Prudent regulation of the collection process will do far more to prevent union misuse than will simply attempting to regulate how unions may spend the dues after they have been collected. Paycheck protection will impose excessive costs on unions and businesses by creating tremendous paperwork requirements to demonstrate compliance. Any changes to payroll deductions as a result of a new check-off provision would have only a minor cost impact on businesses. Such a provision would not differ from other payroll options in wide use today. This would be no more burdensome for unions to process than the complex paper work that many already require of Beck objectors annually.
Opponents argue that paycheck protection provisions are unconstitutional.
Paycheck protection measures are instruments for guarding individual rights articulated in the Bill of Rights and U.S. Supreme Court decisions such as Beck and Hudson . Paycheck protection measures like Michigan s P.A. 117 have withstood constant judicial scrutiny. As Thomas Jefferson observed, To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves is sinful and tyrannical. Union members are the ones directly affected by Paycheck Protection, and they oppose the idea. It is the union leadership that opposes paycheck protection, not the union membership.