No argument from me about that! I agree. The point is that I suspect that through “creative accounting” and nebulous jobs even those who DO opt out still end up having their dollars put towards political goals anyway.
By the way, back then I asked about opting out of the union entirely, but was told that to do so, I had to come up with the entire amount of “dues” at the beginning of the year. IOW, pay the entire amount up front instead of merely being robbed of $70 per month out of my paycheck. I didn’t have $840, being young and broke, so union it was for a couple of years. Until I moved to a state that does not compel union membership. If unions were actually helpful, states wouldn’t have to force people to join. Ours never did anything for us. They’ll take credit for the fact that public school teachers are more highly paid than private school teachers. The thing is, if teacher to student ratios had been kept constant over the past 40 or so years, teacher pay would be much higher than it is now because there would be far fewer teachers. In some places there would be half as many teachers. Instead, in some places as class sizes decreased, we got a lot of young, dumb teachers hired because they were warm bodies. Educational quality decreased, but since almost every teacher contributes to the union, the total union dues went way up. Most of this history applies to California, but it probably happened in many other states as well.
In short, I have nothing against collective bargaining as a matter of free association, but legally enforced monopolies are destructive to product quality and wealth generation.