1. Read the content of the LOA. Upon what rational basis would the employer voluntarily meet with the union and agree to the LOA, rather than insist that the UAW follow the usual Board representation procedures with a secret-ballot election?
2. May card-check/neutrality agreements be utilized to legally determine majority support for a union?
3. Did the dissent believe that the parties did more than establish a procedural framework, and in fact negotiated substantive contract provisions with a minority union, contrary to the Board’s Majestic Weaving precedent? Identify some substantive provisions, if any.

[The Dana Corporation manufactures automotive parts throughout the world, and Dana and the UAW have longstanding bargaining relationships in nine U.S. bargaining units. Dana also has facilities in the United States where employees are unrepresented.
On August 6, 2003, Dana and the UAW entered into a letter of agreement (LOA), which set forth a framework to govern their relationship in the future in the event that a majority of the employees at the St. John's, Michigan, plant chose to designate the UAW as their exclusive collective bargaining representative. Three Dana employees at the St. John's facility filed unfair labor practice charges with the Board, and the General Counsel issued a complaint that the LOA was in violation of Sections 8(a)(2) and 8(b)(1) of the NLRA.]
From the Opinion of the Board
… The LOA's introductory statement of purpose recognized "that dramatic changes in the domestic automotive market ha[ve] created new quality, productivity and competitiveness challenges for the automotive component supplier." It further stated that Dana and the UAW believed that "these challenges will be more effectively met through a partnership that is more positive, non-adversarial and with constructive attitudes toward each other." The introductory statement continued:
Employee freedom to choose is a paramount concern of Dana as well as the UAW. We both believe that membership in a union is a matter of personal choice and acknowledge that if a majority of employees wish to be represented by a union, Dana will recognize that choice. The Union and the Company will not allow anyone to be intimidated or coerced into a decision on this important matter. The parties are also committed to an expeditious procedure for determining majority status.
The LOA then set forth ground rules for both parties that would be applicable in any organizing campaign the UAW might undertake at an unorganized Dana facility. Dana agreed to inform employees that it was "totally neutral regarding the issue of representation by the Union" and that it has "a constructive and positive relationship with the UAW and that a National Partnership Agreement with the UAW exists in which both parties are committed to the success and growth" of Dana. Dana agreed to provide the UAW, upon request, with a list of the names and addresses of employees in any facility covered by the agreement and to permit the UAW to meet with employees in nonwork areas. The parties made a no-strike/no-lockout commitment, effective at a given facility when the UAW requested an employee list for the facility and continuing until a first contract was negotiated or any contract-related dispute was resolved.
Dana agreed to recognize and bargain with the UAW upon proof of majority status, to be determined by a card check by a neutral third party. The LOA specified that Dana "may not recognize the Union as the exclusive representative of employees in the absence of a showing" of majority status.…
… Article 4.2.4 [of the LOA] provided as follows:
The parties agree that in labor agreements bargained pursuant to this Letter, the following conditions must be included for the facility to have a reasonable opportunity to succeed and grow.
• Healthcare costs that reflect the competitive reality of the supplier industry and product(s) involved
• Minimum classifications Team-based approaches
• The importance of attendance to productivity and quality
• Dana's idea program (two ideas per person per month and 80% implementation)
• Continuous improvement
• Flexible compensation
• Mandatory overtime when necessary (after qualified volunteers) to support the customers.
The LOA also specified steps that the parties would take if they were unable to reach a final agreement. Article 4.2 provided that, after 5 months, the parties would submit unresolved issues to a joint UAW/Dana committee. If 6 months were to pass without a contract, the parties would submit unresolved issues to a neutral for interest arbitration, and the neutral would select either Dana's final offer or the UAW's.…
Although the law permits certain forms of cooperation between employers and minority or unrecognized unions, an employer crosses the line between cooperation and support, and violates Section 8(a)(2), when it recognizes a minority union as the exclusive bargaining representative. This is the principle reflected in the Supreme Court's decision in Bernhard-Altmann, supra.…