Hormel Workers Lawsuit: Alleged Sick Time Withheld in Minnesota

Case Overview: A class action lawsuit alleges Hormel Foods illegally withheld paid sick leave from meatpacking employees at its Austin, Minnesota, pork processing plant, violating the state’s Earned Sick and Safe Time (ESST) law.

Consumers Affected: Current and former bargaining-unit employees at Hormel's Austin plant who were allegedly denied ESST benefits.

Court: State of Minnesota District Court, County of Mower, Third Judicial District

Hormel Foods illegally withholds paid sick leave from hundreds of meatpacking employees at its Austin pork processing plant, workers say in a new lawsuit against the Minnesota-based company. 

The meatpackers allege the company ignored the state’s new Earned Sick and Safe Time (ESST) law forcing them to use vacation days instead of providing legally required paid leave for illness, family care, and other covered absences.

The lawsuit claims Hormel willfully refused to provide these benefits between January 1, 2024, when the law took effect, and March 1, 2025, despite employing more than 2,000 people at the facility and being legally obligated to give them the leave they are entitled to.

Workers Say They Were Denied Earned Sick Leave

Four current employees, each with a decade or more experience working at the plant, are leading the case. They allege they accrued the maximum 48 hours of ESST leave in 2024, plus additional hours in early 2025, but received none of it. 

Instead, they say Hormel wiped out balances, blocked carryover into the next year, and required staff with more than two years’ service to burn vacation days for sick leave. 

According to the complaint, this affected the vast majority of the bargaining unit represented by United Food and Commercial Workers Local 663, leaving most workers with zero state-mandated sick hours over the 14-month period.

Hormel's Policy Allegedly Conflicts With Minnesota Law

Minnesota’s ESST statutes require employers to offer one hour of paid sick and safe time for every 30 hours worked and up to 48 hours annually, with unused time carrying over into the next year. The law covers a wide range of reasons for leave, from personal illness to family emergencies and public health closures.

The lawsuit alleges Hormel sidestepped those rules by redesigning its collective bargaining agreement vacation policy in late 2023, effectively shifting the cost of sick leave onto employees. An arbitrator later ruled the policy violated the contract by diminishing vacation rights, but could not address state law violations, prompting the current lawsuit.

Part of a Bigger Pattern in Labor Disputes

Hormel is not alone in facing wage-and-hour legal challenges, as a wave of legal actions target companies that allegedly violate workers rights. 

Amazon has been accused in California of failing to pay new hires for mandatory training, while the Detroit Tigers are battling claims they underpaid overtime by excluding shift premiums and bonuses from calculations. 

PNC Bank faces a similar lawsuit in New Jersey from a loan officer who says the bank demanded long hours without proper overtime pay. Subway, Citibank, and other major employers have also been hit with lawsuits alleging unpaid work, excessive productivity quotas, and wage transparency violations, pointing to a broader pattern of companies skirting labor laws.

The plaintiffs seek to represent all current and former bargaining-unit employees at the Austin plant who were denied ESST benefits during the 14-month window. They’re asking the court to award them the sick time they say they earned, plus liquidated damages, legal costs, and any other relief the law allows.

Case Details

• Lawsuit: Lenway, et al. v. Hormel Foods Corporation
• Court: State of Minnesota District Court, County of Mower, Third Judicial District 

Plaintiffs' Attorneys

• Timothy J. Louris, Emily L. Marshall, and Jacob C. Harksen (Louris Marshall O’brien, P.A.)

Do you work for Hormel Foods? Share your thoughts on this alleged sick leave policy below.