Intersweet, Inc., 321 N.L.R.B. 1 (1996). Courts and administrative agencies agree that IRCA does not limit labor law protections afforded undocumented workers. Enforcing the Board’s A.P.R.A. Fuel remedy, the Second Circuit held “without hesitation that IRCA did not diminish the Board’s power to craft remedies for violations of the NLRA, provided that the Board’s remedies do not conflict with the requirements of IRCA.” NLRB v. A.P.R.A. Fuel Oil Buyers Group, Inc., 134 F.3d at 56. Withholding backpay from undocumented workers would, the court explained, undermine the purposes of both IRCA l Carp., 783 F.Supp. 369, 374 (N.D.Ill.1992) (“Title VII’s protections extend to aliens who may be in this country either legally or illegally.”) (post-IRCA); Tortilleria “La Mejor,” 758 F.Supp. 585 (<HOLDING>); EEOC Enforcement Guidance on Remedies
holding that title vii does not apply to seminary faculty holding that a title vii plaintiff could not hold coworkers liable in their individual capacities under title vii holding that in light of hoffman undocumented workers are entitled to compensatory damages under flsa but not other remedies like back or front pay which would contravene the policies underlying irca and otherwise assume the continued and unlawful employment of undocumented workers recognizing that most other courts apply title vii principles to title ix cases but refusing to apply title viis knew or should have known standard to a title ix claim holding that title vii continues to apply to undocumented workers after irca