UAW President Shawn Fain reveals why he thinks Mercedes vote failed

The loss of a union vote at Mercedes-Benz in Alabama this month might have sounded like a sour note in a symphony of positive UAW headlines in recent months, particularly so close on the heels of a big win at Volkswagen in Tennessee.

The union had just scored a new contract early in May at Daimler Truck, which has plants in several Southern states. Last year's strike against Ford Motor Co., General Motors and Stellantis, owner of Jeep, Ram, Chrysler, Dodge and Fiat, and the agreements that followed had made headlines far beyond Detroit. The defeat in Alabama interrupted the momentum.

But for those who have followed the auto industry for any length of time, it might have more clearly demonstrated how challenging it has been for the UAW to score major organizing victories at foreign-owned auto assembly plants in the U.S. South.

UAW President Shawn Fain, in an exclusive interview with the Free Press following the election, explained why he remains optimistic about the union's prospects, why he believes the vote failed in Alabama and what's next for the union.

"We know what the companies do," he said. "They spend millions on union avoidance firms and write that off and our tax dollars pay for that. They break the law. They do whatever they can do to try to keep (unionizing) from happening because the last thing they want is workers to have any semblance of control over their lives at work."

As the election approached, Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey doubled down on anti-union rhetoric, an echo of past attacks from regional politicians, and Mercedes-Benz faced accusations of running an aggressive union-busting campaign, which the company denied, saying after the election that "our goal throughout this process was to ensure every eligible team member had the opportunity to participate in a fair election." Investigations into complaints against the company are underway by the U.S. National Labor Relations Board and German authorities.

On Friday, the UAW also filed objections with the NLRB Region 10 office in Atlanta seeking to have the results set aside, saying the company fired union supporters and took other improper actions.

NLRB spokeswoman Kayla Blado said the regional director would review the objections.

"If she finds that the objections raise substantial and material issues of fact which could be best resolved by a hearing, she will order a hearing. If, after the hearing, the regional director finds that the employer's conduct affected the election, she can order a new election," Blado said in an email.

A company statement, provided by spokeswoman Felyicia Jerald, defended the election results.

"Over 90% of Mercedes-Benz U.S. International (MBUSI) Team Members made their voices heard through a secret-ballot vote and the majority indicated they are not interested in being represented by the UAW for purposes of collective bargaining," according to the statement. "We sincerely hoped the UAW would respect our team members’ decision. Throughout the election, we worked with the NLRB to adhere to its guidelines, and we will continue to do so as we work through this process. Meanwhile, we will work directly with our team members on measures to ensure we remain an employer of choice and provide a safe and supportive work environment."

The union needed 50% plus one vote to secure a victory, but despite what was said to be a supermajority of workers filing for an election in April and the union's prior announcement that one wouldn't be requested until 70% of workers had filed union cards, the vote was 2,642 against UAW representation to 2,045 in favor. If about 300 of those no votes had gone in the union’s favor, the outcome would have flipped.

One thing is clear. Beginning May 1, the company made a big change at Mercedes-Benz U.S. International, the subsidiary that operates the Alabama facilities east of Tuscaloosa, replacing then-CEO Michael Goebel with Federico Kochlowski, vice president of operations. Kochlowski, who has a degree from Michigan State University, had served stints in China and Mexico, the company said, as well as part of his career with Chrysler, beginning in Argentina in 1996 and as a manager at the Tech Center in Auburn Hills following Daimler's purchase of Chrysler in the 1990s.

The loss at Mercedes-Benz prompted speculation about the state of the UAW's various organizing drives. The union had committed $40 million to the effort in February, and organizing momentum, enhanced by more favorable national attitudes toward unions, appeared stronger than it had been in decades.

Note: This interview has been edited for brevity and readability.

Free Press: What’s your big takeaway from what happened at Mercedes?

Shawn Fain: It’s the same story that’s been going on in this country for years. Millions of workers say they’d join a union if they had the opportunity. Polling shows a majority of people would join a union, or side with a union, but it doesn’t always translate into victories and organizing. There’s a big reason why. We know what the companies do. They spend millions on union avoidance firms and write that off and our tax dollars pay for that. They break the law. They do whatever they can do to try to keep (unionizing) from happening because the last thing they want is workers to have any semblance of control over their lives at work.

We know that going in. We know what we’re up against.

Obviously, the game of changing a plant manager a month out or three weeks out had an impact. They’re walking around treating workers the same way they always do, but all of a sudden they care about them now.But I think that did have an impact, unfortunately. But Volkswagen went through the same thing some years back, and they saw the reality that obviously who the CEO is doesn’t change how the company acts and how the company treats its workers at the end of the day. They’re concerned about extracting profits and keeping it in the hands of the few and letting the workers pay the price for that.

We’re going to keep doing what we’re doing. Over 2,000 people voted to join the union there. Literally, if 300 people voted the other way, we might have won that. So, not the result we wanted but definitely a lot of momentum going forward, and we’ll continue to build on that.

And I think the next time we visit back there, I’m pretty sure it’ll be a different result.

FP: As far as the plant manager change, was it just a commitment they were making?

SF: The No. 1 motivator is fear, preying on fears of workers and trying to make them afraid by joining the union. They threaten them with everything under the sun, including whether they’ll have to move the business or whatever. It’s always the game they play.

I heard that a lot as far as workers saying, that (the new CEO) coming through there the last couple of weeks every day on the floor and basically begging workers for a chance and everything else. ... I’m sure that swayed people, but I think it’s a culmination of several different issues.

At the end of the day, the workers decide. It’s unfortunate we can’t have a true neutrality election where the company doesn’t do what they’re doing, but that would have been a landslide, and I think it just shows the difference. Although Volkswagen wasn’t completely neutral, they were very subdued in how they approached it, and, obviously, you saw the result.

FP: Was the organization different on the ground in Chattanooga (at the VW plant) versus in Alabama?

SF: Obviously, Volkswagen's been going on for a long time but really at Mercedes the workers led this from start to finish. We were there supporting and giving guidance where we could, but the workers really wanted to lead this one and they did.

Philosophy-wise, I think it was a lot of similarities in how we approached it. Obviously, less time than what we had at Volkswagen. But there’s no regrets in this. We did everything we could do, and everybody worked hard, from our staff to the local organizing committee.

We’ll make adjustments and keep pushing forward. We’re going to have a lot of success, and I guarantee working-class people have a lot brighter days ahead. Working-class people are realizing the power they have and they’re realizing the only way forward to have any semblance of a life is with a union because without one they don’t have any control in their work lives, so we’ll see.

FP: Your goal, you said before, was you hoped to organize one plant this year, right?

SF: We definitely wanted to win one. The goal is to do as many as we can, and we’re going to keep pushing … but we’re not going to settle just because we won one. We’re not going to stop, we’re going to keep rolling and win more. So that’s all about the workers.

Naturally, we wanted to win Mercedes. It was a very close vote. Almost half the workers there voted to join. We were really close.

FP: Was there anything specific they were doing during those days of voting or right before the voting, like a specific message?

SF: The plant manager walking the plant floor every day and begging workers to give them a chance. Obviously, that’s something new to them.

They continued having captive audience meetings and just telling flat-out lies about the UAW and me and whoever. It’s the same things you always deal with in these drives. Unfortunately, like I said, in this nation the law doesn’t really protect workers and their right to have a free and fair election when it comes to this, and the companies take full advantage of it.

When they can write off union avoidance firms' costs and stuff like that, again it's sad, it shouldn’t be allowed.

FP: When (Gov. Kay Ivey) signed legislation about punishing companies (if they voluntarily recognize unions) the day of the voting starting, did that have any specific impact? Did you get a sense from the folks you were talking to that they were listening to the politicians at all, or was it really just the plant level?

SF: I think the majority’s the plant level. Obviously, the plant’s going to push that though. Management’s going to push that on workers and try to spin it to benefit their point of view.

All of it can have an impact in some way. … I think a lot of the workers realize some of these politicians for what they are. They see through what they’re doing.

I just think when you combine all those things, out of 5,000 people 300 votes would have swung it the other way, so definitely all those things together didn’t help.

FP: In the end, it was a pretty good turnout. A lot of times, I hear the complaints about poor turnout. The majority of folks voted, right?

SF: The company knew they were up against a fight and obviously ... and I was told that too, they were pressing workers to vote. There were workers that were on sick leave and everything else. They were telling them they had to come in and vote, so it’s pretty apparent by looking at the numbers that they did a good job of getting people in there to try to counteract what they saw from the workers that had been wanting a union in there for years.

FP: Were there specific promises that you heard they made to the workers, other than it will get better?

SF: I won’t say promises verbatim, but, obviously, that they’d made mistakes and that’s why they got rid of the plant manager and they brought this new CEO in, and they promised it’s going to be different.

We see this happen over and over and it doesn’t take long until they realize nothing’s going to change. The governor and others try to paint the union as outsiders. They don’t need outsiders influencing this.I saw a comment (Ivey) made about we don’t need Detroit or something in Alabama. I find a funny irony in that what she doesn’t say is that the (person) that they brought in to run the place has spent (part) of his career in Detroit with Big Three companies. So they’re OK with the Detroit influence as long as it’s management, I guess.

But workers don’t know those things. At the end of the day, it doesn’t matter where we come from. At the end of the day, it's about one thing: It’s about workers having a say about their work life, and without a union they don’t have that.

Working-class people are waking up in this country, between the recession in '08, '09 and the pandemic and the runaway massive profits corporations have realized over the last decade-plus. Workers are realizing they’ve been left behind and they want their fair share, and they're starting to realize now that the only way to get that is by forming a union.

We're going to continue to win and do great things and bring justice to workers everywhere. I look forward to it. I’m really optimistic about what lies ahead for organized labor and for working-class people.

FP: You had a pretty clear set of milestones in terms of how the (organizing) campaigns would go public. Are you comfortable with what you laid out earlier in terms of the percentages?

SF: Yeah, definitely. Any campaign, as they go on and on, obviously, the company has more and more time to run anti-(union) stuff and there’s a fine line when you think you’re at that point.

There's not anything I would go back and we're kicking ourself (over, where) we’re thinking, "Oh my God, we screwed up," or we missed it here. Look, we did everything we could do and we just don’t have the access that the company has, and that’s the big problem in this fight. We can't walk the plant floor and talk to workers. We rely on organized committee members in the plant that work there to do it.

And they do a great job. They worked hard and put their heart and soul into it. But at the end of the day in the power structure of a factory, management has the control. They can have controlled meetings. They can force people to go to meetings. They can tell them whatever they want to tell them and they can make them sit there and listen. It’s just part of the fight and part of the struggle.

FP: Obviously, there’s organizing going on at a variety of different places. Would you expect there to be another big announcement in the short term. What should we be looking for?

SF: We're just assessing things as they develop. As things develop, we’ll make announcements. We’ll keep doing what we’re doing. I don’t really want to throw anything out there yet until we’re ready to.

But we’re not slowing down, trust me. There’s millions of workers that are looking for justice, and they’re looking for a union leadership, and we’re willing to make sure that happens.

FP: It’s been a pretty busy stretch for you. It’s been a year and a few months in your current role. What’s happened, what’s changed? A lot more people know you now, right?

SF: The UAW. The UAW’s relevant. We’ve been irrelevant pretty much my entire career, and everywhere I go now, people of all walks of life stop and talk to me and thank us for what we’re doing and say they love what the UAW’s doing and so that’s all good.

Between all the sectors we represent, we have a lot going on all the time between bargaining and organizing. You know, we’re doing a lot of good things. We’re organizing like crazy in higher ed. We bargained that Daimler agreement, which was a massive, record agreement, the best agreement in their history, and that feeds other sectors, other parts of that heavy truck area and bus area that naturally now they want more and they want to organize. All this feeds everything overall.

I said this when I ran for this (office), that if you bargain good contracts, organizing will follow. I’ve always believed organizing and bargaining go hand in hand, and we’re seeing that.

FP: Is there anything on the national political stage that’s relevant or you want to say? You got your endorsement in but, obviously, we’ve got a pretty intense next six months. What’s the UAW going to be doing on the national political front? Note: In January, the UAW endorsed Joe Biden for president.

SF: We’re going to be working hard to ensure we elect a president that kind of stands with working-class people versus one that stands with the corporate class and the management class. It’s imperative that we see that through, and we know we’re going to work hard to make sure that happens. We can’t afford to go backwards.That’s why we made the endorsement. Like I said, it wasn’t about party politics. It wasn’t about my opinion. It was about putting these two candidates side by side and looking at their own actions and their own words and when we did that, it’s a very telling picture of who stands with labor and who doesn’t. And that’s them in their own words and actions, not mine and not the parties.

FP: Did that come up at all during your talks with folks in Alabama?

SF: Not to me. I’m sure it did. Naturally, the companies are going to use anything they can to try to cause divisions. That’s just how the corporate class wins. They’ll find anything that they can divide workers over, and they’ll push it, so I’m sure they tried to inject that where they knew it would have an effect with workers.We’re not going to run from that. I’m proud of our endorsement, and it’s easy to explain why we made that endorsement, and all we have to do is walk people through it.

Contact Eric D. Lawrence: elawrence@freepress.com. Become a subscriber. Submit a letter to the editor at freep.com/letters.

This article originally appeared on Detroit Free Press: UAW President Shawn Fain reveals why he thinks Mercedes vote failed