Having held the National Labor Relations Act constitutonal, the Court then had to identify labor tactics that the NLRA protected and those it prohibited. In doing so it relied in substantial part on preexisting accounts of employers' property rights. It found no labor law violation when employers hired permanent replacement workers for those who went out on an “economic” strike rather than an “unfair labor practices” strike, and held that the NLRA did not bar employeres from firing workers who engaged in “sit down” strikes. It also limited the scope of the remedy of awarding back pay to workers unlawfully fired. All these decisions reduced the ability of unions to place economic pressure on employers.