For more information on neutrality agreements and card control choices, visit the Center For Employee Rights website. A typical provision of a neutrality agreement is: „The company undertakes not to make negative public statements about the Union and any officer, representative or member of the union.“ The National Restaurant Association lists on its website three points against card control. According to a 2004 Zogby poll for the pro-free Michigan market, the anti-Union Mackinac Center for Public Policy, 78% of union members support maintaining the current voting process or replacing it with a „less private“ one, the current secretive electoral system is „less private.“  As noted above, employers never see authorization cards or credentials on how an employee voted, both in the card review and in the secret NRL elections, when card control unions would see how a worker voted. Forbes commentator Brett Joshpe explains his opposition to card control as such: those who oppose card control argue that they deprive workers of the secret right to vote. They also assert that, while the collection of a majority of card signatories may mean that a secret vote would not be necessary, the signatories could be pushed to sign by intimidation and pressure; The same could be said by employers between registration and a secret vote. Many economic organizations, including the American Chamber of Commerce, oppose the introduction of card cheques. From his website: There are several things that employees can avoid this injustice. If you learn that your employer is under pressure to sign a neutrality agreement, let them know that you are against it and ask your employees to do the same. If you are already under the weapon of such an agreement, contact us and we will work with you on other strategies and tactics. In other cases, unions have exerted their influence with companies that have already been organized, as the United Auto Workers (UAW) have done with the Big Three to encourage them to pressure suppliers to sign neutrality agreements. In 1969, the Chief Justice party gave Earl Warren the majority opinion of the U.S. Supreme Court, which upheld the use of card cheques.
Mr. Warren said: „Almost from the beginning, it was recognized that a union did not need to be recognized as the winner of a board election to invoke a bargaining obligation; it could obtain majority status by other means… convincing support, for example. B by a strike or strike vote called by the unions, or, as here, by the possession of cards signed by a majority of workers who have authorized the union to represent them for collective bargaining. NLRB/.