Wisconsin Union Thugs and Mandatory Union Dues


In Wisconsin, Teachers are FORCED to pay UNION DUES in the amount of more than $800 per year depending on income.

For some that is a house note, a few car payments, payment towards student loans or other loans.

Forcing employees to join and pay UNION dues is NOT American. Why force someone to join and pay UNION dues? Isn’t this, in a sense what Dictators do?

In Wisconsin, a lovely State Democrat had this to say about UNIONS in WI:

State Rep. Nick Milroy is the Democratic state representative from Wisconsin’s 73rd assembly district. He was on America’s Radio News with anchors Chris Salcedo and Lori Lundin. Salcedo pointed out that union membership was split by their votes in 2010, 49% for Democrats and 47% for Republicans, nearly an even split. But unions donated 93% of their total contributions to Democrats in 2010, and 7% to Republicans or others. The question was asked if the assemblyman could understand why Republicans were not in favor of having tax payer funded dues go to fund Democrat campaigns? The assemblyman contended that public employees can opt out of the unions. But when pressed about how even those that opt out must pay union dues, the assemblyman suggested that those people that didn’t want to be part of a union could find other work.

Essentially what is is saying is, if you do not want to join a union or pay union dues then find a job in the private sector. So one must lose their ability to work in the public sector because they do not want to be forced to join a union and pay said union dues?

Right, again Dictator much?

Rich Lowry, writing in the New York Post claimed,

“When Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels ended collective bargaining and the automatic collection of dues in 2005, the number of members paying dues plummeted by roughly 90 percent.”

When Gov. Walker unveiled his budget yesterday, there was the expected wailing and rending of flesh in the popular press including the New York Times which claimed in its headline that the budget would “slash” school aid.

Buried deep in the piece was the acknowledgement that the budget cut eight percent from school districts. Not eighty percent. Eight.

If you work for a private company – meaning not a government – and your boss told you that in order to keep your job, you were going to have to help him find eight percent in overall savings, I suspect you could do that. You could probably get close just being more mindful of how much electricity the company uses.

Gary Becker from WashingtonTimes.com writes:

Union leaders, however, are focused less on teachers paying more for health care and pensions and concentrating more on the union’s ability to bargain collectively and collect dues.

These union leaders are dismissive of the fact that there are thousands of teachers in the Badger State who would rather not be represented by a union and do not want to pay exorbitant dues. What about their rights?

Wisconsin law allows compulsory unionism. That means public school teachers in Wisconsin are forced to pay the union – a private organization with a partisan political agenda – simply for the privilege of having a job.

The Wisconsin Education Association Council (WEAC) agreed that its 98,000 members will pay more for health care and pensions – as long as bargaining and forced dues are preserved. That certainly calls into question what the WEAC is really protecting – its members or its source of income. In fact, it will fight to the end to preserve the holy grail of unionism – forced dues.

Forced dues are serious money for the teachers unions. According to data compiled by the National Institute for Labor Relations Research in 2008, the two teachers unions – the National Education Association (NEA) and the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) – collected $2 billion in union dues in 2007 through their state affiliates. Out of that $2 billion, $1.3 billion came from states that allow forced dues.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics there are 14.7 million American workers who belong to a union. That’s out of about 123.5 million workers. To show you why unions are so desperate to hold on to what they have, the BLS reports that in 1983 there were 17.7 million workers who belonged to unions – three million more – out of a workforce of only about 88 million – 35 million less.

Put another way, in ’83 over 20 percent of the workforce were union members. Today that’s reduced to only 11.9 percent. And it is continuing to fall.

Lastly, to those on the Koch Brother’s kick- this is getting old like the race card and those who do not agree with Obama and his policies. The UNIONS gave Democrats over $400 million in the last election, which is $400 million of FORCED tax payer dues- 98% of Union support went to Democrats and you are complaing about less than $100,000 that the Koch brother’s put into a Republican’s campaign?



About UnPoliticallyCorrect

You know me well enough by now, which is that I am no fan of either establishment party, though sadly I did once in the past, play the game of the "Lesser of Two Evils", for which was tragic. Both seek absolute power, through their own self righteous perceptions of "morality", bastardizing the true concept of the founding of this country and the framing of the US Constitution. Clowns to the Left and the incessant need to control by bigger government while spending us into oblivion; Jokers to the Right and the incessant need to control by religion while spending us into oblivion. Oddly, both are the main two tenets for the founding of the country and framing of the US Constitution - Limited Government and Freedom From Religious Persecution & Religious Zealotry. View all posts by UnPoliticallyCorrect

3 responses to “Wisconsin Union Thugs and Mandatory Union Dues

  • wes

    You don’t understand how unions work … Why would some get the benefit of what the unions bargain for without having to pay their share … Your thoughts are strictly union busting ….

    • Chester

      Well, he did say “teachers in the Badger State who would rather not be represented by a union and do not want to pay exorbitant dues.” So if they didn’t pay their dues, they wouldn’t be represented by the union and not receive the benefits that come with it. That means they could make their own decision about whether paying the union dues were worth the benefits on a personal level rather than being forced to pay and accept the benefits. Seems like sound logic to me.

    • Patrick

      Why would some get benefits without having to pay…. Welcome to all those living on welfare, 99 week unemployment and a mired of other goverment handouts.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: