Federal appeals courts are increasingly divided on whether the National Labor Relations Board can require employers to pay for indirect, but foreseeable, financial harm resulting from labor violations (sometimes called expanded remedies).
The issue stems from a 2022 NLRB decision, Thryv Inc., that expanded the Board’s menu of remedies beyond traditional job reinstatement, back pay, and other direct costs. Thryv allows the NLRB to compel employers to pay workers for expenses such as medical costs, automobile business maintenance costs, and credit card interest.
In 2024, in NLRB v. Starbucks Corp., the Third Circuit blocked expanded remedies, citing lack of Congressional authority.
On October 21, 2025,in IUOE, Local 39 v. NLRB, the Ninth Circuit ruled that the NLRB appropriately ordered Macy's to pay expanded remedies because doing so would make workers whole after the company refused to rehire strikers.
And on October 31, 2025, in Hiran Management v. NLRB, the Fifth Circuit ruled that the NLRB went too far when it ordered a restaurant owner to compensate workers for the foreseeable losses they suffered after their illegal firings, concluding the Board is not allowed to award compensatory damages.