A San Diego federal judge on Wednesday declined to dismiss a lawsuit that alleged human trafficking and forced labor violations by Bumble Bee Seafoods, the San Diego-based canned tuna giant, instead ruling the first-of-its-kind case brought by four Indonesian mariners can move forward toward trial.
“This is a historic moment and an incredible victory for the fishers and the ocean,” Sari Heidenreich, senior human rights advisor with Greenpeace USA, which is helping to represent the plaintiffs, said in a statement. “… We celebrate that the fishers will be allowed their day in court, recognizing this is monumental not only for these four men, who are brave enough to stand up to a giant U.S. corporation, but for hundreds of thousands of fishers globally.”
The four plaintiffs, all men from rural Indonesian villages, sued Bumble Bee in March in U.S. District Court in San Diego, alleging that they were subjected to severe physical abuse and debt bondage on long-line tuna boats that are part of Bumble Bee’s “trusted fleet.” The lawsuit alleged that Bumble Bee had known for years that the fishing vessels in its supply fleet used forced labor but failed to stop the practice.
The suit was believed to be the first to accuse an American seafood company of forced labor at sea.
Attorneys for Bumble Bee asked Southern District of California Chief Judge Cynthia Bashant in June to dismiss the case, arguing in part that Bumble Bee could not have plausibly known about the abuse that the plaintiffs suffered. Bumble Bee also argued that it could not be held liable in a U.S. court because the case involved “injuries suffered overseas at the hands of foreign actors.”
Bashant on Wednesday denied Bumble Bee’s motion to dismiss the case, ruling that at this point in the litigation, the plaintiffs have done enough to show that Bumble Bee likely had “notice” about the prevalence of forced labor on vessels it used to source tuna “and failed to take adequate steps” to prevent such practices.
“This gives me hope for justice for me and my fellow plaintiffs as we struggle for justice and change for the better,” plaintiff Muhammad Syafi’i said in a statement, adding that he was “actually in tears” and overwhelmed by the ruling. “Our fight and sacrifice are not in vain in order to get justice for all of the fishers. I remain steadfast, strong, and enthusiastic.”
Bashant did rule in Bumble Bee’s favor in one aspect, denying the plaintiffs’ motion for injunctive relief that would have forced the company to overhaul certain labor practices.
Bumble Bee told the Union-Tribune in a statement that it was unable to comment on the specifics of the judge’s ruling and the pending litigation, but that the company would continue to vigorously defend itself in the case.
“We care deeply about the people behind every bit of seafood we sell and unequivocally condemn forced labor,” Bumble Bee said in the statement. “We take any such allegations very seriously and require all direct suppliers to agree to adhere to our strict Supplier Code of Conduct prohibiting forced labor … Responsible treatment of fishers at sea is a complex, industry-wide challenge that requires both effective government oversight and dedicated industry action. We will continue to engage with leading industry groups and policy efforts to advocate for progress and deliver positive change, both within our supply chain and across the sector.”
Bumble Bee was sold for nearly $1 billion in 2020, a year after it filed for bankruptcy, to the Taiwanese tuna-trading giant FCF Co. Ltd. But as a subsidiary of FCF, it remains headquartered in downtown San Diego inside the gates of Petco Park.
In 2018, Bumble Bee pleaded guilty to conspiring to fix the prices of canned tuna and agreed to pay a $25 million criminal fine. Bumble Bee’s former CEO was found guilty at trial for his leadership role in the price-fixing conspiracy and sentenced to 40 months in custody.
The lawsuit from the Indonesian mariners alleged that while forced labor is a long-standing problem in the fishing and seafood industry, Bumble Bee lags even further behind other seafood brands in combating such practices.
In 2022, Greenpeace volunteers used Bumble Bee’s “Trace My Catch” tool — a feature aimed at creating transparency around the sourcing of tuna — to find that Bumble Bee had sourced tuna from a Taiwanese ship suspected by U.S. authorities of using forced labor. The resulting Greenpeace East Asia report, “Fake My Catch,” identified cans of Bumble Bee tuna containing fish that had been caught on at least six vessels linked to allegations of forced labor.
In 2023, Bumble Bee agreed as part of a legal settlement to remove claims from its products and advertising that mentioned a “fair and safe supply chain” and “fair and responsible working conditions.”
Syafi’i and the other plaintiffs alleged they were promised good jobs on Chinese-owned tuna boats that are part of Bumble Bee’s “trusted fleet,” but instead were subjected to physical abuse, deprived of adequate food and denied medical care. They alleged they were ensnared in debt bondage and subjected to fees and paycheck deductions that left them destitute after months of excruciating labor and isolation at sea.
The lawsuit alleged that in sourcing its tuna from those boats where the plaintiffs were subjected to forced labor, Bumble Bee violated the federal Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act and was negligent in ensuring that its fleet of suppliers did not use forced labor.
In its motion to dismiss the case, Bumble Bee said that when it learned of the allegations in the lawsuit, “it promptly instructed its suppliers to cease purchasing from the vessels at issue.” But the company argued that it could not be held responsible “for allegations of forced labor committed abroad by third parties somewhere in the supply chain.”
Bumble Bee’s attorneys argued the case should be thrown out in part because the plaintiffs’ theory of liability was too broad and “would allow any manufacturer or retailer to be sued based on conduct by independent foreign actors anywhere in a global supply chain.”
Attorneys for the plaintiffs responded that Bumble Bee was not simply purchasing tuna without oversight from the Chinese companies who owned the ships where the forced labor was occurring, but rather that Bumble Bee and its parent company were deeply intertwined in a joint venture with the Chinese firms. The plaintiffs also argued that Bumble Bee was aware of the forced labor happening on the ships in question through specific reporting, investigations and law enforcement actions.
Bashant sided with the plaintiffs, ruling that they “sufficiently pled that vessel owners and operators engaged in forced labor.” She wrote that Bumble Bee had an “active role in obtaining albacore tuna from the vessels on which Plaintiffs were subject to forced labor and reselling the tuna for a profit.”
The judge also ruled that evidence presented by the plaintiffs was sufficient at this point in the case to show Bumble Bee and its parent company participated in a joint venture with the Chinese owners and operators of the ships where the forced labor occurred.
“This is an important step towards making one of the world’s most dangerous jobs safer and more fair for the fishers who work so hard to put food on American consumers’ plates and who should not be subject to forced labor,” said Agnieszka Fryszman, a prominent human rights attorney from the firm Cohen Milstein who is the lead attorney for the plaintiffs. “… These men endured horrific physical abuse, hunger, and debt bondage while working aboard Bumble Bee’s so-called ‘trusted fleet’ tuna vessels … We look forward to holding Bumble Bee fully accountable under the law.”
A trial date in the case is not yet scheduled. The judge gave the plaintiffs until Dec. 3 to file an amended complaint if they wish to challenge her decision dismissing their claims for injunctive relief.