Retirement Suit Challenged Pilgrim’s Pride Plan Choice

A former employee claims that a major retirement plan investment underperformed compared to industry standards.

Updated on Oct. 1, 2026 in Retirement Planning

Bold flat-color editorial illustration of brass weights on a polished surface, symbolizing the burden of institutional fiduciary responsibility. — A former Pilgrim's Pride employee is challenging a class action lawsuit motion, alleging the companies mismanaged retirement plan assets in favor of underperforming investment contracts. AI Illustration. Upload story photo >

Live Poll

Should employers be held legally liable if retirement plan investments deliver below-market returns?

A former employee has filed a court response to a motion to dismiss a class action lawsuit against Pilgrim's Pride and JBS USA. The suit alleges the companies mismanaged a retirement plan by selecting a guaranteed investment contract that failed to keep pace with broader market benchmarks.

Why it matters

The legal action highlights the fiduciary obligation to monitor and negotiate interest rates for retirement plan assets. For plan participants, this dispute raises questions about how effectively employers review investment options to ensure competitive growth for long-term savings.

The disputed investment accounted for up to 20% of total plan assets. The plaintiff alleges the contract underperformed relative to comparison products by 48.4% before the class period and by 55.03% during it.

The players

Pilgrim's Pride

A food company whose retirement plan management is currently being challenged in a federal class action lawsuit.

JBS USA

An entity named as a defendant in a retirement plan mismanagement case regarding investment performance.

Great-West Life & Annuity Insurance Co.

The provider of the guaranteed investment contract that allegedly underperformed in the retirement plan.

The details

The lawsuit alleges that fiduciaries at Pilgrim's Pride and JBS USA failed to conduct an adequate investment review process and neglected annual benchmarking. By allegedly choosing to keep assets in a Great-West Life & Annuity Insurance Co. contract that produced lower annual returns than established industry standards, the plaintiff claims the plan missed significant growth opportunities.

From 2010 through 2019, the industry benchmark grew at 4.1% annually.
Comparison investments were tracked from 2013 to 2024.
On September 28, 2026, the plaintiff filed a response to the motion to dismiss.

Money Landscape

This case sits within the broader scope of litigation regarding the fiduciary duties mandated by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act. It serves as a reminder of the historical trend of increased scrutiny on how plan sponsors select and monitor low-yield investment options.

Participants in employer-sponsored retirement plans should review their account statements to identify the underlying investments in their portfolio. If you are concerned about fund performance or fees, consult a qualified financial professional to discuss your retirement strategy.

The takeaway

This case underscores the importance of understanding the investment options offered within your workplace retirement plan. Participants can review their annual summary plan descriptions to see how their specific funds are benchmarked against industry standards.