>>>What evidence do you have that all are corrupt?

For what specific use are the dues collected? Is this information published openly and honestly to the membership? Are they even required to publish that information? I would be willing to bet that there isn't a union in existence today where 50% or more of the dues collected are spent directly to benefit the overall membership.

From self dealing contracts to direct political agendas... the unions spend money to sustain themselves. Not the workers.

Let's take the AC case. The union is spending $3,000,000 per week on the strike. That seems like a lot of the worker's money to simply have lying around "just in case". If there had been no strike, what would happen to that money? Does a worker get a nice large rebate check when he/she quits or retires?

Seems to me that the union just might have a strong incentive to actually strike once in awhile to justify the need for a large "strike fund". Hmmmmm

Hell, I might even be sympathetic to the workers in AC if they were actually fighting low pay or terrible working conditions but the main holdup seems to be simply that the union wants a shorter contract period so that they can do this all again in 3 years instead of 5. Give me a friggin break already.

>>>able to negotiate your own employment contracts. Most folks don't have that luxury though and that is where the union comes in.

That would be nice if they actually represented what the workers wanted. They don't. They take a hard line with mangement at the end of each contract term regardless of the economics involved and despite what the worker may actually want.

Hell, most workers could get a nice fat raise if they simply didn't have to pay the dues just so that they could get it back as a large paycut when the **union decides** they have to strike.