The National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) points to an interesting opinion piece in this past weekend's Fort Wayne (IN) News-Sentinel.  Columnist Kevin Leininger chronicles the card check experiences of teenage grocery workers approached by UFCW organizers in Indiana:

Liane Carroll and her son, John, who just turned 18 this week, know but wish they didn't. And they're not alone.

“(John's) a minor and can't even open a bank account on his own. But the union said that if he didn't sign, he'd be charged 10 hours of his salary as an initiation fee. There was no vote, and parents were never told. I'm afraid a lot of parents with minor kids working for Scott's weren't aware of the pressure being put on their kids. Unions have their time and place, but is this legal?”

*  *  *

“I love Scott's, but I'm probably going to quit because of this,” said Rebecca Coffelt, 18, a student at Elmhurst High School. “I'm not anti-union, but I didn't like the way they came across. They were always harassing me. I didn't really want to sign, but I was trying to control my temper and help customers. I was more worried about customers yelling at me (than signing the union card.)”

“I signed, too, because they kept telling me I had to sign and that the union was already approved. We were told we'd have a vote, but we never did. It's really irritating,” agreed Tara Groves, 16, a student at Northrop High School.

Groves, Coffelt and John Carroll said they doubt the union would have won a secret vote among store employees - if one had been held, that is.

Their stories are reminiscent of Danielle Cookson's experiences:

These are but a few stories, and do not prove that under EFCA all union organizers would seek to exert pressure on more vulnerable younger workers in workplaces to achieve their goals.  But certainly the secret ballot's protection from this type of undue influence by either a union or an employer provides a more reliable indication of the workers' feelings about union representation.