4 ms·

I think the argument is that if people aren't required to be in the union then people can free ride on the union's efforts without paying dues.

• Shivetya 11y ago
  they should still have that choice as they cannot choose what happens with their union dues. far too many unions spend inordinate amounts of money on political activities instead of their own membership. then top it off with all the bureaucratic bloat and high paid leadership I think people must be given the right to abstain. If you want to dodge the free ride then have the dues go to a non political spending charity of your choice provided it is local, may I suggest children's healthcare hospitals
  • s73v3r 11y ago
    "they should still have that choice as they cannot choose what happens with their union dues" This isn't true. "far too many unions spend inordinate amounts of money on political activities instead of their own membership" If you believe that, then start getting involved in your union's leadership and change it. " then top it off with all the bureaucratic bloat and high paid leadership" As opposed to the leanness and crappily paid leadership of the company?
  • santaclaus 11y ago
    Technically one is allowed to exercise the so-called 'Beck' decision [1] and only pay the union what is required for contact negotiation and related fees. In practice I wonder how difficult it is to actually leverage Beck. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communications_Workers_of_America_v._Beck https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communications_Workers_of_Amer...