[cdogl]

Well put, but:

> even going as far as saying the employer does not have to deduct dues for members (who have agreed to it) pay

I'm surprised you frame this as an extreme example. Regardless of one's views on unions (they have their place), it seems way off for the employer to deduct those payments. Perhaps it's a convenience, but as a worker that is my money to pay to the union; if the union and the employer orchestrate the transfer of my membership payment behind closed doors before the money hits my account, it's makes it harder to feel the union is truly acting in my interests.

This is not just a matter of hygiene; for example, I was once in a (notoriously corrupt and socially reactionary) union here in Australia that represents retail workers. I didn't have a choice in the matter and my membership payments were deducted by my employer. About a decade later, a court ruled that a deal made between that employer and the union had left workers worse off (but was in the interests of the union bureaucracy). Incidents like this seriously damage the reputation of the union movement.

Having your dues deducted automatically in an environment of compulsory unionism doesn't seem to have much to do with empowering workers at all!

[throwawaymaths]

Compelling employers to pull the wages for dues is a way to make sure the worker pays no matter what. Don't you see? A blue collar worker can't be trusted not to piss away their wages at the bar and be able to come up with their union dues.