Federal Monitor Challenges UAW’s Support for  Ceasefire in Gaza By Malik Miah

There had been concerns about the Federal Monitor of the UAW [United Auto Workers] investigating President Shawn Fain that recently became public. Fain was the first UAW president elected by a direct membership vote in 2023, which also elected a new reform leadership.     At first, I and many other socialist  supporters of the labor movement thought it was about disputes in the reform leadership and conflicts between these leaders, that had been reported in the media.     Behind Monitor’s positionBut it turns out the Court-appointed Monitor, Neil Barofsky’s recent investigation is completely political and had nothing do with union internal democracy and Fain’s alleged financial corruption.     In a July 11 article by Ryan Grim, co-founder of a new media outlet, Drop Site News,  he revealed:     “The federally appointed monitor tasked with overseeing the United Auto Workers, Neil Barofsky, is ratcheting up his conflict with UAW President Shawn Fain, announcing another investigation into the union leader who rose to national prominence amid the successful ‘Stand Up Strike’ against the Big Three automakers.    “Yet newly unveiled documents suggest Barosky’s pursuit of Fain has less to do with concerns over union self-dealing and more to do with the politics of Israel-Palestine.     “Barofsky was appointed in 2021 as the result of the Department of Justice-led consent decree put in place in lieu of prosecution of the union itself for rampant corruption, following prison sentences for two consecutive UAW presidents.”     The Consent Decree between the Department of Justice and the UAW  forced the union to allow the rank and file to directly elect the president for the first time.   Behind monitor’s investigation of Fein.    On  December 1, 2023, the UAW became the largest union in the U.S. to officially call  for a ceasefire in Israel’s genocidal war against the Palestinians in Gaza, explaining, as one union leader put it in a statement at the time,  “From opposing fascism in WWII to mobilizing against apartheid South Africa and the Contra war [in Nicaragua] , the UAW has consistently stood for justice across the globe.”    The UAW’s International Executive Board (IEB) also voted to form a Divestment and Just Transition working group to “study the history of Israel and Palestine, the union’s economic ties to the conflict, and to explore how to achieve a just transition for US workers from war to peace.”    The decision to call for a ceasefire was strongly  criticized  by defenders  of Israel’s war. Among them is Neil Barofsky, who let Fain know about his criticism directly even though the issue has nothing to do with the guidelines of the Consent Decree.    On December 14,  two weeks after the UAW released its statement, Fain appeared on Capitol Hill for a press conference with members of Congress calling for a ceasefire.     “The evening before,” Grim added, “according to a source familiar with the conversation, Barofsky called Fain and urged him to rethink the union position. Barofsky said that it had pained him to see the UAW’s wheel logo and anti-war protests where UAW members were present, and he told Fain there had been repeated instances of antisemitism at those protests. Barofsky told Fain he was not calling as the federal monitor, who has nearly unchecked power over the union, but merely in his personal capacity.”    Barofsky himself confirmed he made such a call in a letter he later sent to the executive board, first reported by the Detroit News buried under the headline “UAW’s court filing highlights tension with federal monitor.” That letter itself was perhaps even more outside its authority  to write and send.     Union’s response.    On February 11, according to an email sent to Barofsky by Benjamin Dictor, a UAW attorney, the Anti-Defamation League [ADL] wrote to Barofsky and “complained about the Union’s demand for a ceasefire in Gaza and in particular the actions of Local 7902 which represents over 4,000 part-time and adjunct professors, student educators, and healthcare workers in New York] in support of same.”     In California, like New York City, the UAW represents many faculty members and instructors who have supported pro-Palestinian campus protests.     Barofsky, in a letter to the UAW board, wrote, “Although this issue is outside of the Monitor’s jurisdiction, we thought it was important to forward the [ADL] message to the IEB given the serious concerns raised here.” He then added, confirming he made the call to Fain, “For what it’s worth, as I previously shared with Shawn, similar concerns were raised directly to me shortly after the IEB issued its own ceasefire statement.”     The UAW board held its next quarterly meeting the week of February 19, and this time Barofsky joined remotely, having missed the meeting when the ceasefire resolution was voted on. A source at the meeting said union officials confronted him about inappropriate lobbying on an issue that is not within his authority. Barofsky defended his position, arguing that the ADL (a Zionist lobbying outfit that says criticism of Israel’s war is anti-Semitic) was an unimpeachable authority on the question. That Barofsky continued debating the union’s position on a ceasefire stunned the board members.    Grim further explained, “Fain and Barosky’s relationship had been strong before the Gaza war, as both had the same interest, to reform and root out corruption at the UAW. “     “It’s been a pretty collaborative working relationship with the monitor,” said one official. “Up until now.””    On  February 23, the UAW lawyer Benjamin Dictor sent Barofsky a blistering letter after the board meeting ended, telling the Monitor that the union was flabbergasted at his breach of ethics.    “You called President Fain and introduced your conversation with President Fain as one that was ‘strictly on a personal level’ during which time you shared with President Fain your personal concerns about the Union’s position on the crisis in Gaza,” he wrote. “Your call to President Fain on an issue so blatantly outside of the Monitor’s jurisdiction was inappropriate as your Office holds disproportionate power over the UAW, and even a ‘strictly personal’ sharing of opinion implicitly implicates such power dynamic. Nonetheless, out of respect for you and the office of the Monitor, President Fain discussed the conversation with only those in his inner circle and chose not to escalate the improper exchange any further. Dictor added that it was additionally inappropriate for Barofsky to lobby the board regarding the ADL’s objection to the UAW’s call for a ceasefire.    “On February 29,”Grim added,  “just six days after the UAW sent its letter to Barofsky complaining about his improper lobbying, Barofsky sent the UAW a sweeping demand for documents, saying he was opening an investigation into Fain over a dispute Fain had with the secretary treasurer. That letter was made public in a court filing by Barofsky this week.”  Barosky asked for “any and all emails, text messages, and instant messages” sent between Fain, his top deputies, and his lawyers, from February 12 through February 23, 2024.” That covers pretty much the exact time the UAW and Barofsky were jockeying over the ADL’s complaint about their call for a ceasefire.    Monitor escalates attack.   Barofsky has only upped the attack on Fain since then. The Wall Street Journal said Barofsky is “probing” new allegations against President Shawn Fain, including that he made demands to benefit his domestic partner and her sister, according to a court filing.    The  allegation, which has nothing to do with the union’s statement on Gaza, is aimed at undermining Fain and his call for a ceasefire.    The Gaza issue is clearly being used by Barofsky and pro-Israel allies, including in Congress,  to attack Fain and the union.    The position of Monitor over the union should be eliminated. How changes are made within unions, including the issues of corruption and rank-and-file control, must be decided by the union’s members.    Direct government intervention in and takeovers of unions, even if it initially weakens the ruling bureaucracy, can lead to a situation where a political issue like the Gaza war can be  used to undermine rank and file democracy and control.