Prof. Discovers Union Using Her Dues Money, Name for Soliciting Political Votes from Non-Members

Trometter v. NEA

If someone used your name on an election mailer to solicit votes for a candidate without your consent, you’d probably feel betrayed. But what if they sent that mailer to your spouse, lied about who you were voting for, and made you pay for it all—violating state law in the process? That’s exactly what the National Education Association (NEA) and the Pennsylvania State Education Association (PSEA) did to 20-year union member and educator Mary Trometter, and she’s demanding answers.

Mary’s Husband Receives Political Mail From Union, Using Her Name


Mary has been a member of the PSEA for more than 20 years. The first member of her immediate family to graduate from college, Mary is currently Assistant Professor of Culinary Arts at Pennsylvania College of Technology in Williamsport, Pennsylvania.

Days before Pennsylvania’s gubernatorial election, Mary’s husband received a letter from the NEA’s Super Political Action Committee (PAC), which is funded using union membership dues. The letter urged him, as a “family member of an educator,” to vote for Tom Wolf in the election. And it ended with a plea to her husband: “Please join Mary in voting for Tom Wolf for Governor on November 4th.”

The letter sent to Mary’s husband and signed by the Presidents of PSEA and NEA was paid for by the NEA Advocacy Fund, the NEA’s independent expenditure committee or “SuperPAC.” The NEA Advocacy Fund was financed by more than $12 million from the NEA itself, including money from union members’ dues, which violates section 1701 of the Public Employee Relations Act, which states:

“No employe organization shall make any contribution out of the funds of the employe organization either directly or indirectly to any political party or organization or in support of any political candidate for public office.”

Mary decided to expose these union officials’ misconduct with the help of the Fairness Center.

Order Enforces Union Political Spending Statute


In November of 2014, Mary, with the help of the Fairness Center, filed a Charge of Illegal Contributions against PSEA and NEA with the Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board (PLRB), claiming that the use of union dues to fund political campaigns, was in violation of the Public Employee Relations Act (PERA), which specifically prohibits government employees’ union dues from being used “either directly or indirectly” to support political candidates.

However, the PLRB attempted to avoid enforcing the PERA by moving the issue to the attorney general. Mary won her appeal of that decision, and the issue was remanded back to the PLRB. This remand effectively ordered the PLRB to enforce the statute restricting the political spending of public unions for the first time in 45 years.

Trometter v. NEA is closed.


Documents

If someone used your name on an election mailer to solicit votes for a candidate without your consent, you’d probably feel betrayed. But what if they sent that mailer to your spouse, lied about who you were voting for, and made you pay for it all—violating state law in the process? That’s exactly what the National Education Association (“NEA”) and the Pennsylvania State Education Association (“PSEA”) did to 20-year union member and educator Mary Trometter, and she’s demanding answers.

Mary’s Husband Receives Political Mail From Union, Using Her Name


Mary has been a member of the PSEA for more than 20 years. The first member of her immediate family to graduate from college, Mary is currently Assistant Professor of Culinary Arts at Pennsylvania College of Technology in Williamsport, Pennsylvania.

Days before Pennsylvania’s gubernatorial election, Mary’s husband received a letter from the NEA’s Super Political Action Committee (PAC), which is funded using union membership dues. The letter urged him, as a “family member of an educator,” to vote for Tom Wolf in the election. And it ended with a plea to her husband: “Please join Mary in voting for Tom Wolf for Governor on November 4th.”

The letter sent to Mary’s husband and signed by the Presidents of PSEA and NEA was paid for by the NEA Advocacy Fund, the NEA’s independent expenditure committee or “SuperPAC.” The NEA Advocacy Fund was financed by more than $12 million from the NEA itself, including money from union members’ dues, which violates section 1701 of the Public Employee Relations Act, which states:

“No employe organization shall make any contribution out of the funds of the employe organization either directly or indirectly to any political party or organization or in support of any political candidate for public office.”

Mary decided to expose these union officials’ misconduct with the help of the Fairness Center.

Order Enforces Union Political Spending Statute


In November of 2014, Mary, with the help of the Fairness Center, filed a Charge of Illegal Contributions against PSEA and NEA with the Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board (PLRB), claiming that the use of union dues to fund political campaigns, was in violation of the Public Employee Relations Act (PERA), which specifically prohibits government employees’ union dues from being used “either directly or indirectly” to support political candidates.

However, the PLRB attempted to avoid enforcing the PERA by moving the issue to the attorney general. Mary won her appeal of that decision, and the issue was remanded back to the PLRB. This remand effectively ordered the PLRB to enforce the statute restricting the political spending of public unions for the first time in 45 years.

Trometter v. NEA is closed.


Documents

See more cases