Proposed Dues Restructuring

On behalf of the Board of Directors, I’m bringing forward a motion to update our dues structure. This is about making our system fairer, simpler, and more in line with the values of CSU 52.

Right now, our dues are calculated as 0.75% of your wages, plus a flat $12 every pay period. That $12 includes $5 for the Emergency Fund. On paper, this has worked for us for years. But in practice, it creates an inequity. That flat fee means that lower-income members are paying a much higher share of their wages than those at the top of the scale.

To put that in perspective: under our current formula, a part-time member earning $25,000 a year is effectively paying 2% of their wages in dues. A member earning $125,000 a year is effectively paying only 1% of their wages. That’s double, and the difference is entirely because of the flat fee.

The Board believes we can do better. That’s why we’re proposing a new structure: a single percentage rate of 1.15% of wages, with no flat fee. Of that, 0.15% will go directly into the Emergency Fund, so that the increased support members approved in 2024 continues to be protected.

Further, 0.1% will be directed to the Members and Community Support Committee. This will ensure a solid source of funding for member assistance, student bursaries, and charitable support where permitted by Bill 32.

This change is revenue neutral. The union will not be collecting more money overall. But what it does mean is that members at lower income levels will see some relief in their dues, while members at higher incomes will see modest increases. For example, someone earning $45,000 a year would save about $132 annually. At the other end, someone earning $120,000 a year would contribute about $168 more annually.

This isn’t about raising dues. It’s about ensuring fairness and equity across the membership. Everyone contributes according to their ability, and everyone benefits from the protections, wage increases, and job security that our union delivers.

There are also other advantages. This new structure is simpler to understand, easier to explain to new members, and cleaner for payroll departments and our finance department to administer. It aligns us with what many other unions already do: one clear percentage of wages, no exceptions. And it helps future-proof our union, since dues revenue will be fully proportional to wages, reducing the need for further increase motions.

At its heart, this proposal is about solidarity. Lower-wage members should not bear a disproportionate burden. Higher-wage members, who gain more in dollar terms from negotiated raises, will contribute proportionally. That is the fairer way forward.

For all of these reasons, the Board unanimously recommends this change. On behalf of the Board, I move...

Motion

That effective January 1, 2026, the Union dues for all members, regardless of income, be set at 1.15% of gross wages (exclusive of overtime), and that the flat rate portions of $12 per pay period, or $4 for low-income members, be abolished.

Dues shall be allocated as follows:

  • 0.25% to the Members and Community Support Committee, of which at least 0.15% shall then be transferred directly to the Emergency Fund, and
  • 0.9% for all other operations of the Union.

The Board shall, as soon as practical, amend Policy F-2: Dues Structure consistent with the terms of this motion.

Dues Calculator: Current vs. Proposed

Bi-Weekly Salary

Input your gross bi-weekly salary, excluding overtime, then click/select anywhere outside the salary textbox:

$

Current Dues Structure

If bi-weekly salary is less than $400, dues are: 
$4.00 flat fee

If bi-weekly salary is $400 or more, dues are:
0.75% of bi-weekly salary plus $12 flat fee

$
Bi-weekly dues based on the current dues structure

Proposed Dues Structure

1.15% of bi-weekly salary
(no flat fee)

$
Bi-weekly dues based on the proposed motion

The above calculation is based on the accuracy of the data you have entered, and is for illustrative and for information purposes only.

Dues Restructuring FAQ

Why is CSU 52 proposing this change?

The current structure (0.75% + $12 flat) is not fair to lower-income members, who end up paying a bigger share of their wages than higher-income members. Currently, there are low-income members paying nearly twice as much (as a proportion of their income) in union dues compared to higher-paid members.

1.15% is the average rate of dues that members are paying right now, after accounting for the flat fee. This change is not an increase for the average member; it’s about fairness, equity, and making things easy to understand.

Will the union collect more money from this change?

No. The new structure is revenue neutral overall. Some members will pay a little more, some will pay less, but the union’s total revenue will remain the same.

How does this change help lower-wage members?

Lower-wage members (making less than $78,300) will see their dues decrease. The lowest-paid members will see reductions of over 40%. This ensures they are not paying a disproportionately high share of their income toward dues, which makes membership more inclusive and supportive for those who need it most.

I’m a higher-paid member and don’t want to see my personal dues go up. Why should I support this?

The increase is modest compared to overall income, and it ensures fairness across the membership. It also strengthens solidarity, which makes CSU 52 more effective in bargaining and defending rights. Everyone benefits when the union is stronger.

Does this make CSU 52 more modern?

Yes. Most unions across Canada use a percentage-only dues structure. This shift aligns us with best practices in the labour movement and simplifies things for members and administrators alike.

Couldn’t we just cut costs instead of changing dues?

The change doesn’t raise extra money, it just redistributes dues more equitably. Operating costs are already managed closely. This is about fairness, not about budget expansion.

Will this help us in bargaining?

Absolutely. A fairer, simpler dues system strengthens solidarity across all income levels. That solidarity is a key factor at the bargaining table, where employers often try to divide workers.

Why fix something that’s worked for years?

The flat fee has always been inequitable. Simplifying to one percentage is easier for members, fairer for lower-wage earners, and more sustainable for the long term.

Will this make the union’s finances more stable?

Yes. A percentage-only model adjusts naturally as wages increase over time. That makes revenue more predictable and keeps the union on sustainable footing without complicated adjustments.

Does this reduce administrative work?

Yes. The simpler structure makes payroll deductions cleaner, reduces errors, and makes auditing and financial reporting more straightforward. That frees up time and resources for serving members instead of bookkeeping.

Comparison Charts

A. Comparison in dollar amounts of bi-weekly dues at various annual salaries under each system:

Dollar Comparison Graph

B. Comparison in percentages of income spent on union dues under each system (after accounting for the flat rate):

Dollar Comparison Graph