SEIU members must contribute toward their bosses political preferences

The Service Employees International Union (SEIU) plans to spend $150 million in the election this year. At least $85 million has already been committed to specific Democratic candidates.

With the SEIU planning to spend $150 million with at least $85 million committed to the election of Barack Obama and other Democrats where did they get that much money? The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation has asked the Departments of Labor and Justice to investigate the SEIU which it seems has forced locals to guarantee each member contribute to their political action committee more than what their dues are. Last month at the SEIU convention a new amendment was adopted to their constitution which requires every local to contribute the amount of $6 minimum per member per year to their political action committee. According to the Wall Street Journal if a union fails to meet the required amount they must contribute an amount in

""local union funds" equal to the "deficiency," plus a 50% penalty".

A SEIU union representative stated this has always been policy but it has now simply been formalized. This policy may violate federal law. Union and corporate PACS are to rely only on voluntary contributions. It is illegal to obtain money by the "threat" of "financial reprisal." If the SEIU demands the locals comply it cannot be seen as "voluntary" and if there are penalties of 50% imposed it would seem to be a "threat." Workers know even though they do not want to join a union they are required to join and pay dues to be employed. It is illegal for a union to take these union dues and use them for federal elections. The local unions will most likely try to get voluntary contributions to meet the national requirement. The amendment by the SEIU says the unions who do not meet the requirements will have to pay the shortage plus a penalty with member dues and agency fees. Using dues money for a PAC is illegal. It is also illegal to use the dues of those workers who must pay dues even though they did not join a union for any political activity. In the last Presidential election SEIU President Andy Stern was one of the founders of America Coming Together (ACT), which is one of the 527 groups that influences elections while avoiding individual campaign donor limits. Among the largest contributors in that group was the SEIU along with billionaire George Soros. They raised around $26 million to elect John Kerry in 2004. A penalty of $775,000 was imposed on ACT by the Federal Election Commission for the violation campaign finance laws. Even though the fine was the most ever imposed on any of the 527 groups it still equaled less than one cent on the dollar for the $100 million that ACT improperly used to influence a national election. Stern was only a founder of ACT. The lesson that was learned is even if you break the rules the minuscule penalty imposed after the outcome is nothing compared to the potential for winning the election. Because of this the Departments of Labor and Justice need to take this complaint seriously. The demand by the SEIU may be breaking serious rules about labor operations and union dues. These complaints need to be investigated now before the election. Union employees have a right to participate in elections however they want to and not have union bosses tell them what they have to do.