The UAW’s federal watchdog was always destined to have a tough job. In 2021, a district judge appointed Neil Barofsky for a six-year term to monitor this notoriously corrupt union as it supposedly worked toward legitimacy. Barofsky then issued a stream of reports with the twelfth edition being a doozy that detailed how President Shawn Fain ousted two officers who “refus[ed] to divert benefits to his fiancée” and approve ambiguous spending requests “for the benefit of those in the President’s Office.”
That report also showcased Fain’s penchant for profanity and threats to “slit” or “cut” the “f***ing throats” of those who “messed” with his inner circle. Fain admitted that he “got sh*tty” by making a UAW staffer cry, and Barofsky recommended the reinstatement of ex-Secretary-Treasurer Margaret Mock, which is where we pick up with today’s discussion.
Barofsky’s thirteenth report recently dropped, and “profanity” has been replaced by “retaliation” as the word of the day, pointing toward an insidious “culture of fear” that grips the UAW’s staffers. Of course, these findings are awfully ironic for an organization that infiltrates workplaces with false promises of improvement, and although Barofsky notes that retaliation has historically been present within the UAW, it’s now gone into overdrive.
Case in point: The magic of “Ctrl+F” reveals over 100 uses of “retaliation” within the thirteenth report. Further smatterings of “retaliatory,” “retaliate,” and “retaliated” add up to 135 uses, leading to Barofsky’s main findings:
- Fear of retaliation among UAW staffers
- Retaliatory actions taken against Secretary-Treasurer Mock, which were initially detailed in the twelfth report
- Failure to adequately address the union’s culture of retaliation
- Staff reluctance to report misconduct due to fear of retaliation
A dizzying array of retaliatory acts is then described in this 62-page report (and a 40+ page appendix of recommendations), but what’s most telling is how 51% of surveyed UAW staffers are so worried about consequences of reporting retaliation that they admitted they would not report it.
Yes, that’s right: The UAW’s staffers fear being retaliated against for either reporting retaliation or commenting upon past acts of retaliation.
If that’s not a cut-and-dried description of a toxic and miserable workplace, we’re not sure what else could as easily qualify.
Individual workers further detailed their fears about the twelfth report:
- Employee #1 declared, “The President is going to retaliate against me when he hears this.”
- Employee #2 expressed how they were “really concerned” about how Fain “is going to retaliate against me when he hears this.”
- Employee #3, a senior official, admitted that they were “afraid” to talk to Barofsky because Fain “would be vindictive.”
- Additional employees admitted feeling “constantly on eggshells” about “the President’s potential to retaliate.”
Shockingly, this thirteenth report wasn’t 100% bad, though.
Barofsky conceded that he recently observed “green shoots of positive change” within the UAW, including plans to hire a new compliance director and how recent financial audits had been done in a timely manner with Fain’s office cooperating. Still, Barofsky noted that although there’s still room for the union to “renounce the same-old culture of fear and retaliation and embrace one of inclusion and reform,” time is running short.
Conclusion: To drive the point home, Barofsky’s own words point toward how, if the UAW does not get serious about “cultural reform,” then “it is only a matter of time before abuse and corruption creep back into the Union.”
In short, the UAW monitor sounds skeptical about lasting reform within Fain’s union, and Barofsky isn’t done yet. He’s got at least a few more reports to compile before his job as federal monitor is done. Stay tuned.
