The NLRB Employer Record
The strongest public evidence that CFMG did not become a shell — argued at full strength.
Orientation
An investigation that only reports evidence supporting its own line of inquiry is not worth reading. This page exists because the National Labor Relations Board record is the hardest public evidence against the proposition that CFMG became a nominal entity after the Wellpath brand arrived.
What the public record establishes
Across California bargaining-unit proceedings occurring after the 2018 enterprise combination — and now after the Chapter 11 — CFMG continued to appear as the employer.
Stanislaus, 2025 — workforce-level employer identity
The 2025 representation proceeding names California Forensic Medical Group, Inc. (Wellpath) and describes a bargaining unit of approximately 106 employees. The classifications include nurses, nurse practitioners, mental-health professionals, social workers, counsellors, dental staff, clerks, licensed vocational nurses, medical-records staff and jail-based competency-treatment employees.
That is not a narrow one-off physician designation. It is workforce-level employer identity.
Lake County, 2025 — the layered model in one government record
The 2025 Lake County matter identifies California Forensic Medical Group, Inc., an affiliate of Wellpath, for a unit including registered nurses, nurse practitioners, mental-health professionals, discharge planners and licensed vocational nurses.
That formulation is unusually useful because it states both propositions at once: CFMG is the employer; Wellpath is an affiliate.
Merced, 2026 — the strongest post-bankruptcy labour evidence
In January–March 2026 the Board processed a representation case involving employees at Merced correctional facilities, identifying California Forensic Medical Group, Inc. as the employer. The professional unit includes registered nurses, psychiatric registered nurses, nurse practitioners, physician assistants, licensed psychiatric technicians and mental-health professionals; a nonprofessional unit covers additional employees. The Board certified the union after the election.
government record
This is current, post-emergence evidence. Any theory that CFMG’s labour-law employer status is merely historical is contradicted by Merced 2026.
And the same record locates administration at enterprise headquarters
In the Merced proceeding, the employer’s legal representative is listed at 6550 Carothers Parkway, Suite 500, Franklin, Tennessee — Wellpath’s corporate headquarters.
That single pairing is the structure in miniature: CFMG remains the labour-law employer; enterprise administration is centred at Wellpath headquarters.
Why labour records carry unusual weight here
Representation and unfair-labour-practice proceedings are adversarial, and employer identity in them is consequential rather than clerical. It determines who must bargain, who is bound by the resulting agreement, and who bears liability for violations. Unions have every incentive to name the entity with actual control over wages, hours and working conditions; employers have every incentive to resist misdesignation. Neither side benefits from an inaccurate employer name.
A federal labour agency, organised labour, and the employer’s own counsel all continued to treat the professional corporation as the employing entity — through the brand transition, the management assignment, and the bankruptcy.
Evidence supporting integration, within the same record
The hybrid formulations are themselves informative. “CFMG (Wellpath).” “CFMG, an affiliate of Wellpath.” “CFMG dba Wellpath.” Even in formal federal proceedings, the parties found it necessary to attach the enterprise name to the professional corporation in order to be understood.
Collective-bargaining material points the same way. At Santa Rita, a bargaining side letter was signed on behalf of Wellpath / CFMG by an enterprise human-resources representative who also appears across CFMG human-resources matters and in Rule 30(b)(6) testimony.
That establishes integrated labour administration and enterprise HR representation. It does not establish that CFMG and Wellpath are the same corporation, and this page does not present it as an alter-ego finding. See: Entity nomenclature ledger
Two litigation comparators
Overfield. A 2026 order records an enterprise human-resources representative being deposed as CFMG’s Rule 30(b)(6) witness concerning a physician’s termination from CFMG employment, in litigation that also involves extensive enterprise management participation. That is employment-administration integration, documented.
Its limit is on the same page of the record. The physician testified that his termination was unrelated to treatment decisions concerning CFMG patients, and the court recognised that testimony. Overfield therefore supports employment-administration integration. It does not support management override of clinical judgement, and that boundary is locked.
sworn testimony
Beckner. A 2026 federal summary-judgment order describes an individual medical staff member as CFMG’s employee while the Wellpath entities stand discharged. One employee does not prove statewide sole-employer status — but it is independent judicial language outside the labour context, pointing the same way.
What these records establish
CFMG remained the employer of record in adversarial federal labour proceedings across at least three California counties, for broad clinical and nonclinical workforces, after the 2018 brand transition, after the 2019 management assignment, and after the Chapter 11.
The professional corporation was not a dormant licence wrapper. It bargained, it was named, and it was bound.
What these records do not establish
NLRB employer determinations under the National Labor Relations Act do not decide:
- employer identity under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act
- wage-and-hour employer status under the California Labor Code or the Fair Labor Standards Act
- plan-sponsor or employer questions under ERISA
- unemployment-insurance employer identity under the California Unemployment Insurance Code
- joint-employer status under any of the above
- who controlled clinical decisions
Each regime applies its own test. Readers encountering confident claims in either direction — “the NLRB settled it,” or “a different entity appeared on my records, so I was transferred” — are watching someone reason across incommensurable legal standards.
Above all: employer identity is not professional authority. CFMG being the employer of record for a bargaining unit of nurses says nothing about who decided a clinical policy, a credentialing question, or a physician’s competency review.
What follows
Employment in this structure is not one relationship but eight, and a state unemployment record naming a different entity remains an unresolved reconciliation question rather than proof of transfer. That analysis has its own page. See: Layered employment and reporting-entity drift
Documents still missing
- Collective-bargaining agreements naming the employing entity, by unit and year
- DE-9 and DE-9C quarterly filings identifying the reporting entity by quarter
- W-2 federal employer identification number chronology
- Payroll entity codes within the enterprise human-resources information system
- Benefit-plan documents and participating-employer adoption agreements
- Workers’ compensation policy declarations
- Any employer-of-record or professional-employer-organisation agreement
Related litigation
Overfield v. Wellpath/CFMG · Beckner v. County of Santa Cruz · Vizgaudis-Gomez — CFMG and Wellpath LLC as simultaneous 2026 defendants in California labour litigation · Wagner — allegations of employment by both CFMG and WMI (allegations, not established employer identity)
allegation
Principal public sources
- NLRB Case 32-RC-365452 — California Forensic Medical Group, Inc. (Wellpath), Stanislaus 2025
- California NLRB representation records — Lake County 2025 and Merced 2026
- CFMG collective-bargaining agreement, Santa Rita
- Beckner v. County of Santa Cruz — Document 160 (N.D. Cal. 2026)
- Overfield v. California Forensic Medical Group, Inc. — 2026 discovery order