Skip to content
Farmstand
    • Worker JusticeAdvocating for safe conditions, fair wages, and dignity for farmers and laborers
    • Farmers & Rural CommunitiesStrengthening local food systems through fair and equitable markets
    • Climate & Environmental ProtectionWorking to stop deceptive greenwashing and enforcing environmental laws
    • Animal WelfareFighting Ag-Gag laws that stifle protests against inhumane factory farming
    • Consumer RightsDefending the right to clear labeling and transparency about food production practices
  • Court Cases
    • All Court Cases
  • Get Involved
  • News
    • In The News
    • Insights
    • Deep Dives
    • Press Releases
    • For the Media
  • About
    • Our Team
    • Board of Directors
    • Careers at FarmSTAND
  • Donate
  • Sign Up
  • Contact
Search
April 24, 2020

Rural Community Workers Alliance & Jane Doe v. Smithfield

Case

Worker Justice

With food chain workers deemed “essential” for the wellbeing of others at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, but expected to continue working through their own illness, workers at Smithfield’s pork processing plant in Milan, Missouri took legal action to secure basic protective equipment and protocol changes and stop the spread of the disease in the plant and the surrounding community.

This action, filed in April 2020, was the first lawsuit seeking to secure injunctive relief to protect frontline workers from coronavirus, and was profiled in the New York Times. The plaintiffs in the suit were local nonprofit workers’ rights group Rural Community Workers Alliance and an anonymous worker who was a veteran of the facility’s cut floor and who feared contracting the disease in the plant and spreading it in the community. The anonymous worker’s story was featured in the Washington Post.

Filed by FarmSTAND (formerly the Food Project at Public Justice), Towards Justice, and the Heartland Center for Jobs and Freedom less than two weeks after Smithfield’s Sioux Falls plant shut down indefinitely due to a coronavirus outbreak, the complaint alleged Smithfield’s operations constituted a public nuisance because they unreasonably interfered with the common public right to public health, and because they were a breach of Smithfield’s duty to provide its workers with a reasonably safe workplace. The suit did not seek money damages, but asked the Court to force Smithfield to comply with CDC guidelines, state public health orders, and the guidance of health care professionals.

After we filed suit, the court ordered Smithfield to follow current CDC guidelines, and there were numerous changes to Smithfield’s practices. Smithfield:

  1.  expanded the break area to allow for social distancing;
  2. changed its clock in/clock out policies to allow for social distancing;
  3. reduced the number of hogs it is slaughtering at the plant to allow for social distancing;
  4. began enforcing mask policies;
  5. altered its sick leave policies to allow for paid leave (and that workers wouldn’t lose their right to a bonus) if workers showed symptoms;
  6. expanded its guidelines of what constituted “symptoms” to match the CDC’s updates; and
  7. made the barriers between workers on the line stronger.

The district court stated that given these changes, there was no “imminent” risk of harm and the additional changes we were asking for should be left to OSHA. This spurred our Maid-Rite case, which ultimately affirmed that workers can go to the courts when OSHA fails to protect them from imminent danger.

The Smithfield case was featured in an New York Times editorial about Mitch McConnell’s rush to reopen businesses amid the global pandemic, and the true need for mandatory guidelines to protect people’s health and lives. The case was also featured in Netflix’s Patriot Act with Hasan Minhaj, in the episode “How Coronavirus Broke America.”

Trial Briefs

Complaint (RCWA & Jane Doe v. Smithfield)

Emergency motion for preliminary injunction (RCWA & Jane Doe v. Smithfield)

Doe declaration (RCWA & Jane Doe v. Smithfield)

Fuentes declaration (RCWA & Jane Doe v. Smithfield)

Fritzsche declaration (RCWA & Jane Doe v. Smithfield)

Harrison declaration (RCWA & Jane Doe v. Smithfield)

Corbo declaration (RCWA & Jane Doe v. Smithfield)

Order granting Smithfield motion to dismiss (RCWA & Jane Doe v. Smithfield)

Second Doe declaration in support of plaintiffs’ opposition to defendants’ motion to dismiss (RCWA & Jane Doe v. Smithfield)

Second Fuentes declaration in support of plaintiffs’ opposition to defendants’ motion to dismiss (RCWA & Jane Doe v. Smithfield)

Exh. A to plaintiffs’ opposition to defendants’ post-hearing brief (RCWA & Jane Doe v. Smithfield)

Exh. B to plaintiffs’ opposition to defendants’ post-hearing brief (RCWA & Jane Doe v. Smithfield)

Michaels declaration in support of plaintiffs’ opposition to defendants’ motion to dismiss (RCWA & Jane Doe v. Smithfield)

Perry declaration in support of plaintiffs’ opposition to defendants’ motion to dismiss (RCWA & Jane Doe v. Smithfield)

Plaintiffs’ opposition to defendants’ post-hearing supplemental brief (RCWA & Jane Doe v. Smithfield)

Plaintiffs’ brief in support of motion to allow Doe to proceed under pseudonym (RCWA & Jane Doe v. Smithfield)

Plaintiffs’ opposition to defendants’ supplemental authority (RCWA & Jane Doe v. Smithfield)

Plaintiffs’ opposition to Smithfield’s motion to dismiss (RCWA & Jane Doe v. Smithfield)

Rosenthal declaration in support of plaintiffs’ opposition to defendants’ motion to dismiss (RCWA & Jane Doe v. Smithfield)

Plaintiffs’ opposition to defendants’ motion for time (RCWA & Jane Doe v. Smithfield)

Plaintiffs’ motion to reconsider and suggestions in support (RCWA & Jane Doe v. Smithfield)

Order denying motion for reconsideration (RCWA & Jane Doe v. Smithfield)

Related Posts

Bloomberg Law: Farm Union Ban Violates Pennsylvania Constitution, Lawsuit Says

Worker Justice
View post

Equal Rights for Pennsylvania Ag Workers (UFCW 1776 v. Pennsylvania)

Worker Justice
Agricultural workers deserve the same workplace protections as all other workers. But in Pennsylvania, the state specifically excludes them from […]
View case

UFCW 1776 Sues State of Pennsylvania To End Unconstitutional Labor Law Exception for Agriculture

Worker Justice
Legal challenge seeks to end nearly nine-decade injustice harming organized labor in the state The United Food and Commercial Workers, […]
View post

National Headquarters
712 H Street NE Suite 2534
Washington, DC 20002
(202) 595-8816

Stay engaged with the fight for a fair food system. Sign up for emails from FarmSTAND.

Footer Newsletter


  • Our Issues
    • Worker JusticeAdvocating for safe conditions, fair wages, and dignity for farmers and laborers
    • Farmers & Rural CommunitiesStrengthening local food systems through fair and equitable markets
    • Climate & Environmental ProtectionWorking to stop deceptive greenwashing and enforcing environmental laws
    • Animal WelfareFighting Ag-Gag laws that stifle protests against inhumane factory farming
    • Consumer RightsDefending the right to clear labeling and transparency about food production practices
  • Court Cases
    • All Court Cases
  • Get Involved
  • News
    • In The News
    • Insights
    • Deep Dives
    • Press Releases
    • For the Media
  • About
    • Our Team
    • Board of Directors
    • Careers at FarmSTAND
  • Donate

Support the Movement

  • Bluesky
  • LinkedIn
  • Instagram
  • Facebook
Donate
Shop Merch
Contact Us

© 2026 Farmstand All Rights Reserved

  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use

Site by: Eighty2degrees & Chee Studio

English
Spanish