MINNEAPOLIS — This past week, a federal judge with the US District Court of Minnesota denied Hormel Foods Corp.’s motion to dismiss a lawsuit brought on by former employee Scott Payne. In his complaint, Payne accused the company of mismanaging its $1.2 billion retirement plan.

Hormel’s retirement plan offers several different investment options, with varying risk levels that the participants may elect. The majority of these investment options do not pose a problem, according to the complaint. Payne finds fault with two aspects of the plan: the stable value investment option and the share classes selected for certain mutual funds.

Regarding the plan’s stable value investment option, Hormel only offers one option of this kind — the MassMutual general account guaranteed investment contract (GIC). Payne alleged that MassMutual consistently underperformed over a period of six years, when measured against four other comparable stable value funds.

The plan also offers several mutual funds that participants may direct their investments into. Payne alleged that Hormel retained more expensive share classes in certain mutual funds when less expensive share classes were available. He said even fractions of a percent increase in expense ratios can have a significant impact on long-term performance of participants’ investments.

Hormel made a motion to dismiss the class action lawsuit, which Payne filed in February 2024 on behalf of himself and similarly situated persons. The company argued Payne failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and that his claims lacked sufficient evidence for violations of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA).

However, Judge Susan Richard Nelson found plausibility in Payne’s allegations that Hormel’s fiduciary process was flawed regarding the two aspects of the 401(k) plan, and she denied Hormel’s motion.