-Editorial
The National Labor Relations Board has issued a broad formal complaint against Innercare and its chief executive officer, Yvonne Bell, alleging the company engaged in widespread violations of federal labor law during a union organizing campaign by clinic employees seeking representation by SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West.
The complaint follows an investigation into more than 30 unfair labor practice charges filed by workers and the union. The NLRB alleges Innercare management unlawfully interfered with employees’ right to organize, subjected workers to intimidation and harassment, and illegally terminated at least 11 employees because of their involvement in union activity.
The agency issues complaints only after determining there is sufficient evidence to pursue the case before an administrative law judge. The scope of the complaint and the remedies sought suggest the NLRB believes the alleged conduct was extensive, according to labor law experts familiar with the process.
“Innercare workers were harassed, intimidated, and fired for exercising our legal right to form a union,” said Maabel Quevedo Cuevas, a former telehealth technician at Innercare’s Calexico clinic. “I feel vindicated that the federal government is calling out Innercare’s illegal behavior and is holding management accountable.”
The NLRB is seeking a series of remedies that go beyond standard cease-and-desist orders. Among them is a request that Bell personally acknowledge to employees that the company violated the National Labor Relations Act. The complaint also seeks an order requiring Innercare to recognize SEIU-UHW as the exclusive bargaining representative for workers without holding a new election, a remedy sometimes pursued when the agency concludes employer misconduct undermined the possibility of a fair vote.
In addition, the NLRB is asking that Innercare be ordered to bargain in good faith with the union, reinstate workers the agency alleges were unlawfully fired, and compensate them for lost wages and benefits. The agency may also seek workplace postings, notices read aloud to employees, and other corrective actions designed to inform workers of their rights.
A hearing before an NLRB administrative law judge is scheduled for March 17, 2026, in San Diego. At the hearing, government attorneys will present evidence and witness testimony, and Innercare will have the opportunity to contest the allegations. Any decision by the judge can be appealed to the five-member National Labor Relations Board in Washington and then to a federal appeals court.
The case centers on a union drive by Innercare employees at clinics in Imperial County and other locations. Workers sought to join SEIU-UHW, which represents health care workers throughout California. Organizers have said the campaign emerged from concerns over workplace conditions, staffing, and job security, though specific workplace demands were not detailed in the complaint summary.
SEIU-UHW said the complaint validates workers’ long-standing claims that management attempted to derail the organizing effort. The union has called on Innercare to accept the proposed remedies and begin bargaining.
In background materials, the union alleges Innercare spent more than $500,000 on consultants and activities opposing unionization, drawing from its 2023 operating budget. The union also claims Innercare is among several California community clinic systems that have faced litigation related to labor practices. Those assertions were not independently confirmed by the NLRB complaint and remain union allegations.
Innercare had not issued a public response to the complaint as of publication. Under NLRB procedure, the company will be required to file a formal answer addressing each allegation before the hearing.
The complaint does not represent a final ruling. Allegations remain unproven unless upheld by an administrative law judge and affirmed through the appeals process. However, labor law specialists note that the issuance of a complaint signals the agency believes there is sufficient evidence to support the claims.
If the NLRB ultimately prevails, the case could result in court-enforced orders requiring Innercare to alter its labor practices, restore terminated employees to their positions, and formally recognize and bargain with the union.
