1M1V: A System Built for Chaos and Exclusion
For a union of 1.4 million, direct elections mean low turnout, high costs, outside influence, and disenfranchised members.
12% Turnout: Is That Really Democracy?
UAW’s first direct election saw only 12% turnout — 88% of members didn’t vote.
For AFSCME, even 20% turnout would mean 1.12 million voices unheard.
If only a fraction of members vote, can we call the result a true mandate?
Millions Spent on Elections—or on Winning for Workers?
UAW spent $10 million on its 2022 election—money that could have gone to organizing, strikes, or member education.
For AFSCME, costs would be even higher due to our size.
Do we want to spend millions on elections—or on fighting for better contracts?
Who Really Wins in Direct Elections?
Direct elections open the door to anti-union groups to sway votes with misinformation or funding.
For example, the Freedom Foundation has actively campaigned against AFSCME and supports policies that weaken unions.
If organizations like the Freedom Foundation support 1M1V, should we?
Not All Votes Are Created Equal
The 1M1V amendment excludes retirees (200,000+ members), who currently have 20 votes at conventions.
Ironically, the current system gives retirees some representation. But under 1M1V, they’d have zero.
If we’re fighting for democracy, why are we silencing 200,000 members?
Our System: Proven, Accountable, Strong
Delegates are elected by locals and accountable daily—not just at election time.
Locals that select delegates from a diverse and active membership show how the system amplifies marginalized voices.
1M1V Doesn’t Just Change How We Vote — It Silences Thousands
The 1M1V amendment explicitly excludes three critical groups.
Retirees
- Including more than 200,000+ members
- Currently have 20 votes at conventions.
- Under 1M1V: Zero votes for top officers.
After decades of service, do retirees deserve to be erased from our democracy?
Voluntary At-Large Members
- Pay dues but lack a bargaining unit.
- Under 1M1V: No vote for international officers.
If we’re a union for all workers, why exclude members who choose to join AFSCME?
Members in At-Will States
- Cannot form bargaining units (due to state laws).
- Under 1M1V: No say in electing leadership.
In states where AFSCME is the only voice for workers, should we take that voice away?
They say 1M1V is about ‘equality.’ But equality means including all members — not silencing thousands.
‘Equal Rights’ Shouldn’t Mean Excluding Members
Claim
The 1M1V amendment claims to promote equality (“each vote cast shall be of equal weight”).
Reality
It violates the Member Bill of Rights, which guarantees: “fair and democratic elections at all levels of the union” and “equal opportunity for competing candidates.”
Under the current system: All members have representation via delegates.
The contradiction contained in 1M1V: Retirees, at-large, and at-will members lose their voice.
How can we call this ‘equal rights’ when we’re taking rights away from thousands?