(The Center Square) – An emergency responder wants to disband Teamsters representation at her station in southwestern Pennsylvania.
It’s one of a handful of cases in the commonwealth where workers say unions pressure them to remain members and use their dues to fund political activities lest they face termination – a violation of their constitutional rights.
In this complaint, filed Tuesday with the National Labor Relations Board, Shannon Miller – an employee at North Huntingdon EMS/Rescue in Westmoreland County – said her request for a secret ballot election to vote on continued representation from Teamsters Local 205 was wrongly denied based on a bureaucratic technicality not found in national labor laws that union officials exploit.
Backed by the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, Miller argues that the Teamsters leadership uses monopoly collective bargaining rights to threaten workers’ jobs. Her complaint points to a board-adopted rule that sets a minimum six-month timeline for contract bargaining, of which her original filing fell eight days short.
“Teamsters union brass, increasingly unable to hold onto their rank and file, are choosing to silence worker voices by not allowing them the chance to have their wishes expressed via secret ballot elections,” said Foundation President Mark Mix. “This attempt to use any means to keep workers trapped in a union they oppose and never even voted for demonstrates why the NLRB should move to eliminate the various board-created hurdles that workers face when attempting to exercise their statutory right to hold decertification elections.”
NLRB is the abbreviation for the National Labor Relations Board, which is responsible for overseeing local groups to ensure enforcement of federal labor laws. Miller says the Pittsburgh regional director dismissed her first request, citing the timeline issue, which is not spelled out in statutes.
In July, a Coca-Cola driver in Houston, Pa., filed a federal lawsuit against Teamsters Local 585 violated his constitutional right to opt out of membership and avoid paying dues that can support political activities. However, the union contract stipulated that joining was mandatory.
The lawsuit points to what critics say is a slush fund for Democratic candidates bankrolled by automatic payroll deductions of union dues, many of whom rank-and-file members don’t support.
The Commonwealth Foundation, a conservative policy group based in Harrisburg, said government unions spent $33 million in 2023 and 2024 supporting political action committees and other causes, of which just 5.2% backed candidates from other parties.
Foundation research shows that membership dues bankrolled more than half of the $227 million unions have spent on political endeavors since 2007. According to the report, the organizations spent the money on voting drives, lobbying, mailers, and PAC contributions to sidestep claims that the money doesn’t directly support political candidates.
In August, the Freedom Foundation filed an ethics complaint against the Pennsylvania State Education Association – which represents 177,000 current and retired educators – that says the union concealed a $1.5 million campaign contribution to Democratic Gov. Josh Shapiro by routing it through unauthorized political funds and the Democratic Governors Association, violating state and federal campaign finance law.
In a statement to The Center Square, the association spokesman Chris Lilienthal denied the allegations. Investigations remain ongoing.
“PSEA, through its Fund for Student Success, made a lawful contribution to DGA, into an account that was permitted to accept union contributions,” he said. “None of those funds were used to make direct contributions to the Shapiro campaign.”
Andrew Holman, a foundation policy analyst and author of the report, said that in a swing state like Pennsylvania, it’s “impossible” for 9 in 10 members to agree completely with their union bosses’ political priorities.
“Government unions don’t even try to hide their blatant partisanship,” Holman said. “Unfortunately, it is union members who suffer when they learn how union bosses are spending their dues.”
In the 2024 election, for example, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters declined to endorse a presidential candidate – bucking a two-decade streak of Democratic support – because of its members’ differing views.
A straw poll conducted that same year showed 60% of the union’s rank-and-file members supported Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump. During the 2024 Republican National Convention in Milwaukee, Teamsters President Sean O’Brien reiterated the sea change.
“The American people aren’t stupid,” he said. “They know the system is broken. We all know how Washington is run. Working people have no chance of winning this fight.”
The Teamsters represent 1.3 million workers – from newspaper reporters to zookeepers to police officers and everything in between – across the country. It was Republican congressional support guaranteeing sick leave for unionized rail workers, however, that inspired O’Brien to endorse Trump – even if he was called “traitor.”
“I want to be clear: at the end of the day, the Teamsters are not interested if you have a D, R or I next to your name,” he said. “We want to know one thing: what are you doing to help American workers?”
Regional chapters of the union stood behind Kamala Harris and other Democratic candidates. Holman’s research found that the same held true in Pennsylvania, where unions spent $2.1 million on state and local races that helped maintain the party’s one-seat majority in the state House of Representatives.
“With a long-standing record of transparency issues within these unions, many members remain in the dark about what their dues are actually funding,” Holman said.
