On July 10, 2013, the Second Circuit, applying the Supreme Court's ruling in Hoffman Plastics, denied back pay to undocumented bakery workers who were terminated for participating in protected labor activities.  The Court rejected the argument that the matter should be distinguished from Hoffman Plastics since the petitioners committed no fraud in obtaining employment.  Unlike the employee in Hoffman Plastics, in this case they did not submit false I-9 documentation to the employer.  The Court found that the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA) was intended to prohibit formation of employment relationships with undocumented workers.  The former employees' lack of fraud does not alter the need to effectuate the statutory purpose, and the question of whether the employees or the employer violated IRCA is inconsequential under the Hoffman back pay prohibition.   The Court, however, remanded the case to NLRB on the question of whether a conditional order of reinstatement should have been granted in the event the former employees could provide proper IRCA documentation.  The Court said that the employer may still be subject to IRCA sanctions, so it is not getting a free pass for those violations even if it escapes a back pay award.  See decision at link below:  

Palma v. NLRB