Kaiser Permanente's Mental Health Crisis: A Call for Urgent Action

On February 7, 2025, more than 100 striking mental health workers and allies, including California Labor Federation President Lorena Gonzalez, took to the streets in a massive protest outside Kaiser Permanente's Los Angeles Medical Center. The workers, who have been on strike since October 2024, demanded that Kaiser Permanente address their concerns and reach a fair agreement. The protest marked the first act of civil disobedience during any Kaiser strike and highlighted the seriousness of the situation and Kaiser's failure to act in a moral and ethical manner.

The ongoing strike has resulted in a lack of mental health care for patients, with some waiting for months to see a therapist. This has led to increased stress, anxiety, and other mental health issues for patients, as well as a strain on the healthcare system. Kaiser Permanente's slow-walking of negotiations and refusal to agree to focused mediation have contributed to the ongoing strike and its negative impact on both patients and workers.

Governor Gavin Newsom offered to assist in identifying a mutually agreed-upon mediator to help settle the strike, but Kaiser Permanente has not responded to this offer. This inaction demonstrates a lack of urgency in resolving the dispute and addressing the workers' concerns. Additionally, Kaiser Permanente executive Dawn Gillam has insisted on maintaining the disparity between Kaiser's Northern and Southern mental health systems, claiming that they have "two different business models" and "two different geographic markets that are very different." This statement suggests that Kaiser Permanente is more concerned with preserving its business model than addressing the legitimate concerns of its Southern California mental health workers.

Since the current strike in Southern California began last October, NUHW has filed more than a dozen complaints with state and federal regulators documenting instances of Kaiser violating clinical standards and legal requirements for care during the strike. These violations include:

* Placing patients who want to retain their therapists on 30-day appointment waitlists, despite Kaiser being required to provide medically necessary follow-up appointments within 10 business days by law.

* Cancelling psychotherapy groups for thousands of patients, including mothers with postpartum depression and people with substance use disorders.

* Violating industry standards by sending patients with severe conditions to an outside virtual provider that is only capable of treating patients with mild-to-moderate conditions.

Kaiser Permanente's lack of urgency in addressing the demands of its striking workers reflects poorly on the company's commitment to mental health care and its patients. The company's inaction and refusal to engage in meaningful negotiations have contributed to the ongoing strike and its negative impact on both patients and workers. It is crucial for Kaiser Permanente to take immediate action to address the workers' demands and reach a fair agreement to ensure the well-being of its patients and the long-term financial stability of the company.

In conclusion, Kaiser Permanente's mental health crisis, exacerbated by the company's lack of urgency in addressing the demands of its striking workers, is a pressing issue that requires immediate attention. The economic implications of maintaining a two-tiered mental health system and the impact on patients and workers highlight the need for Kaiser Permanente to take decisive action to resolve the strike and improve mental health care for its patients. By addressing the workers' demands and committing to focused mediation, Kaiser Permanente can help ensure the well-being of its patients and the long-term financial stability of the company.