A lawsuit was filed in Missouri Federal Court claiming Smithfield Foods provided inadequate protective equipment to workers at their Milan, MO. facility. Additional allegations include discouraging workers from taking sick leave and insufficient hand-washing facilities and personal protective gear.
The Rural Community Workers Alliance a labor advocacy group noted "workers, their family members and many others who live in Milan and in the border community may die, - all because Smithfield refused to change its practices in the face of the pandemic". A separate lawsuit brought on behalf of an employee at the Milan plant seeks a court order enforcing Smithfield to comply with current CDC guidelines to prevent COVID-19. These cases may be moot given the Executive Order indemnifying packers against claims. The directive does however require plants to comply with CDC guidelines to protect workers from infection.
|
Last week CHICK-NEWS reported on the results of a CDC evaluation of the Sioux Falls, SD. plant recently closed as a result of more than two hundred diagnosed cases of COVID-19. This facility is responsible for producing five percent of U.S. pork. In a memorandum, Keira Lombardo, Executive Vice President, Cooperate Affairs and Compliance Smithfield replied to the issues raised by CDC. Smithfield claim that COVID-19 is ubiquitous across the U.S. and that it is believed that community spread occurred in the area of operation of the Sioux Falls plant before the condition appeared among workers. Unfortunately, there are insufficient results of antigen testing and serologic assays to support this contention.
|
Workers at a WH Group Plant in China |
An important conclusion and consequential recommendation by CDC was that Smithfield should communicate with workers concerning precautions to be taken to prevent COVID-19 in the languages as understood by workers. Smithfield maintains that it "regularly communicates in multiple languages, verbally in videos and in print including iconography, e-mails and on the company intranet. This is at variance with the CDC investigation.
The memorandum attempts to justify company policy with regard to personal protective equipment. The Company claimed it was following CDC guidelines. Unfortunately, the CDC has "wobbled" over the need for masks and eye protection since April 3rd. At this time the advice provided was that masks were unnecessary in "agriculture", presumably in fields and barns and not in packing plants where social distancing is difficult to achieve. The CDC later amended recommendations, acknowledging the need to protect workers. When the April 3rd CDC recommendations were released there was an absolute shortage of masks, gowns, gloves, and other equipment and clearly the Agency had no idea of the close proximity of workers in meat packing and poultry processing plants.
Common sense based on a knowledge of the transmissibility of the virus should have been recognized by management of Smithfield that employed 40,000 in forty facilities throughout the U.S. When Smithfield was obliged to provide masks, the short supply situation became evident. In her self-exculpatory statement Ms. Lombardo opined that "it is not standard practice in the industry for employees to wear masks let alone face shields". She is referred to images of plants in China operated by the parent company of Smithfield Foods, the WH Group, depicting workers with smocks and head covering extended over the nose and mouth. Apart from recognizing the need to supply protective equipment, and recognizing their non-availability in the U.S., the parent company in China should have recognized its obligation to workers and airfreighted masks and other protective equipment apparently available in China to the U.S. After all the Patriots team located and transported masks in their own jet for first responders and hospital personnel in Boston and other Massachusetts cities in mid-March. Smithfield should have been more worker-oriented and made use of their parent company in China to anticipate problems and respond proactively. Hand-wringing is no substitute for hand-washing!