Former Employee Challenged Pilgrim's Pride Retirement Suit
A lawsuit alleges that Pilgrim's Pride and JBS USA mismanaged retirement plan assets through underperforming investments.
Updated on Oct. 1, 2026 in Retirement Planning
Live Poll
Should employers be held legally liable if retirement plan investments deliver below-market returns?
A former employee has filed a legal response in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado to prevent the dismissal of a retirement plan class action. The lawsuit claims that Pilgrim's Pride and JBS USA failed to adequately monitor a guaranteed investment contract that allegedly trailed industry benchmarks.
Why it matters
The case highlights fiduciary responsibilities regarding the monitoring and benchmarking of stable-value retirement investments. Plaintiffs argue that poor oversight and a failure to negotiate competitive rates significantly impacted the growth of plan assets.
The Great-West Life & Annuity Insurance Co. contract represented 16% to 20% of the plan assets. The plaintiff claims this contract underperformed by 48.4% before the proposed class period and 55.03% during it.
The players
Pilgrim's Pride
Pilgrim's Pride is a major poultry producer that is currently a defendant in a retirement plan class action lawsuit.
JBS USA
JBS USA is a large meat processing corporation named as a defendant alongside Pilgrim's Pride in the retirement plan litigation.
Great-West Life & Annuity Insurance Co.
Great-West Life & Annuity Insurance Co. provided the guaranteed investment contract that is the subject of the performance dispute.
The details
The plaintiff alleges that plan fiduciaries neglected their duties by failing to conduct an adequate investment review process and neglecting to perform annual benchmarking. According to the court filing, the contested investment consistently failed to keep pace with broader stable-value market performance from 2010 through 2019.
Timeline
From 2010 to 2019, a stable-value industry benchmark grew at a 4.1% compound annual rate.
The plaintiff identified comparison investments used from 2013 to 2024.
On September 28, 2026, the plaintiff filed a response to the motion to dismiss.
Market Dynamics
The case follows a pattern of fiduciary duty litigation established under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974. Such litigation increasingly scrutinizes the performance of stable-value funds compared to broader market indices.
This case highlights the importance for employees to review the performance and fees of investment options within their 401(k) or similar retirement plans. Investors should monitor whether their plan's stable-value components are meeting stated growth benchmarks over long-term periods.
The takeaway
Retirement plan participants should regularly review their investment performance against industry-standard benchmarks. Understanding the long-term growth of your plan's assets can help ensure your future security against potential fiduciary oversight failures.
Further reading
For more information on the standards governing pension funds, visit the Retirement Planning section.
Source note: This article includes information reported by HOTELS magazine.
Live Poll
Should employers be held legally liable if retirement plan investments deliver below-market returns?
