Dana Corp. (II)

Dana Corp. (defendant) manufactured automotive parts at 90 facilities worldwide. Dana had a long history of collective bargaining with International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace, and Agricultural Implement Workers of America (the union), which represented over 2,200 Dana employees in nine bargaining units at various locations. The union sought to organize about 300 employees at one of Dana’s Michigan facilities. Dana and the union entered in a letter of agreement (LOA) setting forth a framework to govern their collective-bargaining relationship in the event that the union gained support from a majority of employees as their exclusive bargaining representative. The LOA contained statements of cooperation, employer neutrality during the union’s organizational campaign, Dana’s provision of an employee list to the union, and Dana’s recognition of the union after a neutral card-check process. The LOA further contained certain principles to inform future collective bargaining, including timeframes for bargaining; duration of any collective-bargaining agreement; concepts to include in an agreement, such as “flexible compensation”; and dispute-resolution methods. Before the National Labor Relations Board (the board), three employees (plaintiffs) charged Dana with unfair labor practices by unlawfully assisting the union in entering the LOA. The general counsel issued a complaint. The judge found that Dana did not commit an unfair labor practice and dismissed the complaint. The board reviewed the matter.