Workers deserve answers — and they deserve to know their options.
The United Auto Workers corruption scandal was supposed to be a turning point.
Former union officials went to prison. Two former UAW international presidents were convicted of crimes involving the misuse of union funds. The federal government brought an anti-corruption and anti-fraud lawsuit against the union. And in 2021, a federal court appointed an independent monitor with sweeping authority to investigate fraud, corruption and misconduct inside the UAW.
The monitorship was designed to last six years.
Five years later, UAW workers are still waiting for the clean break from the past they were promised.
Serious Questions at the Very Top
In June, the UAW’s court-appointed monitor released findings from an investigation involving current UAW President Shawn Fain and Vice President Rich Boyer.
The monitor concluded that Fain abused his authority, retaliated against Boyer and improperly used his position in matters involving potential benefits for his fiancée and assistance for her sister. Fain strongly denies the allegations and has called the monitor’s findings politically motivated.
The Justice Department is also conducting a grand-jury investigation into allegations involving Fain, according to Reuters.
But workers do not need to wait for a criminal conviction to ask whether they are satisfied with the leadership, accountability and representation they are receiving from an organization they financially support.
And the Problems Aren’t Limited to One Investigation
The timing is striking because UAW members are currently voting on the people who will lead their union.
Mail-in ballots for the 2026 UAW International Officer Election began going out around August 21 and must be received by October 5.
And even that election has generated new accountability concerns.
On September 1, the independent monitor found that UAW Region 2B leaders had engaged in a recurring pattern of pressuring staff over which candidates they supported, monitoring employees perceived to support an opponent and threatening “consequences” for doing so.
That came just weeks after the monitor disciplined another UAW official who posted an image depicting a candidate for UAW president bound, gagged and bleeding while an armed person pointed a rifle at him. The official’s UAW membership was suspended for two years, and he was permanently barred from running for union office.
These are not ancient stories from the corruption scandal that originally brought federal oversight to the UAW.
They are happening now, while that oversight is still in place.
Workers Are Paying for This Organization
UAW members currently pay monthly dues equal to 2.5 hours of straight-time pay.
For a worker earning $25 an hour, the UAW itself calculates that at $62.50 every month. Delegates voted this summer to maintain dues at that level while building a $1.3 billion strike fund.
The UAW is also one of North America’s largest labor organizations, representing more than 400,000 active members across industries ranging from auto manufacturing and aerospace to state and local government, colleges and universities, hospitals and nonprofit organizations.
That means hundreds of thousands of workers have a direct stake in how this organization is run.
Why It Matters
Workers should be free to support a union they believe represents them well. They should be able to vote for different union leadership when they want change.
And workers who no longer believe a union represents them should also be able to learn what options the law provides for changing or ending that representation.
Private-sector workers covered by federal labor law may have access to a decertification process during legally defined periods. Public-sector workers operate under state-specific laws and procedures.
The Bottom Line
The original UAW corruption investigation was supposed to change the union.
Federal oversight was supposed to restore trust.
Five years later, the union remains under that oversight while its current president faces misconduct findings and a reported federal investigation — and the monitor is still stepping in over intimidation and retaliation concerns surrounding union elections.
At some point, accountability has to mean more than another investigation, another report or another monitor ruling.
It has to mean putting power where it belongs:
With the worker
One worker may look at these facts and decide to remain a UAW member.
Another may decide the answer is new leadership.
And another may conclude that it is time to reconsider whether the UAW should represent that workplace at all.
Those decisions belong to workers — not union bosses.
Your paycheck. Your voice. Your choice.
Have a tip about possible union fraud, retaliation, intimidation or misuse of worker funds? Submit it to the AFFT Union Accountability Center.