Massive pay raises for executives even as the company is on the downward
spiral?"Hmm ... I guess we better get all we can before we close
the doors." Hostess ExecutivesPreplanned? It sure looks that
Its all part of the fallout of Obama economics and job creation. Get used to it,
there will be a lot more to follow. This country deserves what it will get, and
it won't be too good.
I doubt this was preplanned because the company has been struggling for years to
keep its customer base and loyal consumers. The craze is some trying to take
advantage of others who like them has bought out all the shelf supplies in hopes
of making a buck on out dated and spoiled leftover bricks.I wondered
how long they would last, since they changed their recipes for all their
products and all taste like congealed bricks of Canola and Corn oils it has been
their downfall and why they can't pay their employees or suppliers anymore.
They tried to sucker their employees to work for half pay poverty but they
didn't fall for it this time.Go Unions, and if American's
don't organize they will never have more than what they have now.
Disorganization and socializing workers is what destroys a nations wealth and
power, and the living of today are the witnesses of our destruction.
Tom, Sad but true!
rvalens2, the Union negotiator for Hostess unions makes $254,000 a year. How
does that fit in your analysis.From the Wall Street Journal,
"The Twinkie, a Suicide"Hostess's 372
collective-bargaining agreements required the company to maintain 80 different
health and benefit plans, 40 pension plans and mandated a $31 million increase
in wages and health care and other benefits for 2012.Union work
rules usually required cake and bread products to be delivered to a single
retail location using two separate trucks. Drivers weren't allowed to load
their own vehicles, and the workers who loaded bread weren't allowed to
load cake. On most delivery routes, another "pull up" employee moved
products from back rooms to shelves.
Tom and BYUalum appear to approve of the trend; full-time, ever-declining,
poverty-wage jobs as the wave of the future for American workers. If there is a
class war going on, it's not coming from those at the bottom of the pay
scale. They're too busy trying to survive.
These "treats" symbolize all that is wrong with the American diet and
food production system. I'm sorry for the loss of jobs, but good riddance
to this "food."
I'm waiting for President Obama to step in, name a Ding Dong czar, and
nationalize the Twinkie industry.
I was amused to see all the Hostess products fly off the grocery store shelves
within hours of this news hitting the airwaves.Don't panic,
people. Twinkies, Ding Dongs and HO-HOs brands are far too valuable. Someone
will buy up these brands, and the recipes, and continue to put out this product.
Of course, I wish they would go back to the old lard-laden recipes,
yum. But then I live in Texas, home of the deep fried snack cake........
Don't worry. Obama will save Twinkies. I hear Michelle loves them!
As an avid twinkie devourer I must my two cents. First of all, those backing the
unions in this debate, go ahead, keep backing the unions. Maybe soon you can
form an "Unemployed Union" and President Obama will allow members of the
UU to collectively bargain for better unemployment benefits. Keep dreaming.
Second, those backing the owners, get off your high horse and realize that there
is plenty of blame to go around in this. Hostess allowed the unions to have
their way back in the heyday, and now they are paying for it. Owners can not
have the mindset that their product will always be in demand. Ever hear of
"Little Debbie", well, it's soon to have a name change to "Big
Debbie" as she'll be the only one selling snack cakes.Hostess
allowed the fat cat unions to have too much control, now we're all
suffering. Much like the UAW is trying as hard as they can to bankrupt Detroit,
Americans must realize that foreign cars are cheaper because the people making
them pay for their own retirement, rather than their retirement being paid for
by an $$ add-on to each car's price.
Another example of poor management and Labor Union decisions combining to hurt
the people they are supposed to be looking after.
This has little to do with Unions - where were simply trying to save their
retirement pensions and everything to do with venture/Vulture
CAPITALISTS -- Who will over-pay the executives to cave and give into
their demands, then bankrupt the company (in name only), and who
will come out on the other side of bankrupcy debt free, by cutting and
gutting the actual workers who end up LOOSING their entire life-long
pensions.I like business, I dis-like greedy, cut-throat
business men who make $ Billions for doing nothing more than buy and sell
company names at the expense of the workers who actually PRODUCE something.
Let the union buy them out.
RationalSalt Lake City, UT"...Union work rules usually
required cake and bread products to be delivered to a single retail location
using two separate trucks. Drivers weren't allowed to load their own
vehicles, and the workers who loaded bread weren't allowed to load cake. On
most delivery routes, another "pull up" employee moved products from
back rooms to shelves.7:44 a.m. Nov. 19, 2012=============== In other words -- Union work rules created
JOBS.Inefficient IMHO, but created JOBS none-the-less.You
can't argue that fact.meanwhile -- A Corporations still
making a huge profit will leave us with;Corporate exec's getting $
millionsVenture Capitalists will be getting $ Billionsand those
workers making $10 - $12 an hour will now be unemployed while losing their
retirement, adding to our national deficiet, Meanwhle -- those greedy 1%
will bank in off-shore bank accounts.
If I was a manager at Hostess (going through bankruptcy), they would have to
increase my pay for me to stick around. Managers can leave with two weeks
notice. They can take another job. Why would they want to stick around a
failing company? Of course, they were given raises. How else is HR suppose to
fill those positions?If I was a unionized baker, I would feel
trapped by my union's bargaining. I would want to negotiate my services
without the union's overhead and ultimately keep baking stuff.The real failure is not being able to produce baked goods at a price people
would buy them. Who is to blame? Everyone in the company contributed to this
Ruraljohnboy, can you name for us one industry that President Obama has
nationalized? And, no, he did not nationalize the auto industry. So why would
you think he would nationalize the bakery industry?Article-Reader
you said, "Americans must realize that foreign cars are cheaper . .
."Where in the world are you getting the idea that foreign cars
are cheaper then domestic? I mean that's funny. John20000, you
would rather negotiate without the union? You really think a company the size of
Hostess would have negotiated with individual bakers? It would never happen.
Their "negotiation" with you would consist of them telling you what they
would pay you. End of negotiation. ". . . Union work rules
usually required cake and bread products to be delivered to a single retail
location using two separate trucks. Drivers weren't allowed to load their
own vehicles, and the workers who loaded bread weren't allowed to load
cake. On most delivery routes, another "pull up" employee moved products
from back rooms to shelves.""Rational", you make it
sound like this is unreasonable. I used to work in a warehouse in my youth
(very efficient, successful, non-union warehouse) This is basically how we ran
@Mark--It was a joke. I would call what President Obama did with GM "
nationalization." And his actions with Citigroup are at least partial
nationalization. But really, Mark, it's Twinkies! Lighten up :-)
Over a hundred fifty thousand lay offs since the elections, and much more to
come.Maybe a government take over of twinkies is in order.May liberal friends get what they voted for.
John, it was a joke? Don't ever try stand up, dude. And no GM was not
nationalized, no matter what you would call it. And neither was Citigroup.
Perhaps you would care to read up on what nationalization is, and also learn
what happened with GM and Citigroup. It's just twinkies you
say? No, it is a continuation of attacks on labor and President Obama by
conservatives. You think it is funny that labor is made the scapegoat for the
actions and mismanagement of vulture capitalists and management? I don't.
Where LDS Liberal sees jobs, I see money being wasted. Business owners, and
product inventors have every right to line their pockets. It is their hard work
that created those businesses, and now its time that they get paid. Getting paid
when you OWN the business is NOT Vulture Capitalism. It is Unions requiring
overpayment into 40 different types of pensions and benefit policies isn't
creating jobs. It's creating confusion, its wasting money, and now. . . it
is KILLING jobs.
All my "snack cake" purchases are made on price alone so Hostess usually
loses to the Little Debbie equivalent. I have opinions about unions
in general and this union in particular. 1) Got the job on my merits; could have
kept the job on same but "the union" required that I join-- 2) Existing
employees protected their own benefits by agreeing to inferior conditions for
new hires; "class" conflict-- 3) Union agreed to individual pain when
revenue could not continue group benefits at same levels allowing for lay-offs
instead of a general reduction among all employees--demonstrating that staffing
levels in negotiation had been based on lies and proving that unions really
aren't unions at all.If management and unions would act
honorably in distribution of income so that labor, management, and stockholders
all had appropriate shares related to productivity, then the business involved
would continue indefinitely. That means all three groups participate in the bad
just like the good. This type of relationship requires no single group to
stockpile resources and provides for individual asset allocation in preparation
for any bad times. It also encourages direct recognition of productivity.