At a recent hearing titled “Unmasking Union Antisemitism,” Health, Employment, Labor, and Pensions Subcommittee Chairman Rick Allen (R-GA) addressed concerns about the actions of certain unions regarding Jewish workers. The hearing focused on how some unions have allegedly used federal labor law to pursue anti-Israel political agendas and have failed to protect Jewish employees from discrimination.
Allen stated, “Today’s hearing will examine the ways in which unions are using federal labor law to pursue their anti-Israel political agenda and to harass and discriminate against Jewish workers. Today we will hear about how unions like the United Electrical Workers and a United Auto Workers affiliate, A Better NYLAG would rather defend union members who engage in disruptive, discriminatory, and antisemitic behavior than fulfill their duty to fairly represent all the workers they represent. We will hear today about how their unions are selling them down the river, even though Jewish workers have supported unions and been leaders in the labor movement for generations.”
He referenced a previous subcommittee hearing held 14 months prior that raised similar concerns over rising antisemitic incidents at workplaces. According to Allen, these issues have only increased over the past year. He cited FBI data indicating that anti-Jewish incidents remain the most frequent religion-related hate crimes in the country. Although Jewish people make up less than three percent of Americans, they are victims of about 60 percent of religious-based hate crimes. Allen also mentioned that last year, the Anti-Defamation League reported more than 9,300 antisemitic incidents across the U.S., marking a five percent increase from 2023 and setting a record since tracking began in 1979.
Allen criticized some unions for focusing resources on what he described as divisive political activities instead of representing all members equally. He gave examples such as ABN (A Better NYLAG), which represents public-interest lawyers in New York City. When posters supporting Hamas were put up in an office, management banned all posters related to Israel and Gaza. ABN responded by filing unfair labor practice charges against the employer.
Another example involved the Cornell Graduate Student Union. According to Allen, this union opposed disciplinary actions against students who disrupted campus life or harassed Jewish students. He said that when Jewish graduate students requested not to fund these union activities due to their beliefs, they were threatened with termination if they did not pay dues—actions he argued conflict with Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Allen emphasized that union members have rights under existing laws such as the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act and Supreme Court decisions like Beck v. Communications Workers of America, which allow them to object to paying dues for political activities they disagree with.
“Union members have rights under the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act and the Supreme Court’s Beck decision to speak out against their unions and not pay dues for political activities they disagree with. Title VII protects workers who want to live their lives with integrity and protects them from having to sacrifice their faith and their principles to get and keep a job. But unions have every incentive to keep workers in the dark about their rights,” Allen said.
He concluded by stating: “Today we will hand the microphone over to those who are not truly represented by their unions. We will discuss how the law protects their political and religious convictions, and how lawmakers could provide additional protection.”
“We might not all agree on the appropriate role of unions in society, but I believe we can all agree that they should use their resources to promote the workplace interests of their employees and treat each worker who relies on them with equal dignity and fairness.”
