OPINION:
In the wake of immigration protests that rocked California and spread across America, many union members are wondering: Why is my money supporting this chaos?
David Huerta, president of the Service Employees International Union California, was recently arrested on charges of impeding immigration enforcement in Los Angeles. Video shows Mr. Huerta blocking the driveway of a federal detention center. He was later released on a $50,000 bond. The violent and destructive protests that swept the “City of Angels” spread across the country, and labor unions proudly supported and even led them.
Why have labor unions been spending a single cent of their members’ dues on any of this? Some unions indeed represent illegal immigrants, especially in places like California, where illegal immigration is so high and unions are so powerful. Some unions may also want to show solidarity with workers, even those in the U.S. illegally.
However, none of those explanations accounts for the intensity and ferocity of union involvement in frequently lawless and disruptive demonstrations. The SEIU, the AFL-CIO, the American Federation of Teachers and other unions have actively fueled the chaos in our cities.
So why are so many unions focused on issues with little or nothing to do with their membership? Because something else is driving this: politics. Specifically, the far-left politics that most labor unions embrace, regardless of what their members want.
The modern labor movement is often an arm of the Democratic Party. Unions spend hundreds of millions of dollars directly and billions of dollars indirectly each election cycle, and nearly all of it benefits Democratic candidates or opposes Republicans. Most union leaders are adamantly opposed to President Trump. Although some unions declined to endorse Mr. Trump’s opponent in the November election, the labor movement as a whole worked hard to defeat our current commander in chief. Now that he is in the White House, they are opposing him every step of the way.
Yet while union leaders are fighting the president, union members are divided. More than 40% voted for Mr. Trump in November, and union members are increasingly a key part of Republican and Democratic coalitions. Yet even in cases where workers lean to the right, unions use their dues to fund liberal causes that have little to do with their members’ interests, including nationwide protests.
Unions have heavily spent their members’ money to bus workers to protests, buy anti-Trump placards and foment disruption on city streets. Even when unions have organized press conferences to denounce the arrest of the SEIU California president, it cost money they took from their members, many of whom support Mr. Trump and his immigration crackdown.
These union members shouldn’t be forced to fund protests and political activity they disagree with, but many are forced to do just that. All the most union-heavy states, including California, force workers at unionized companies to join the union as a condition of employment. Public-sector workers can withdraw, but private-sector employees in unionized shops have no choice but to pay dues or fees. It doesn’t matter if they don’t want to join the union. Nor does it matter if they oppose the union’s leftist priorities. They don’t have the freedom to opt out.
Thankfully, most states have given workers that freedom by passing right-to-work laws. There, employees are not required to join a union or pay union dues. Every union member deserves that freedom, not just those in states such as Texas, Florida and North Carolina. Unfortunately, states such as California, New York and Illinois — which, not coincidentally, are the epicenter of immigration protests — won’t respect their workers’ rights. They are in thrall to union demands.
If these states won’t do what’s right, Congress should. The union-led immigration protests this month should prompt Republicans to take up the Employee Rights Act, which would institute right-to-work for the entire United States. Millions of workers would then be free to leave their unions and keep their money instead of being forced to fund organizations that spend it on political causes unrelated to their interests.
To be sure, the unions have every right to lead and fund these protests, but no worker should be forced to pay for it.
• Jarrett Skorup is vice president for marketing and communications at the Mackinac Center for Public Policy.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.