In this case, is it possible for the court to enforce the voluntary settlement agreement between the employer and the NLRB without violating any immigration laws? No, it is not possible for the enforcement of the voluntary settlement agreement between the employer and the NLRB without violating the immigration laws. Moreover, the case of Jose Castro, proved that an employer can’t enforce the voluntary settlement agreement without violating the immigration laws when it was forced to pay Mr. Castro back pay not allowed to rehire him. Furthermore, the Supreme Court found that by paying Mr. Castro the back pay to an illegal alien interred with federal immigration policy and grant that the ruling on the case was impermissible.
The court stated that the NLRB has a broad understanding on the remedies given under the NLRA, this is way it awarded Mr. Castro the back pay. However, the court set that decision aside due to the fact the Mr. Castro gained a U.S. position by giving false documents to represent him as a U.S. citizen. Moreover, this document falsified his identity as an illegal alien which has not given rights or…show more content… NLRB, the court found that when an employer wrongfully terminate its employees due to union related activity that’s in violation of the federal labor law the traditional way of satisfying this issue is to return the employees to their jobs and give the employee back pay; however in this case, Jose Castro gain his employment with Hoffman Plastic Compounds by using falsified birth certificate and it would appear that Hoffman Plastic Compound had knowledge of this. Moreover, when the court determined that the employer had to return its employees back to their jobs, the company paid Mr. Castro back pay along with the other Hoffman Plastic employees which later the court remanded. Furthermore, this ruling shows and proves a division in the ruling when it comes to implementing and enforcing the federal immigration
