I. Introduction

There was a time when unions were the champions of the working class—standard-bearers of justice in the industrial chaos of the 19th and early 20th centuries. They stood as the proverbial David against the Goliath of unchecked corporate power, securing basic rights like reasonable working hours, safer conditions, and fair pay. That history is not lost on me.

But like many institutions born of noble ideals, unions have not remained untouched by the temptations of power, politics, and preservation of their own influence. Having been a member of multiple unions across different sectors—from trades like welding and pipefitting to public service roles such as teaching—I’ve witnessed firsthand how the rhetoric of justice can cloak practices that are anything but.

What troubles me isn’t just inefficiency or internal squabbling—those are almost expected in large organizations. It’s the deeper shift from principled advocacy to what I can only call ideological and organizational authoritarianism. The shift from helping workers to serving the organization itself. This is not just disappointing—it’s morally troubling.

To borrow from the world of Star Wars, many unions today remind me less of the Rebel Alliance and more of the Trade Federation: bloated, politically entangled, and so obsessed with leverage that they’ve forgotten what they were originally created to do. Power for power’s sake is never benign.

And so, this post isn’t a blanket condemnation. It’s a call to think more deeply. If we’re going to entrust unions with the voices and livelihoods of millions, we should be willing to ask the hard questions: Are they still protecting the vulnerable—or have they become another Goliath in disguise?

II. The Masks of Advocacy: When Leadership Deceives

Let’s suppose you’re a member of a union negotiating with management over wages. You trust your union leadership to present your case, to fight for your best interests, and to communicate honestly about what’s happening behind closed doors. But what if that trust is misplaced?

In multiple unions I’ve been part of—ranging from local trades to large public sector outfits—I’ve sat at negotiation tables and watched a troubling pattern emerge: union leaders spinning partial truths or outright misrepresentations to their members. Offers that were fair, even generous by regional standards, were framed as insults. Financial realities—like legally mandated pension set-asides—were conveniently omitted from the narrative. The result? Outrage. Protest. Solidarity built not on truth, but on a carefully constructed fiction.

Here’s one story that still gnaws at me. During a facilities worker contract dispute, union leadership portrayed the employer as greedy and dismissive, claiming workers were being lowballed. But when I reviewed the financials, it became clear the offer on the table placed these workers among the highest paid in the entire region. Even so, union leaders kept stoking dissatisfaction—refusing to explain budget constraints and implying there was more money to be squeezed. Some union members, stirred into action, poured concrete into public restroom drains to cause damage—a calculated act of sabotage, not a prank. This wasn’t about justice. It was about leverage at any cost.

This isn’t a matter of differing opinions. It’s a matter of dishonesty. When leadership distorts reality to manipulate emotions, it isn’t advocacy—it’s propaganda.

Some might argue, “But unions need to rally members to build leverage—what’s the harm in emphasizing our side of the story?” Well, the harm is profound. A community built on misinformation is brittle and easily corrupted. When members begin to act not as informed advocates, but as loyal followers, it stops being a movement and starts becoming a machine.

Think of the Jedi Council in Star Wars: well-meaning, powerful, but ultimately blind to the truth, their own bureaucracy leaving them vulnerable to manipulation from within. By the time they realized the danger, it was too late. Their power, once a beacon, had become a shadow of its promise.

The same can happen to any institution—including unions—when transparency is sacrificed for control.

III. The Tyranny of Solidarity: Coercion and Groupthink

Solidarity is often painted as the heart of union strength—workers standing together, shoulder to shoulder, against injustice. But what happens when that unity becomes a weapon turned inward?

Let me share a personal experience that still unsettles me. During a heated political issue in a local government vote—an issue that had nothing to do with wages, benefits, or working conditions—the union I belonged to instructed members to call in and speak in favor of a particular resolution. A few colleagues, after doing their own research, disagreed with the union’s stance and intended to speak against it.

Before they could do so, they were contacted by other union members and not-so-subtly warned: if they spoke out, their reputations and opportunities within the union could be affected. No physical threats, just a clear message—dissent would come at a cost. Imagine that: being punished not for betraying your fellow workers, but for exercising independent judgment.

Some might say, “Well, that’s just how collective action works—you need everyone on the same page.” But this isn’t unity. It’s coercion. And it reveals something deeper and darker about the culture that’s taken hold in many unions: the expectation of total conformity.

It reminded me, disturbingly, of the behavior of the Cylons in Battlestar Galactica—driven by collective programming, punishing deviation from the script, and convinced of their moral superiority no matter the cost. What began as a desire for equality turned into a theology of uniformity.

In an environment like this, freedom of thought becomes dangerous. Critical thinking becomes subversive. And the very people unions are meant to empower are instead pressured into silence.

The irony? The union, created to give workers a voice, becomes the very force that takes it away.

IV. The Political Engine: Ideology Over Individuality

One of the most insidious shifts I’ve witnessed in union culture is the transformation from worker advocacy into political machinery. It’s no secret that many unions have long-standing ties to specific political parties, but what concerns me is how those affiliations now bleed into every aspect of union identity—turning members into ideological foot soldiers rather than empowered individuals.

Here’s a story that crystallizes the issue for me.

During an election cycle, my union sent out emails, flyers, and even had reps visit workplaces to encourage members to vote for a specific slate of candidates—all of them from one party. At first, I brushed it off. After all, endorsements are common. But then came the real pressure. At meetings, leadership didn’t just recommend candidates—they implied that voting otherwise was a betrayal of union values. Conversations about alternative viewpoints were shut down. Members who openly supported other candidates were quietly ostracized.

One colleague—a thoughtful, politically independent worker—voiced concern about this. His opinion? “Let me choose based on character and policy, not because someone told me I have to.” Not long after, he found himself left out of union projects, passed over for speaking roles, and eventually stopped attending meetings altogether. Not because he didn’t care—but because he no longer felt safe to speak.

This isn’t democratic engagement. It’s ideological enforcement.

You might say, “But unions support candidates who support labor—that’s logical.” True, and strategic alliances aren’t inherently wrong. But there’s a difference between supporting policy and demanding political obedience. When the union begins to function like a political party—demanding uniformity, punishing dissent, and funneling dues into partisan campaigns—it stops being a voice for the worker and starts being a mouthpiece for someone else’s agenda.

It’s not unlike 1984’s Ministry of Truth—where narratives are curated, dissent is dangerous, and the “right” opinion is mandatory. In that world, citizens lose not just their freedom to speak, but their freedom to think. Tragically, that’s the direction some unions seem to be heading.

Solidarity shouldn’t mean surrendering your mind at the door.

---

Side Bar

Here are a few major union corruption cases that have made headlines in recent years:

1. IBEW Local 98 – Philadelphia

Brian Burrows, former president of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) Local 98, was sentenced in 2024 to four years in prison for embezzlement, falsifying records, and filing false tax returns. His conviction followed a sweeping investigation into misuse of union funds and fraudulent reporting.

2. American Labor Alliance – California

Marcus Asay, founder of the American Labor Alliance, and Antonio Gastelum, a former officer, were convicted in 2024 for orchestrating a multi-year pension fraud scheme. The scam caused over $3 million in losses and involved selling fraudulent insurance products to workers under the guise of union benefits.

3. Hudson Yards Construction Scandal – New York

One of the largest union-related frauds involved the Building and Construction Trades Council of Greater New York. Allegations included inflated costs and illegal practices that added over $100 million to the Hudson Yards project. The general contractor sued the union council for promoting corrupt practices.

4. United Auto Workers (UAW) – Internal Retaliation

In a twist of intra-union conflict, UAW Staff United accused the UAW leadership of retaliatory firings and bad-faith bargaining. This came despite UAW President Shawn Fain’s reformist platform, raising questions about entrenched behaviors within the organization.

5. Multi-State Embezzlement Case – Embezzlement

Former union officials in Kansas, Alabama, and Massachusetts pleading guilty to embezzlement and fraud ranging from $7,000 to over $100,000.

These stories reflect a troubling pattern of financial misconduct and abuse of power within some labor organizations.

---

V. The Morality Gap: Ends Justify the Means?

Every movement faces a choice: uphold ethical principles even when it’s hard, or adopt a utilitarian mindset where the ends justify the means. Unfortunately, many modern unions seem to have chosen the latter—where the goal of winning negotiations eclipses the method of getting there.

One incident seared itself into my memory like a moral scar.

A union—frustrated by stalled negotiations over wages—resorted to sabotage. Members intentionally poured concrete down public restroom drains in government buildings. It wasn’t a prank. It wasn’t symbolic. It was a calculated act of vandalism meant to create chaos and pressure administrators into yielding. The damage was extensive, the repair costs high, and the message clear: Give us what we want, or suffer.

Now, some might try to excuse this, arguing, “When you’ve been ignored and mistreated long enough, you have to escalate.” But I was at that negotiating table. The offer from the administration wasn’t just reasonable—it was competitive for the region. The workers in question were already among the best-paid in their field locally. Yet, leadership misrepresented the offer to keep the pressure on and framed the destruction as a justified act of resistance.

This isn’t resistance. It’s moral decay.

The incident reminded me of the behavior of the Decepticons in Transformers—once proud warriors who believed in justice, now willing to sow destruction to impose their will. There’s a fine line between fighting injustice and becoming the very injustice you claim to oppose.

What’s even more disturbing is the righteousness with which these acts are defended. There’s no room for self-critique, no hesitation. The leadership’s logic is simple: If it gets us what we want, it’s right.

But might does not make right. And when unions embrace a philosophy where any action is justified by its outcome, they lose the moral authority that once made them powerful.

Victory without virtue is just another form of defeat.

VI. The Hollow Echo of Purpose: Are Unions Serving Their Members?

Let’s imagine your house is on fire, and instead of grabbing a hose, your fire chief starts arguing politics with the neighbors. That’s what it feels like when a union—entrusted to defend its members—becomes more invested in grandstanding than in solving real problems.

In one case, I was a member of a union that received a call to action. But it wasn’t about our working conditions, safety standards, or benefits. No—our leadership wanted us to show up at a city council meeting to protest on behalf of a completely different union. A construction firm was in a dispute with its workforce, and we, the Teamsters, were told to mobilize. Show up. Blow up the infamous inflatable rat. Chant slogans. Make noise.

But here’s the thing: we didn’t know the facts. We weren’t involved in the dispute. Our own union had pressing issues that weren’t being addressed. And yet, leadership diverted our attention to a battle that wasn’t ours, offering no transparency or justification.

When I questioned it, I was met with blank stares and veiled suggestions that not participating would be “noted.”

This is the kind of mission creep that corrodes the soul of any organization. A union should be a focused, responsive advocate for its members—not a mercenary force summoned to every ideological skirmish across the region.

It’s the same tragic arc we see in Battlestar Galactica. Once a fleet of refuge and hope, the Battlestars become agents of internal conflict, political machinations, and, at times, even oppression. The very structure built to protect people starts functioning to protect itself.

And that is the essential betrayal: when a union forgets that its first duty is to its own members.

Are there still good unions out there? Of course. Ones that keep their mission clear, their leadership accountable, and their members informed. But those are becoming the exception—not the rule.

If a union spends more time in political theater than in practical problem-solving, it has become an echo of its original purpose—a hollow shell making a lot of noise, but delivering very little value.

VII. A Call for Reform: Can We Imagine a Better Way?

It would be easy to end here—pointing fingers, recounting failures, and walking away with a cynical shrug. But that’s not enough. If we believe unions have a purpose worth saving, then we owe it to ourselves—and to future generations of workers—to imagine something better.

Not every union is corrupt or coercive. Some still embody their original mission: to represent workers, ensure fair treatment, and provide a voice where none existed before. These unions operate with transparency, welcome dissent, and recognize that their power is a means—not an end.

So what would reform look like?

• Radical Transparency – Open books, public negotiation summaries, clear breakdowns of financial realities. If leadership wants trust, it must be earned with truth.
• Voluntary Political Neutrality – Let unions support policies that align with their goals, but stop dictating how members vote. Treat workers like adults—capable of independent thought.
• Localized Empowerment – Decentralize decision-making so that chapters focus on the specific needs of their members, not the ideological whims of national leadership.
• Accountable Leadership – Term limits, democratic reforms, and safe channels for dissent ensure that leaders serve the members—not the other way around.

You might say, “That sounds naïve. Power always corrupts.” But not always. History gives us examples of institutions that corrected their course—like the Jedi Order at the end of The Clone Wars, or the reformation of the X-Men after internal betrayal. Change is hard. But it is not impossible.

And maybe, like the Goonies discovering Chester Copperpot’s bones deep in the tunnels, we need to learn from those who went before us. We don’t have to fall into the same traps. We can still search for treasure—but we have to do it with eyes open, maps updated, and courage to take a different path.

Unions don’t have to be relics of a better past. With the right reforms, they could become part of a better future.

VIII. Conclusion: The Right to Dissent, The Duty to Think

We often talk about rights—especially the rights of workers. But rights are only meaningful when paired with responsibility. And in our time, perhaps the most neglected responsibility is the duty to think critically—even, and especially, about the institutions that claim to serve us.

Throughout my years in multiple unions, I’ve seen how quickly a noble cause can twist into something unrecognizable. I’ve seen deception packaged as solidarity, coercion dressed as unity, and ideology mistaken for principle. And I’ve seen how those who dare to dissent—who simply ask, “Is this the right thing to do?”—are treated not as valued voices, but as traitors.

But let me say this clearly: questioning your union does not make you anti-worker. In fact, it may be the most pro-worker stance you can take.

Because true solidarity isn’t silent obedience. It’s mutual respect rooted in truth. It’s the willingness to stand up not just with your fellow workers, but for them—especially when that means speaking hard truths to power, even union power.

So I end not with condemnation, but with a challenge.

Ask questions. Demand transparency. Resist the urge to join every chorus without knowing the tune. And above all, reclaim your voice.

As The Matrix taught us, sometimes waking up from the dream is painful. But the alternative is to live forever in a simulation—comfortable, controlled, and blind to the truth.

It’s time to unplug. To think. To speak. And to rebuild—not just better unions, but a better culture of advocacy and integrity.

The future isn’t written yet. But we still hold the pen.

Excerpt

Unions once championed workers—but what happens when they suppress dissent, distort truth, and demand political conformity? This post explores the dark turn from advocacy to authoritarianism, urging a return to transparency, integrity, and individual voice. It’s time to rethink what solidarity truly means—and who it should serve.

References

• Sticky Fingers 2024: Union Corruption Roundup https://news.lrionline.com/sticky-fingers-2024-union-corruption-roundup/
• Top Ten Union Corruption Stories of the Year https://archive.nlpc.org/2019/01/15/top-ten-union-corruption-stories-of-the-year/
• Union Corruption Update: Fresh Examples of Labor Leader Misconduct https://news.lrionline.com/union-corruption-update-fresh-examples-of-labor-leader-misconduct/