Union Uses Prof’s Dues, Name for Political Mailer Without Consent

Trometter v. NEA

You’d probably feel betrayed if someone used your name to solicit votes for a candidate without your consent. But what if they sent a 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 Mary Trometter. We helped her push back.

Mary’s Husband Receives Dues-Funded Political Mailer, Using Her Name


An Assistant Professor of Culinary Arts at Pennsylvania College of Technology in Williamsport, Pennsylvania, Mary was a member of the PSEA for more than 20 years. In 2014, Mary’s husband received a letter from the NEA’s Super PAC days before the Pennsylvania gubernatorial election. The letter urged him, as a “family member of an educator,” to “Please join Mary in voting for Tom Wolf for Governor on November 4th.”

The letter, signed by the Presidents of PSEA and NEA, was paid for by the NEA Advocacy Fund which was funded by the dues of teachers’ union members like Mary. Meanwhile, Section 1701 of Pennsylvania’s Public Employee Relations Act 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 sought to expose union officials’ actions with the help of the Fairness Center.

Order Enforces Union Political Spending Statute


In November of 2014, Mary filed a Charge of Illegal Contributions against PSEA and NEA with the Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board (PLRB). She claimed that the use of union dues to fund political campaigns violated the Public Employee Relations Act (PERA). However, the PLRB attempted to avoid enforcing the statute by referring the issue to the state attorney general. Mary won her appeal of that decision and the case was remanded back to the PLRB. This remand effectively ordered the labor board to enforce the statute restricting the political spending of public unions for the first time in 45 years.

Trometter v. NEA is closed.


Documents

You’d probably feel betrayed if someone used your name to solicit votes for a candidate without your consent. But what if they sent a 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 Mary Trometter. We helped her push back.

Mary’s Husband Receives Dues-Funded Political Mailer, Using Her Name


An Assistant Professor of Culinary Arts at Pennsylvania College of Technology in Williamsport, Pennsylvania, Mary was a member of the PSEA for more than 20 years. In 2014, Mary’s husband received a letter from the NEA’s Super PAC days before the Pennsylvania gubernatorial election. The letter urged him, as a “family member of an educator,” to “Please join Mary in voting for Tom Wolf for Governor on November 4th.”

The letter, signed by the Presidents of PSEA and NEA, was paid for by the NEA Advocacy Fund which was funded by the dues of teachers’ union members like Mary. Meanwhile, Section 1701 of Pennsylvania’s Public Employee Relations Act 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 sought to expose union officials’ actions with the help of the Fairness Center.

Order Enforces Union Political Spending Statute


In November of 2014, Mary filed a Charge of Illegal Contributions against PSEA and NEA with the Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board (PLRB). She claimed that the use of union dues to fund political campaigns violated the Public Employee Relations Act (PERA). However, the PLRB attempted to avoid enforcing the statute by referring the issue to the state attorney general. Mary won her appeal of that decision and the case was remanded back to the PLRB. This remand effectively ordered the labor board 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