Question: The source of dispute was a representation election held at Kusan's Franklin, Tennessee, plant on October 19, 2002. The union won that election by a vote of 118-107. Kusan, however, filed objections with the Board over the conduct of the election. The objections charged that the union interfered with the election by conducting a poll of the employees and threatening and coercing employees during the course of the polling. In December 2002, the regional director of the NLRB investigated Kusan's objections and issued a report recommending that the objections be overruled. The results of the election were certified by the Board in April 2003.

Kusan's objections centered on a petition that Kusan employees who supported the union circulated among their fellow workers prior to the election. The petition, which bore approximately 100 names, read as follows: We, the undersigned, are voting YES for the IAM. We don't mind being on the firing line because we know it's something that has to be done. Please join with us. VOTE YES and help us to make Kusan, Inc. a better place to work and earn a living. Kusan contends that the circulation and distribution of the petition constituted impermissible "polling" of the employees by the union. How should the Board have ruled on Kusan's objections? See Kusan Mfg. Co. v. NLRB [749 F.2d 362, 117 L.R.R.M. 3394 (6th Cir. 1984)].