(FORTUNE) -- Dear Annie: My company was recently acquired, and the culture is changing drastically. One aspect of the new regime, as openly expressed by the company president, is that we are all expected to donate money to a political action committee. I have heard that failure to join the PAC means your name ends up on a list and you get fewer opportunities for promotions, plum assignments, etc.

When the PAC representatives first held an after-hours meeting to tell us about it, my boss said attendance was "mandatory." Since this PAC is in support of candidates I would not otherwise support or vote for, I really feel compromised by having to join. The company recommended that everyone donate 1% of gross salary; I didn't do that, I just gave $125, and now I regret even that. What do you think of this? Does it seem unethical or am I just overreacting? -No Name Please

More from Fortune Scandal rocks the polo set The Marchionne revolution at Chrysler The latest tech tool: People power FORTUNE 500 Current Issue Subscribe to Fortune

Dear No Name: There's no question that corporate PAC activity is on the rise: The Federal Election Committee reported a couple of weeks ago that political action committees run by companies are expected to donate about $120 million to congressional candidates in this year's election, up from $91.6 million in the 2002 midterm campaigns.

But it sounds as if your employer is overstepping its bounds by requiring that you contribute. Federal law prohibits this. Here's the exact wording of the Federal Election Campaign Act, 2 USC Section 441b(b)(3): A political campaign fund may not "make a contribution or expenditure by utilizing money or anything of value secured by physical force, job discrimination, financial reprisals, or the threat of force, job discrimination, or financial reprisal." Physical force isn't the issue here - no one's accosted you in a dark parking lot, have they? - but that list you mention sure smacks of the "threat of job discrimination or financial reprisal."

"We rarely see cases where employees are coerced into joining PACs, because it is so clearly illegal," says Philip Berkowitz, a partner in the employment law practice at Nixon Peabody in New York City. "Big companies, especially publicly held ones, know the rules about this."

However, he points out that simply feeling pressured is not the same as actually being coerced: "Do you know that this 'list' exists, or is it a rumor or a matter of perception? Merely keeping a list of who contributes may just be record-keeping," not intended for any nefarious purpose. If there really is an enemies list - how Nixonian! - you could report the situation to the Federal Election Commission (anonymously, perhaps), which enforces campaign-finance laws.

But before you do that, Berkowitz recommends that you speak with someone in-house about it - either in human resources or someone in the legal department responsible for compliance.

"Expressing your concerns about feeling pressured to join the PAC will probably resolve this situation pretty quickly," he says.

Let's hope so.

----------------------

Many thanks to all who wrote to comment on the column last week about working as an independent contractor - especially to all those who noted (correctly) that "Cautious in Cleveland" might consider other options besides staying on full-time, retiring, or setting up shop as a separate business. Readers suggested becoming a part-time employee (with or without benefits); working out an arrangement whereby "Cautious" could work, say, 25% fewer hours for 25% less pay; or signing on as a W-2 employee of a temp agency that could then send him back to his former employer for a given number of hours per week without all the hassle of satisfying the IRS requirements for independent-contractor status.

And further regarding the question a couple of weeks ago from someone whose co-worker constantly interrupted her: Several of you wrote to say that this could be a symptom of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), which is treatable. Of course, suggesting that a co-worker seek evaluation and treatment takes diplomacy and tact, but it may work where all else fails. Thanks, all!

----------------------------------

Related: Bitter partisan politics: Good for TV?

Democrats returning $5,000 in Milberg gifts