Hormel Foods Corporation is currently defending several active lawsuits and investigations, including turkey price-fixing antitrust litigation, an ERISA class action over its $1.2 billion retirement plans, a Minnesota sick leave class action from its Austin plant workers, a race and age discrimination suit filed in Georgia in June 2026, and a securities investigation tied to an October 2025 stock drop. The Austin, Minnesota company has also recently settled or resolved a pork price-fixing case for more than $11 million, a wage-fixing case for $13.5 million, and a trade secret suit against rival Johnsonville that Hormel voluntarily dismissed in February 2026.
Turkey Price-Fixing Case Still Active
Jennie-O Turkey Store, Hormel’s subsidiary, is a defendant in In re Turkey Antitrust Litigation, a set of private antitrust claims pending in federal court in Illinois. Plaintiffs allege the major turkey producers used Agri Stats, an industry analytics service, to swap confidential pricing information and coordinate supply restrictions that pushed turkey prices higher.1Arnold & Porter. Antitrust Agency Insights: Developments at the US Antitrust Enforcement Agencies, First Quarter 2026 The complaint pairs a per se price-fixing claim with a rule-of-reason claim built on the same information-sharing arrangement.
The U.S. Department of Justice filed a statement of interest in March 2026, disputing the defendants’ argument that the information exchanges were presumptively lawful. The Illinois federal judge then denied the turkey companies’ request to file a formal response to the DOJ, finding none was needed.2Law360. Turkey Cos. Denied Response to DOJ Price-Fix Intervention The case remains active.
Pork Price-Fixing Settlement
A parallel wave of antitrust class actions targeted Hormel and other leading pork producers beginning in 2018, alleging they restricted pork supplies and inflated prices, again using Agri Stats to coordinate. The cases were consolidated in federal court in Minneapolis as In re Pork Antitrust Litigation.3Star Tribune. Hormel Settles Pork Price-Fixing Suits for $11 Million
In April 2024, Hormel agreed to pay more than $11 million without admitting fault. The money was split across three plaintiff classes: roughly $4.8 million for wholesalers and direct purchasers, $2.4 million for institutional customers like restaurants and delis, and $4.4 million for consumers.3Star Tribune. Hormel Settles Pork Price-Fixing Suits for $11 Million Litigation continued against non-settling defendants including JBS, Smithfield Foods, and Tyson Foods.4PR Newswire. Pork Antitrust Litigation Settlement Notice
$13.5 Million Wage-Fixing Settlement
In August 2024, Hormel and two affiliated plants agreed to pay $13.5 million to settle claims that they conspired with other major meat processors to hold worker wages down. The case, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado before Judge Philip A. Brimmer, alleged Hormel, JBS, Cargill, Tyson, Smithfield, and others fed compensation data through consulting firms Agri Stats and WMS & Company, letting the companies coordinate wages at red meat processing plants nationwide.5ClassAction.org. Brown et al. v. JBS USA Food Company et al., Motion for Preliminary Approval
The settlement class covered all workers employed at Hormel’s, Rochelle Foods’, and Quality Pork Processors’ beef and pork plants in the continental U.S. from January 2000 through February 2024. Hormel’s $13.5 million was part of a broader group of settlements topping $200 million across nine defendants as of September 2024, with claims still pending against others.6Bloomberg Tax. Hormel Meat Plants Set to Pay $13.5 Million in Wage-Fixing Case
Sick Leave Class Action in Minnesota
Production, maintenance, and quality control workers at Hormel’s Austin, Minnesota, plant sued the company on July 30, 2025, alleging it violated Minnesota’s Earned Sick and Safe Time (ESST) law for 14 months. Dan Lenway is the lead plaintiff, and UFCW Local 663, which represents more than 1,600 Hormel workers in Austin, is financing the case.7Minnesota Reformer. Meatpacking Workers Allege Hormel Foods Violated Sick Leave Law in Class-Action Lawsuit
Between January 1, 2024 and March 1, 2025, according to the complaint, Hormel required employees to use contractual vacation time to cover sick absences instead of providing separate ESST benefits. The suit says the company refused to give most workers their earned 2024 ESST benefits and denied the statutory right to carry unused benefits into 2025.8UFCW Local 663. ESST Class Action Lawsuit Against Hormel FAQ The union had already won a labor arbitration on the same practice earlier in 2025, when an arbitrator ruled Hormel could not swap vacation pay for the state-mandated benefit. Plaintiffs’ attorney Tim Louris said Hormel began complying with the law on March 1, 2025, but the lawsuit seeks compensation for the earlier period.7Minnesota Reformer. Meatpacking Workers Allege Hormel Foods Violated Sick Leave Law in Class-Action Lawsuit Hormel has declined to comment on pending litigation, and the case is expected to take several years to resolve.
Retirement Plan (ERISA) Class Action
Former employee Scott Payne filed a proposed class action in February 2024 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota, accusing Hormel of breaching its fiduciary duties under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act while managing roughly $1.2 billion in company retirement plans.9Bloomberg Law. Hormel Foods Sued Over Retirement Plans Fees, Stable Value Fund
Two allegations anchor the complaint. First, that the plans offered an underperforming MassMutual stable value fund that returned less than comparable investments while carrying more risk. Second, that Hormel kept employee money in expensive mutual fund share classes when cheaper alternatives were available.10Meat+Poultry. Hormel Accused of Fiduciary Breach of 401(k) Plan Judge Susan Richard Nelson denied Hormel’s motion to dismiss in September 2024, finding Payne’s allegations of a flawed fiduciary process plausible enough to proceed. As of April 2026, the plaintiff had moved to certify a class, and the case remained active.11Law360. Hormel Foods Faces Class Cert Bid in Retirement Fund Suit
Race and Age Discrimination Suit
In June 2026, Andrea Tarver-Ryans, a 61-year-old Black payroll specialist who had worked at Hormel’s Atlanta plant for more than three years, sued the company in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. She alleges she was fired two days before Christmas because of her race and age, and that the termination was also retaliation for raising concerns about improper wage recordkeeping.12Meatingplace. Former Hormel Employee Alleges Race, Age Bias in Termination Lawsuit13Law360. Tarver-Ryans v. Hormel Foods Corp. et al., Case No. 1:26-cv-03119 The case, assigned to Judge Tiffany R. Johnson, was in its earliest stages as of mid-2026.
Securities Investigation After Stock Drop
On October 29, 2025, Hormel disclosed that it was cutting its earnings forecast, citing price pressures, avian flu at its Jennie-O turkey operations, and a fire at an Arkansas peanut butter production facility. It also announced the departure of its chief financial officer. Hormel’s stock fell 9.1% that day.14Rosen Legal. Hormel Foods Corporation Investigation
Multiple shareholder firms opened investigations into whether Hormel had issued materially misleading information to investors before the announcement. As of mid-2026, at least one firm was actively soliciting lead plaintiffs for what it described as a pending securities class action. No formal complaint from those investigations had appeared in public court records yet.15ZLK. Hormel Foods Corporation Class Action Lawsuit
Trade Secret Suit Against Johnsonville, Dismissed
In June 2025, Hormel sued rival sausage maker Johnsonville in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota, accusing the company of orchestrating a scheme to steal proprietary business information. The suit also named two former Hormel directors of operations, Brett Sims and Jeremy Rummel, as defendants.16Star Tribune. Hormel Sues Johnsonville Alleging Trade Secret Theft
The complaint said Sims left Hormel in June 2023 to become Johnsonville’s chief supply chain officer, then violated a nonsolicitation agreement by recruiting other Hormel managers, including Rummel, plant manager Brandon Koehler, and senior finance manager Alison Koehler. In April 2025, after Rummel had accepted a Johnsonville offer but before resigning, he allegedly forwarded sensitive files to a personal email account. Those files, per the complaint, held product formulas, processing procedures, acquisition targets, and marketing strategies.17WPR. Hormel Foods Corporation v. Johnsonville, LLC, Case No. 0:25-cv-0255118FOX 9. Sausage Secret Border Battle: Hormel Sues Johnsonville Hormel fired Rummel for cause on May 30, 2025.
The case ended quickly. In February 2026, Hormel voluntarily dismissed the lawsuit with prejudice, meaning the same claims cannot be refiled. No reason was given in court filings, and no settlement terms were made public.19Meatingplace. Hormel Closes Federal Case Against Johnsonville, Former Execs20SwineWeb. Hormel Dismisses Federal Case Against Johnsonville
Earlier Matters Worth Knowing
Two older cases still come up in searches. In 2016, the U.S. Department of Labor’s Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs reached separate settlements with Hormel and Jennie-O over allegations that both companies discriminated against female job applicants. Hormel agreed to pay $550,000 in back wages to 403 female applicants at its Fremont, Nebraska hog plant, and hire 37 of them with retroactive seniority.21Manufacturing.net. Hormel to Pay Half a Million Dollars in Discrimination Settlement Jennie-O agreed to pay nearly $492,000 to 339 women who applied at its Willmar, Minnesota turkey plant and to hire 53 of them. Both companies denied wrongdoing.22U.S. Department of Labor. Jennie-O Turkey Store Settlement News Release
Separately, the Animal Legal Defense Fund sued Hormel in D.C. Superior Court in June 2016, alleging the “Natural Choice” line of deli meats and bacon was deceptively marketed as “natural,” “honest,” and “wholesome” despite the animals being raised in factory farms and given antibiotics. The trial court dismissed the case on preemption and standing grounds, but in September 2021 the D.C. Court of Appeals reversed, holding that federal labeling law does not preempt claims aimed at advertising outside USDA-approved labels.23CaseMine. Animal Legal Defense Fund v. Hormel Foods Corp., No. 19-CV-0397 The parties settled in November 2022, with Hormel agreeing to publish additional explanations of its label terms on its website and to include explanatory language in future Natural Choice advertising.24Animal Legal Defense Fund. Challenging Hormel’s Deceptive Advertising Practices: Natural Choice