Not a government sitenlrb.fyi is an independent project. It is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or operated by the National Labor Relations Board or any government agency. The Board's own site is at nlrb.gov.

Kaiser Permanente

651 cases in this site's copy of the record · 23 of those 651 are marked open by the Board · Region 04, 05, 07, 08, 10, 14, 19, 20, 21, 27, 31, 32 · ANAHEIM, CA; Alameda, CA; Anaheim, CA; Antioch, CA; Atlanta, GA; Aurora, CO and more

Each case links to the Board's own docket page. This site holds what the Board listed, not the documents.

This name is gathered, along with others, on the Kaiser Permanente page.

The Board has also spelled this name Kaiser Permanente, Inc. (1). Every spelling of this name.

What kinds of case

Type	What it is	Here
CA	Charge against an employer	634
RC	Petition for an election	13
RD	Petition to decertify	4

The cases

Page 3 of 5, newest first: 1 2 3 4 5

Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 17 January 2017Case 31-CA-191571ClosedOntario, CARegion 31Workers in the unit 1,500
KAISER PERMANENTE
CA
Filed 9 December 2016Case 21-CA-189629ClosedDOWNEY, CARegion 21Workers in the unit 1,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 30 November 2016Case 31-CA-189666ClosedFontana, CARegion 31Workers in the unit 2
Petition for an election
RC
Filed 18 November 2016Case 20-RC-188438ClosedSan Francisco, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 550
All Patient Care Coordinator registered nurses employed by the Employer working in its Medical Centers located within its Northern California Region and at hospitals not owned b yKaiser Foundation Hospitals, but with which the Employer contracts for services and to which the Employer assigns Patient Care Coordinator registered nurses employed by it, including St. Joseph Medical Center in Stockton. Excluded: Nurses ...
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 12 September 2016Case 31-CA-184302ClosedPasadena, CARegion 31Workers in the unit 21
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 16 August 2016Case 20-CA-182316ClosedLincoln, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 300
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 29 June 2016Case 20-CA-179300ClosedSacramento, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 500
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 1 June 2016Case 05-CA-177556ClosedRockville, MDRegion 05Workers in the unit 250
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 9 May 2016Case 31-CA-176037ClosedLos Angeles, CARegion 31Workers in the unit 2
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 20 April 2016Case 27-CA-173992ClosedDenver, CORegion 27Workers in the unit 3,700
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 16 March 2016Case 20-CA-171961ClosedSacramento, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 5,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 9 March 2016Case 31-CA-171445ClosedLos Angeles, CARegion 31Workers in the unit 10
KAISER PERMANENTE
CA
Filed 16 February 2016Case 21-CA-169826ClosedSan Diego, CARegion 21Workers in the unit 50
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 29 January 2016Case 27-CA-168697ClosedDenver, CORegion 27Workers in the unit 3,700
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 15 January 2016Case 20-CA-167918ClosedVallejo, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 13
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 30 December 2015Case 20-CA-166897ClosedSacramento, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 250
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 24 December 2015Case 31-CA-166644ClosedLos Angeles, CARegion 31Workers in the unit 1
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 9 November 2015Case 20-CA-163847ClosedRoseville, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 100
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 20 October 2015Case 20-CA-162348ClosedOakland, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 400
KAISER PERMANENTE
CA
Filed 9 October 2015Case 21-CA-161688ClosedRIVERSIDE, CARegion 21Workers in the unit 6,000
KAISER PERMANENTE
CA
Filed 9 October 2015Case 21-CA-161687ClosedRIVERSIDE, CARegion 21Workers in the unit 6,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 23 September 2015Case 31-CA-160687ClosedNorth Hollywood, CARegion 31Workers in the unit 1,000
KAISER PERMANENTE
CA
Filed 11 September 2015Case 21-CA-159985ClosedANAHEIM, CARegion 21Workers in the unit 16
KAISER PERMANENTE
CA
Filed 4 September 2015Case 21-CA-159518ClosedANAHEIM, CARegion 21Workers in the unit 16
KAISER PERMANENTE
CA
Filed 31 August 2015Case 21-CA-159067ClosedANAHEIM, CARegion 21Workers in the unit 16
KAISER PERMANENTE
CA
Filed 27 August 2015Case 21-CA-158883ClosedANAHEIM, CARegion 21Workers in the unit 16
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 21 August 2015Case 31-CA-158570ClosedLos Angeles, CARegion 31Workers in the unit 1,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 20 July 2015Case 20-CA-156310ClosedHonolulu, HIRegion 20Workers in the unit 100
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 16 July 2015Case 10-CA-156275ClosedAtlanta, GARegion 10Workers in the unit 105,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 10 June 2015Case 20-CA-154011ClosedSan Francisco, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 25
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 15 May 2015Case 31-CA-152465ClosedOntario, CARegion 31Workers in the unit 1
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 26 March 2015Case 31-CA-148989ClosedHarbor City, CARegion 31Workers in the unit 1,500
KAISER PERMANENTE
CA
Filed 20 March 2015Case 21-CA-148605ClosedCORONA, CARegion 21Workers in the unit 400
KAISER PERMANENTE
CA
Filed 18 March 2015Case 21-CA-148519ClosedNORCO, CARegion 21Workers in the unit 400
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 11 March 2015Case 27-CA-148021ClosedLafayette, CORegion 27Workers in the unit 15
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 13 February 2015Case 19-CA-146416ClosedPortland, ORRegion 19Workers in the unit 10,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 9 February 2015Case 20-CA-146135ClosedVacaville, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 3,000
KAISER PERMANENTE
CA
Filed 5 February 2015Case 21-CA-145933ClosedSan Diego, CARegion 21Workers in the unit 110
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 28 January 2015Case 20-CA-145343ClosedRoseville, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 170
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 26 November 2014Case 20-CA-141817ClosedVacaville, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 100
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 10 November 2014Case 20-CA-140680ClosedSacramento, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 1,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 7 November 2014Case 31-CA-140737ClosedFontana, CARegion 31Workers in the unit 1,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 17 October 2014Case 20-CA-139078ClosedSacramento, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 500
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 25 September 2014Case 19-CA-137510ClosedPortland, ORRegion 19Workers in the unit 9,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 8 September 2014Case 32-CA-136192ClosedWalnut Creek, CARegion 32Workers in the unit 100
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 4 September 2014Case 20-CA-136083ClosedSacramento, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 25
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 29 August 2014Case 27-CA-135721ClosedDenver, CORegion 27Workers in the unit 50
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 18 August 2014Case 20-CA-135055ClosedSacramento, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 25
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 13 August 2014Case 20-CA-134725ClosedSacramento, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 1,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 6 May 2014Case 31-CA-128201ClosedPanorama City, CARegion 31Workers in the unit 300
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 22 April 2014Case 20-CA-127230ClosedSacramento, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 1,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 7 April 2014Case 20-CA-126072ClosedSan Francisco, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 1,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 21 March 2014Case 10-CA-124977ClosedAtlanta, GARegion 10Workers in the unit 2,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 5 March 2014Case 27-CA-123863ClosedDenver, CORegion 27Workers in the unit 120
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 25 February 2014Case 20-CA-123188ClosedSacramento, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 500
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 14 January 2014Case 05-CA-120628ClosedRockville, MDRegion 05Workers in the unit 700
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 13 January 2014Case 32-CA-120567ClosedOAKLAND, CARegion 32Workers in the unit 5,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 27 December 2013Case 05-CA-119721ClosedRockville, MDRegion 05Workers in the unit 700
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 12 December 2013Case 27-CA-118947ClosedDenver, CORegion 27Workers in the unit 1,000
KAISER PERMANENTE
CA
Filed 6 December 2013Case 21-CA-118515ClosedPASADENA, CARegion 21Workers in the unit 500
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 29 November 2013Case 20-CA-118110ClosedSacramento, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 4,600
KAISER PERMANENTE
CA
Filed 22 November 2013Case 21-CA-117691ClosedCORONA, CARegion 21Workers in the unit 300
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 14 November 2013Case 31-CA-117150ClosedPasadena, CARegion 31Workers in the unit 25
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 5 November 2013Case 31-CA-113309ClosedLos Angeles, CARegion 31Workers in the unit 2
KAISER PERMANENTE
CA
Filed 31 October 2013Case 21-CA-116109ClosedSAN DIMAS, CARegion 21Workers in the unit 50
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 12 September 2013Case 31-CA-113409ClosedLos Angeles, CARegion 31Workers in the unit 1
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 11 September 2013Case 31-CA-113167ClosedLOS ANGELES, CARegion 31Workers in the unit 2
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 11 September 2013Case 20-CA-113111ClosedHonolulu, HIRegion 20Workers in the unit 200
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 5 September 2013Case 27-CA-112792ClosedDenver, CORegion 27Workers in the unit 1
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 28 August 2013Case 20-CA-112229ClosedHonolulu, HIRegion 20Workers in the unit 200
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 26 August 2013Case 20-CA-112020ClosedHonolulu, HIRegion 20Workers in the unit 200
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 21 August 2013Case 20-CA-111791ClosedRoseville, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 100
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 1 August 2013Case 27-CA-110426ClosedWheat Ridge, CORegion 27Workers in the unit 500
KAISER PERMANENTE
CA
Filed 16 July 2013Case 21-CA-109322ClosedRIVERSIDE, CARegion 21Workers in the unit 500
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 16 July 2013Case 08-CA-109179ClosedCleveland, OHRegion 08Workers in the unit 100
KAISER PERMANENTE
CA
Filed 10 July 2013Case 21-CA-108898ClosedCORONA, CARegion 21Workers in the unit 100
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 2 July 2013Case 31-CA-108494ClosedWestley, CARegion 31Workers in the unit 10
KAISER PERMANENTE
CA
Filed 1 July 2013Case 21-CA-108355ClosedSAN DIEGO, CARegion 21Workers in the unit 5,600
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 7 June 2013Case 20-CA-106809ClosedRoseville, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 100
KAISER PERMANENTE
CA
Filed 17 May 2013Case 21-CA-105404ClosedSAN MARCOS, CARegion 21Workers in the unit 150
KAISER PERMANENTE
CA
Filed 15 May 2013Case 21-CA-105239ClosedDOWNEY, CARegion 21Workers in the unit 500
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 6 May 2013Case 27-CA-104543ClosedDenver, CORegion 27Workers in the unit 100
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 23 April 2013Case 20-CA-103548ClosedSan Rafael, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 1,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 16 April 2013Case 31-CA-103005ClosedHARBOR CITY, CARegion 31Workers in the unit 1,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 10 April 2013Case 20-CA-102512ClosedRoseville, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 200
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 29 March 2013Case 20-CA-101612ClosedSan Francisco, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 1,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 22 March 2013Case 27-CA-100954ClosedDenver, CORegion 27Workers in the unit 100
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 22 March 2013Case 27-CA-100952ClosedDenver, CORegion 27Workers in the unit 1,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 4 March 2013Case 20-CA-099619ClosedSacramento, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 400
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 28 February 2013Case 32-CA-099501ClosedWALNUT CREEK, CARegion 32Workers in the unit 100
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 22 February 2013Case 27-CA-098906ClosedAurora, CORegion 27Workers in the unit 50
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 19 February 2013Case 20-CA-098722ClosedRoseville, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 200
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 13 February 2013Case 31-CA-098397ClosedPasadena, CARegion 31Workers in the unit 2
all Employees of the Employer at the medical offices, hospitals, and business offices of the Employer located in Los Angeles and Orange Counties in the State of California, but specifically excluding Medical Doctors, Registered Nurses, Registered Pharmacists, Optometrists, Pharmacy Cashiers, Supervisory Employees, and Confidential Secretaries at the Employer’s facilities in the counties above specified.
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 31 January 2013Case 31-CA-097509ClosedPASADENA, CARegion 31Workers in the unit 2
all Employees of the Employer at the medical offices, hospitals, and business offices of the Employer located in Los Angeles and Orange Counties in the State of California, but specifically excluding Medical Doctors, Registered Nurses, Registered Pharmacists, Optometrists, Pharmacy Cashiers, Supervisory Employees, and Confidential Secretaries at the Employer’s facilities in the counties above specified.
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 18 December 2012Case 20-CA-095209ClosedSacramento, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 21
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 13 December 2012Case 32-CA-094982ClosedWalnut Creek, CARegion 32Workers in the unit 2,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 4 December 2012Case 20-CA-094251ClosedRedwood City, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 1,200
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 30 November 2012Case 31-CA-094167ClosedLos Angeles, CARegion 31Workers in the unit 50
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 30 November 2012Case 21-CA-094007ClosedCORONA, CARegion 21Workers in the unit 50
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 6 November 2012Case 21-CA-092699ClosedCORONA, CARegion 21Workers in the unit 50
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 6 November 2012Case 20-CA-092743ClosedSacramento, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 21
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 1 November 2012Case 21-CA-092468ClosedSAN DIEGO, CARegion 21Workers in the unit 4,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 18 October 2012Case 21-CA-091656ClosedCorona, CARegion 21Workers in the unit 50
KAISER PERMANENTE
CA
Filed 11 October 2012Case 32-CA-091198ClosedSan Jose, CARegion 32Workers in the unit 500
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 11 October 2012Case 31-CA-091300ClosedLos Angeles, CARegion 31Workers in the unit 50
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 26 September 2012Case 21-CA-090225ClosedSan Diego, CARegion 21Workers in the unit 1,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 14 September 2012Case 31-CA-089378ClosedPasadena, CARegion 31Workers in the unit 50,000
The CBA covers Kaiser facilities in Bakersfield and other parts of the Kern County Service Area. Some of the classifications included in the bargaining unit are: medical assistants, licensed vocational nurses, respiratory technicians, unit clerks, couriers and storeroom workers. The bargaining unit is represented by UFCW Local 770.
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 7 September 2012Case 21-CA-088846ClosedPasadena, CARegion 21Workers in the unit 100
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 5 September 2012Case 32-CA-089028ClosedAntioch, CARegion 32Workers in the unit 1,500
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 5 September 2012Case 21-CA-088828ClosedPasadena, CARegion 21Workers in the unit 100
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 23 August 2012Case 21-CA-087960ClosedDowney, CARegion 21Workers in the unit 100
KAISER PERMANENTE
CA
Filed 16 August 2012Case 21-CA-087603ClosedPasadena, CARegion 21Workers in the unit 100
KAISER PERMANENTE
CA
Filed 16 August 2012Case 21-CA-087584ClosedPasadena, CARegion 21Workers in the unit 100
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 20 June 2012Case 20-CA-083649ClosedRoseville, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 100
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 18 June 2012Case 20-CA-083512ClosedHonolulu, HIRegion 20Workers in the unit 2,277
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 18 June 2012Case 19-CA-083383ClosedPortland, ORRegion 19Workers in the unit 850
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 13 June 2012Case 21-CA-083046ClosedSanta Ana, CARegion 21Workers in the unit 100
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 8 June 2012Case 20-CA-082832ClosedRoseville, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 100
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 24 May 2012Case 20-CA-081844ClosedSan Francisco, CARegion 20
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 22 May 2012Case 19-CA-081555ClosedPortland, ORRegion 19Workers in the unit 167,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 10 May 2012Case 20-CA-080842ClosedRoseville, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 100
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 18 April 2012Case 31-CA-079096ClosedLos Angeles, CARegion 31Workers in the unit 1,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 16 April 2012Case 32-CA-078895ClosedStockton, CARegion 32Workers in the unit 500
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 13 April 2012Case 20-CA-078863ClosedSan Francisco, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 5,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 10 April 2012Case 27-CA-078521ClosedDenver, CORegion 27Workers in the unit 200
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 6 April 2012Case 20-CA-078394ClosedSacramento, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 400
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 2 April 2012Case 05-CA-077981ClosedGaithersburg, MDRegion 05Workers in the unit 1,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 23 March 2012Case 21-CA-077382ClosedDowney, CARegion 21Workers in the unit 100
KAISER PERMANENTE
CA
Filed 21 March 2012Case 20-CA-077243ClosedSAN FRANCISCO, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 5,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 15 March 2012Case 27-CA-076704ClosedDenver, CORegion 27Workers in the unit 120
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 9 March 2012Case 20-CA-076407ClosedSan Francisco, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 5,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 9 March 2012Case 20-CA-076390ClosedSan Francisco, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 5,000
KAISER PERMANENTE
CA
Filed 7 March 2012Case 05-CA-076104ClosedROCKVILLE, MDRegion 05Workers in the unit 1,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 24 February 2012Case 20-CA-075428ClosedSan Francisco, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 1
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 8 February 2012Case 19-CA-074097ClosedClackamas, ORRegion 19Workers in the unit 1,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 6 February 2012Case 32-CA-073894ClosedOakland, CARegion 32Workers in the unit 50
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 2 February 2012Case 20-CA-073770ClosedSan Francisco, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 100
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 20 January 2012Case 20-CA-072923ClosedSan Francisco, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 1
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 12 January 2012Case 08-CA-072298ClosedParma, OHRegion 08Workers in the unit 200
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 9 January 2012Case 27-CA-072135ClosedDenver, CORegion 27Workers in the unit 200
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 2 December 2011Case 21-CA-070126ClosedSan Diego, CARegion 21Workers in the unit 750
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 29 November 2011Case 20-CA-069891ClosedSan Francisco, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 100
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 29 November 2011Case 20-CA-069890ClosedSan Francisco, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 1,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 14 November 2011Case 27-CA-068892ClosedDenver, CORegion 27Workers in the unit 6,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 14 November 2011Case 20-CA-068976ClosedSan Francisco, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 300
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 25 October 2011Case 21-CA-067558ClosedOakland, CARegion 21Workers in the unit 1,500
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 24 October 2011Case 05-CA-067624ClosedWashington, DCRegion 05Workers in the unit 400
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 21 September 2011Case 32-CA-065076ClosedOakland, CARegion 32Workers in the unit 50
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 6 September 2011Case 27-CA-021974ClosedDenver, CORegion 27Workers in the unit 100
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 26 August 2011Case 36-CA-010916ClosedPortland, ORRegion 19Workers in the unit 167,000

Page 3 of 5, newest first: 1 2 3 4 5

Last refreshed 22 September 2026. What is in it, and what is not.

The Labor Board FYI is independent, and is not the Board or any government agency. Where a number here disagrees with the Board's, the Board is right: tell us at [email protected]. If a name here is a private person and not a business or a union, write to the same address and it comes off. Where this comes from.