Unions force Hostess into bankruptcy. 18000 to lose jobs. No more Twinkies

[LizKat]

Originally Posted by haxrnick

Yeah, lets make the company that employs us go out of business! That will teach those rich, fat cats for employing us!!!

Oh please. The lenders are the ones being intransigent this time. They took the risk but they don't want to take dime one of the loss. People have tried to take the workers over the cliff too many times with this one. I don't blame some of the unions (there are more than one union with this thing) for just drawing a line here. You have to draw the line or your guys are going to be like non union shops all over this country making min wage on permanent part time and supposed to be grateful because... let's see... the company CAREs about its employees, is that the line? The company provides your cart-corral job uniform jacket? Woop woop!

This company has been ripped off from the top too many times. It was not going to stop with this reorg. It was always going to go down the tubes again and again until liquidation and the brands (maybe!) went somewhere else. The vulch caps love this kind of company, aging product lines, still vaguely some kind of a market out there (so you can likely gloss it up a little and sell the thing to the next sucker). You spruce it up, you get some lenders to foot that tab, you get the unions to get the workers to take a cut, you promise the moon, it sounds better than strike pay, they take the deal, the guy at the top gets his payday, the revenues don't cover that hit plus the rest of the costs, the lenders squawk...

It's a flip-script, and the guy sliding off the spatula to the floor is always the worker. Sometimes there are extra losers (and they may get to take fat writeoffs), but the worker is always the one looking at no paycheck and likely no salvaged benefits either.

[eric/]

Originally Posted by Rodimus Prime

but the CEO got a 300% pay raise along with some of the other hire ups. That should of been the first place to cut pay. Not taking out of the unions. And you wonder why we have issues with the people at the top?

I disagree with the CEO getting a large pay increase, but that doesn't mean you just refuse to work and lose everything.

[IBradMac]

Originally Posted by likemyorbs

God forbid America eats a few less twinkies.

And the job losses?

----------

Bankruptcy twice you say? garbage company?

Lets assume to say the same about twice bankrupted GM.

GM is a piece of **** garbage imo.

Originally Posted by zioxide

Do you think you could ever post an article on here without sensationalizing the **** out of it?

I doubt it.

This company is garbage. They've gone through bankruptcy twice in the past few years already because nobody wants to buy their garbage unhealthy crap anymore. Maybe they should update their business model and start making something that will be profitable in 2012 instead of asking their employees (who are no doubt underpaid and are being taken advantage of already) to give up even more salary and pensions.

Screw that. Why should the employees have to pay because upper management made **** business decisions? I bet the CEO isn't taking cuts on his bonuses but they expect minimum-wage production workers who barely scrape by paycheck to paycheck to take cuts because the big wigs can't run a company.

[Zombie Acorn]

Originally Posted by IBradMac

And the job losses?

Less junk food and more people on welfare, a liberal win win.

[Rodimus Prime]

Originally Posted by eric/

I disagree with the CEO getting a large pay increase, but that doesn't mean you just refuse to work and lose everything.

problem is it was pretty clear the company was at the table in bad faith to begin with. The Union gave in last time and they turn around and take massive pay increases that I would not be surpised wipe out most of the savings. Why should they give in again when shortly down the road the higher ups would repeat the same line of reasoning.

[Zombie Acorn]

Originally Posted by Rodimus Prime

problem is it was pretty clear the company was at the table in bad faith to begin with. The Union gave in last time and they turn around and take massive pay increases that I would not be surpised wipe out most of the savings. Why should they give in again when shortly down the road the higher ups would repeat the same line of reasoning.

The union workers can have fun finding a different job with even close to the same wages with "twinkee conveyor belt watcher" on their resume.

[Queen of Spades]

Originally Posted by Zombie Acorn

The union workers can have fun finding a different job with even close to the same wages with "twinkee conveyor belt watcher" on their resume.

You sure do derive a lot of joy from acting superior over other people based on their job. So people with less glamorous, lower paid jobs don't deserve benefits? Or respect? Or a decent wage? Or the right to expect some equality in pay cuts? I can't imagine what it must be like to garner joy from another's horrible situation.

[MacNut]

If the Wiki is accurate, these are the Hostess brands:

Baker's Inn
Beefsteak
Blue Ribbon
Bread du Jour
Butternut Breads
Colombo
Cotton’s
Di Carlo
Dolly Madison
Drake's
Dutch Hearth
Eddy’s
Good Hearth
Holsom
Home Pride
Hostess
J.J. Nissen
Merita
Millbrook
Mrs. Cubbison's Foods
Nature's Pride
Parisian
Standish Farms
Sweetheart
Twinkie
Toscana
Wonder Bread

I could see a good portion of those surviving under another company. How many would Kraft Foods buy?

[LizKat]

Originally Posted by Zombie Acorn

The union workers can have fun finding a different job with even close to the same wages with "twinkee conveyor belt watcher" on their resume.

Oh so if they had not been union members (therefore making even less money), you're sure they still would have had jobs as of this afternoon, they'd not be getting set up to take another round of "We'd like to give everyone a raise this year but things have been tough in the marketplace as you all know..." meanwhile bosses jacking up their own top management pay as usual?

So what if their job was watching stuff go past on a conveyor belt. Something or someone needs to watch stuff come off a line. If it's not some piece of Cognex (or whatever) equipment, and it's a person watching the line, then I'm glad he or she is there. I don't want a dead mouse in my salad greens.

Sure, we all hope our children will acquire enough education to get good jobs, and that there will be some jobs for them to get when they finish school. Not everyone is going to get a great job. Not everyone will have gotten a great education either. Not everyone recovers in high style from disruption of their famlly's lives or from interruptions to their schooling or career. But people who are working for a living, no matter their walk in life, deserve some respect. They are trying to look after themselves the best they can. If they didn't have "twinkee conveyor belt watcher" on their resume, as you put it, maybe they'd have nothing. Then what, you'd call them welfare queens? And if they're disabled? They're what... "takers?"

Please get off your high horse. Find some gratitude and some compassion. I hope your child never has to fight a war and then sit on the sidewalk as a homeless vet because no one wanted to hire someone who was "just an inventory clerk" in a forward base while in the military on active duty.

[DakotaGuy]

Originally Posted by IBradMac

And the job losses?

----------

Bankruptcy twice you say? garbage company?

Lets assume to say the same about twice bankrupted GM.

GM is a piece of **** garbage imo.

GM was never properly restructured. It's cost remain too high and it has too many brands for it's marketshare. It still relies on it's full sized pickups and SUVs for most of it's profit and it's smaller vehicles are mediocre at best when compared to their competition. We will see another GM bankruptcy in the near future.

I still think it is funny that the so-called "GM success story" was so advertised during the election, but those who know better know that GM is still a complete basket case.

[Zombie Acorn]

Originally Posted by Queen of Spades

You sure do derive a lot of joy from acting superior over other people based on their job. So people with less glamorous, lower paid jobs don't deserve benefits? Or respect? Or a decent wage? Or the right to expect some equality in pay cuts? I can't imagine what it must be like to garner joy from another's horrible situation.

When someone creates the situation over the years by taking inflated wages, asking for pensions on jobs that should be relegated to people who just finished up high school, and striking on any chance of a pay cut I do get a strange kind of joy to hear that they have reaped what they sown.

[callmemike20]

I can't find HoHos anywhere!!!! I went to 3 stores and everything was gone except Brownie Bites! What do I do?????

[Rodimus Prime]

Originally Posted by Zombie Acorn

When someone creates the situation over the years by taking inflated wages, asking for pensions on jobs that should be relegated to people who just finished up high school, and striking on any chance of a pay cut I do get a strange kind of joy to hear that they have reaped what they sown.

and yet you pass over the fact that the highers up took massive pay raises after they took the last pay cut more than likely taking all the gains.

I can point to example of why business majors are though so little off. So again I ask why the hell should the union trust the company and the higher ups after last time when all the "saving" were suck up by the higher ups. What is going to prevent them from doing it again.

Yet again you are a shinning example of why bussiness people are though so little of.

[Moyank24]

Originally Posted by Zombie Acorn

When someone creates the situation over the years by taking inflated wages, asking for pensions on jobs that should be relegated to people who just finished up high school, and striking on any chance of a pay cut I do get a strange kind of joy to hear that they have reaped what they sown.

I do hope that you don't hurt yourself too badly when you fall out of that Ivory Tower you're living in.

[Queen of Spades]

Originally Posted by Zombie Acorn

When someone creates the situation over the years by taking inflated wages, asking for pensions on jobs that should be relegated to people who just finished up high school, and striking on any chance of a pay cut I do get a strange kind of joy to hear that they have reaped what they sown.

Inflated wages? Wow. How much do you think these Hostess workers are making? Also you clearly haven't read the story - this is their first strike, after several bankruptcies by Hostess and it's not the first pay decrease. Again, this is their first strike. If anyone has "created a situation" it's the management of Hostess. The company was failing long before the workers went on strike.

And yet still, through two bankruptcies, Hostess continued to pay executives salary increases and bonuses. Let me say it again since you keep skipping over it: Hostess asked its workers to take pay cuts while continuing to pay executives salary increases.

Compassion and understanding for another's situation doesn't require you to be in situation yourself. I don't know how anyone can argue these workers somehow caused Hostess to close, or deserved to lose their jobs, or worse, take joy in it. Again, the timing of this closure coincides with the perfect opportunity for Hostess to lay the blame on the employees. Sometimes it's necessary to consider things critically before jumping to the obvious/spoon fed conclusion.

[Ugg]

Originally Posted by Zombie Acorn

The union workers can have fun finding a different job with even close to the same wages with "twinkee conveyor belt watcher" on their resume.

Why do hate Americans who have honest jobs? It's palpable and it's embarrassing.

These are the kind of jobs that Romney has spent his career exporting, the kind of jobs that Pre-Reagan made up the bulk of the middle class, the kind of jobs that were honest and fulfilling. Unfortunately Reagan and Romney sold their souls so the rich could get richer.

Your attitude disgusts me.

[AlaskaMoose]

Originally Posted by Ugg

Why do hate Americans who have honest jobs? It's palpable and it's embarrassing.

These are the kind of jobs that Romney has spent his career exporting, the kind of jobs that Pre-Reagan made up the bulk of the middle class, the kind of jobs that were honest and fulfilling. Unfortunately Reagan and Romney sold their souls so the rich could get richer.

Your attitude disgusts me.

It's doubtful that any US corporation does not have jobs overseas. Even the computer you are using to post in this forum is made overseas. By the way, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act by the Obama administration outsourced a lot of jobs and stimulated the economies of England, China, Finland, and many other countries. I am not making things up; just do a Google search of, "President Obama exports jobs overseas," and have a look.

Now, going back to the OP: this is where the Twinkie workers and unions should be at to get big bonuses:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...s-159-billion/

[Zombie Acorn]

Originally Posted by Ugg

Why do hate Americans who have honest jobs? It's palpable and it's embarrassing.

These are the kind of jobs that Romney has spent his career exporting, the kind of jobs that Pre-Reagan made up the bulk of the middle class, the kind of jobs that were honest and fulfilling. Unfortunately Reagan and Romney sold their souls so the rich could get richer.

Your attitude disgusts me.

honest jobs? Those jobs stopped being honest when they turned into conveyor belt factories. An honest job is something that takes skill or craftsmanship to accomplish. Calling this union a baker's union is an insult to bakers everywhere.

I must be the only one who can see the waste in having a lifer watching cupcakes roll by for 30 years meanwhile a 19 year old looking for their first job and can't find one.

[Peace]

Originally Posted by Zombie Acorn

honest jobs? Those jobs stopped being honest when they turned into conveyor belt factories. An honest job is something that takes skill or craftsmanship to accomplish. Calling this union a baker's union is an insult to bakers everywhere.

I must be the only one who can see the waste in having a lifer watching cupcakes roll by for 30 years meanwhile a 19 year old looking for their first job and can't find one.

Do I understand this correctly ? Are you saying the only people with an honest job are those that have skilled craftsmanship jobs ?

What do you call a person that works at a factory to feed their family ?

conveyor belt factory jobs are part of what built this country and them "job creators" created those jobs.

[eric/]

Originally Posted by Rodimus Prime

problem is it was pretty clear the company was at the table in bad faith to begin with. The Union gave in last time and they turn around and take massive pay increases that I would not be surpised wipe out most of the savings. Why should they give in again when shortly down the road the higher ups would repeat the same line of reasoning.

Because if they don't give in, the plant shuts down and they all lose their jobs

[eric/]

It's also worth noting that generally these executive pay increases are insignificant to total overall cost. Taking a pay cut is symbolic more than anything.

Secondly the union pretty much gave the executives what they wanted, since it's also not in their best interest to stick around a failing company. It's difficult to attract new executive management to a company that is in such a situation.

Hence, perhaps the reason for the pay increase for the executives in order to keep them around in the first place.

[bradl]

Originally Posted by eric/

It's also worth noting that generally these executive pay increases are insignificant to total overall cost. Taking a pay cut is symbolic more than anything.

Secondly the union pretty much gave the executives what they wanted, since it's also not in their best interest to stick around a failing company. It's difficult to attract new executive management to a company that is in such a situation.

Hence, perhaps the reason for the pay increase for the executives in order to keep them around in the first place.

And yet the executives' performance has proven to be so crappy that they go into bankruptcy again, and ask the employees to concede more. In a free market, which conservatives pride themselves so much on, everything has been pay for performance. If going into bankruptcy twice within a 10-year period shows their performance, those executives don't deserve to be there in the first place, let alone getting a pay increase. Either they do their jobs and do it well, or get fired.

Yet it's the union's fault this is happening...

BL.

[eric/]

Originally Posted by bradl

And yet the executives' performance has proven to be so crappy that they go into bankruptcy again, and ask the employees to concede more. In a free market, which conservatives pride themselves so much on, everything has been pay for performance. If going into bankruptcy twice within a 10-year period shows their performance, those executives don't deserve to be there in the first place, let alone getting a pay increase. Either they do their jobs and do it well, or get fired.

Yet it's the union's fault this is happening...

BL.

I didn't say that it was the unions fault for it happening. I'm saying it's their fault now for making a bad choice. Now nobody has a job and the executives walk away. I prefer the pragmatic decision, which is to keep the place running, even if only for another month over shutting the whole thing down. One more paycheck means a lot.

Also, again you have to consider that those pay increases are both insignificant to overall costs, and possibly warranted in order to keep the company functioning at the highest level, because as I've pointed out, there aren't very many people sitting around that are executive level material saying well shoot I sure wish I could find a failing company to join and lose my job again within the year and make it look like it's my fault. That pay increase may have been required to even keep the company functioning and retain those executives. And yes, a company does need executives.

So quick to place all the blame on the management and harp on pay increases that don't matter. It's just as bad as sitting around blaming union workers for everything.

[thekev]

Originally Posted by Zombie Acorn

When someone creates the situation over the years by taking inflated wages, asking for pensions on jobs that should be relegated to people who just finished up high school, and striking on any chance of a pay cut I do get a strange kind of joy to hear that they have reaped what they sown.

Factory jobs have never been a good fit for those just out of high school. The hours would not coincide well with college, and the locations are typically not favorable to those attending college. If they're going to work at a factory full time, where do they go from there? Factories are often located in cost effective areas. What is the step up later on? As for inflated wages, look at executive pay too. As I mentioned before, raises that may have just been an effort to retain management in a sinking ship while they search for a buyer. If that's the case, many of these jobs have no long term future anyway.

[IBradMac]

The Chevy volt is an absolute joke. GM's government dependency is an absolute joke.

My last two vehicles have been silverados. After the election and the debates over GM, I'm moving on when I trade next. Ford or Honda will be my next purchase. There was good reason Henry ford hated unions, and it wasn't because he was a money horder either.

Originally Posted by DakotaGuy

GM was never properly restructured. It's cost remain too high and it has too many brands for it's marketshare. It still relies on it's full sized pickups and SUVs for most of it's profit and it's smaller vehicles are mediocre at best when compared to their competition. We will see another GM bankruptcy in the near future.

I still think it is funny that the so-called "GM success story" was so advertised during the election, but those who know better know that GM is still a complete basket case.