A union’s purpose should be straightforward. Workers pool money and bargaining power to negotiate better working conditions, better pay and better benefits from their employers.

Instead, member dues are increasingly used to provide a blank check for powerful union leaders to embark on activist crusades, raise their national profile and play politics.

The Service Employees International Union (SEIU), which has more than 2 million members, 333 local branches and affiliates and was provided more than $300 million in revenue in 2023, is one example where there’s a significant disconnect between member needs and the union’s larger goals.

The scandals involve bankrolling expensive political campaigns, huge bills from luxury hotels, and troubling allegations of bullying and harassment by leadership.

At some point, members must be asking themselves: Are we running this union, or are we just paying for it?

To its credit, SEIU makes its political goals no secret.

Its mission statement lists immigration, climate, healthcare and racial justice among its top priorities.

It also has a stated purpose to, “further the interests of this organization and its membership, directly or indirectly.”

But just how “indirect” is its political spending justified in being?

Some members may want to provide funding for those causes, and many likely support them.

But others may simply want a helping hand in fighting for better working conditions, paychecks and benefits.

Union leaders should explain just how their massive political operation, and the money that it costs, benefits workers.

Members and potential members, for their part, must look carefully at how dues are spent and demand accountability from those in power.

In 2025, members from SEIU’s leadership congregated in Washington, D.C., to oppose President Donald Trump’s budget reconciliation measure, the “One Big Beautiful Bill.”

Merits of opposing the legislation aside, the union spent $1.2 million at a five-star D.C. hotel, with expenses listed as support for political activities.

Certainly, opposing this legislation, which included cuts to Medicaid, mattered for healthcare workers across the country.

But racking up that kind of bill, using paying members’ money, should raise some questions, if not some eyebrows.

How many members attended? Was this hotel the most cost-effective option? Who approved these expenses? What was the payoff for members?

Union leadership is trusted, and paid for, by members who need them to represent their interests. Accountability to membership should be a requirement, not a nice-to-have.

Similar patterns have been seen with state-based SEIU spending.

In 2024, SEIU’s Illinois state affiliate collected more than $3 million in dues. It spent just $57,000 of that money representing workers.

Meanwhile, the organization spent $1.2 million in the same year on political activities and lobbying.

Could some of this work benefit their members? Of course. But without accountability and clear communication with members, the argument falls flat.

Better yet, the union could simply spend money on its primary goal: supporting its members directly.

A similarly troubling situation played out this year in California, culminating in the Nov. 3 midterm election.

SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West contributed nearly $32 million to support Proposition 40,, a one-time tax of 5% on billionaires to help close gaps in healthcare funding.

The measure lost handily, 52.8% to 47.2%, with more than 11 million votes cast.

SEIU-UHW president Dave Regan faces serious allegations in how he sought support for this proposal, including harassment and bullying of women who work for affiliated unions. This is in addition to an allegation of assault against a former colleague of his. 

An investigation found that Regan had extorted support for the measure and targeted women in the process.

Despite supporting the measure, the California Nurses Association called for Regan to resign over his conduct. He remains in power.

How many other times have powerful union leaders used their weight to push members around? How often does the SEIU respect the wishes of its rank-and-file members?

And who can hold these organizations, who have grown exponentially in scope and in power, accountable?

When powerful union leaders treat member dues as a blank check for their own political agenda and demand members to fall in line, the system is broken.

Unions were created to give workers a voice against the powerful few. SEIU leaders have, increasingly, become the very power they were meant to hold to account.