Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/non_aviation/read.main/2470109/

Topic: No More Twinkies!
Username: LFutia
Posted 2012-11-16 06:21:13 and read 2334 times.

Hostess, the maker of Twinkies and all the other delicious snacks, will be closing for good which will result in a loss of 18,000 jobs after a labour strike, and looming deadline for those to return to work never happened.

Leo/ORD

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: dcann40
Posted 2012-11-16 06:29:09 and read 2340 times.

I just saw the article in the WSJ

Quote:
Hostess Brands Inc., the maker of iconic treats such as Twinkies and traditional pantry staple Wonder Bread, said Friday it is shuttering its plants and will seek to liquidate the 82-year-old business.
[image] Reuters

Hostess Brands is seeking to liquidate.

The company, which filed for Chapter 11 in January, said it has requested bankruptcy-court authorization to close the business and sell its assets.

A victim of changing consumer tastes, high commodity costs and, most importantly, strained labor relations, Hostess ultimately was brought to its knees by a national strike orchestrated by its second-largest union. ...


online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324556304578122632560842670.html

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: Braniff747SP
Posted 2012-11-16 06:36:34 and read 2342 times.

No job is better than some job, apparently.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: KiwiRob
Posted 2012-11-16 06:39:28 and read 2339 times.

Jesus I thought unions were supposed to protect jobs no lose them.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: Dreadnought
Posted 2012-11-16 06:43:47 and read 2341 times.

The company was already under bankruptcy protection and desperately trying to restructure its business in order to survive. The company’s delivery drivers are Teamsters, who voted by a narrow margin to take a pay cut and benefit renegotiations in September rather than have the drivers lose their jobs in a down market. But the Bakery union say “No way” and decided on a strike rather than take a pay cut and reduced benefits.

I guess elections DO have consequences....92% voted to reject the contract....100% now out of work. I bet those Teamsters drivers are happy with the Bakery union tonight.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: stlgph
Posted 2012-11-16 06:46:11 and read 2339 times.

Gee, what are they going to deep fry now at the Iowa State Fair?

But on a serious note, a lot of vendors do make a living literally by traveling the country every summer serving up Hostess products deep fried, baked, sizzled, etc. etc. -- and now they're pretty much screwed as well. Shame.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: cmf
Posted 2012-11-16 06:52:38 and read 2339 times.

So a company is in C11 for the second time in less than 10 years but the "only" problem is that workers went on strike...

Seems to me the unions were the responsible here. End what obviously was a dead man walking.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: Nitrohelper
Posted 2012-11-16 07:05:15 and read 2341 times.

Some other bakers will purchase parts of the company - Twinkies will survive along with some of the other best sellers...
Probably will be made by non-union workers...

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: aloges
Posted 2012-11-16 07:06:23 and read 2341 times.

"Tallahassee" is NOT going to like this!   

Quoting cmf (Reply 6):
So a company is in C11 for the second time in less than 10 years but the "only" problem is that workers went on strike...

Obviously.    Something stinks to high heaven, particularly when you consider these parts of the WSJ article:

Quote:
On the one hand, the names have decades of brand equity, and there is "pretty significant demand" for the products, according to Mr. Rayburn.
(...)
But Hostess has threatened liquidation before in the case—and during its last stint in Chapter 11—and not followed through.

If you "have" to liquidate a business whose products are selling well and have already been in Chapter 11 protection before (which you shouldn't have left without completing all necessary restructuring), you're doing something fundamentally wrong.

Quoting cmf (Reply 6):
End what obviously was a dead man walking.

  

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: L-188
Posted 2012-11-16 07:12:44 and read 2340 times.

Yup another kill for orginized labor

But most of the hostess brands will surivive. They are assets that will be sold to pay debts.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: blueflyer
Posted 2012-11-16 07:19:03 and read 2338 times.

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 3):
Jesus I thought unions were supposed to protect jobs no lose them.

Maybe the membership decided to do what others have been unwilling to do in similar situation, draw a line in the sand and refuse to watch as pay and benefits are dragged down for everyone.

Their gambit comes at the expense of the Hostess employees, but employees at other food manufacturers aren't going to be told their pay and benefits need to be cut in line with Hostess', unlike what has happened to a lot of other professions, chief among them pilots and flight attendants.

Besides, the company tried this... negotiation tactic once before but didn't follow up on its threat to close when employees called their bluff, so you can be forgiven for employees not taking it seriously this time.

Quoting Nitrohelper (Reply 7):
Probably will be made by non-union workers...

Not sure, depends where the plants are. Of course, a buyer could get the brand and formulation only and move production to right-to-work states, but they would lose valuable time and store shelves hate a vacuum...

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: Dreadnought
Posted 2012-11-16 07:26:41 and read 2338 times.

Quoting L-188 (Reply 9):
But most of the hostess brands will surivive. They are assets that will be sold to pay debts.

Yep. The brand and/or the specific product rights (like Twinkie) will be sold to Nestle, United Biscuit and other such companies, the debt and shareholders will get the proceeds of that and the workers will be left holding their ****s.

If this is not a textbook lesson of what happens when you have an outside business (in this case the Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers' International Union, part of the AFL/CIO) brought in to "represent" workers, I don't know what is. Anyone care to bet that if Hostess' workers represented themselves (selected spokesmen, negotiators and leaders from among their own employees) that Hostess would still be around? When the union is entirely dependent on the survival of the company, they will be much more reasonable in their demands.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: slider
Posted 2012-11-16 07:47:29 and read 2337 times.

The dogs bark and the caravan marches on...

Another sterling example of the idiocy of unions. 80%+ of Americans don't even have a company funded pension and these morons were asked to kick in 2% more for it, as well as increased medical and insurance costs (which are, in case anyone has had their head in the sand, going up across the board for everyone, everywhere in the US).

So they killed the golden goose.

Funniest Tweet I read on the matter--- "Parasites always kill their Host(ess)"....

Too true. Once again, a death knell for unions. Hostess will have their assets purchased, the recipe for Twinkies and all that stuff will continue and 18,000 people are now out of a job. Welcome to Obama's Amerika, circa 2012.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: DocLightning
Posted 2012-11-16 07:48:19 and read 2341 times.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 11):
If this is not a textbook lesson of what happens when you have an outside business (in this case the Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers' International Union, part of the AFL/CIO) brought in to "represent" workers, I don't know what is. Anyone care to bet that if Hostess' workers represented themselves (selected spokesmen, negotiators and leaders from among their own employees) that Hostess would still be around? When the union is entirely dependent on the survival of the company, they will be much more reasonable in their demands.

So what is your answer to the fact that the company has been in CH 11 twice in ten years and yet they sell a ridiculously fast-selling product?

Is that also the fault of the union?

What possible benefit would AFL/CIO have from sinking companies like this? It means less union dues for them and now the brand may re-open non-unionized. See, there's accusing them of being self-interested and then there's accusing them of being wantonly evil without motive.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: flipdewaf
Posted 2012-11-16 07:52:00 and read 2339 times.

Quoting slider (Reply 12):
The dogs bark and the caravan marches on...

Another sterling example of the idiocy of unions. 80%+ of Americans don't even have a company funded pension and these morons were asked to kick in 2% more for it, as well as increased medical and insurance costs (which are, in case anyone has had their head in the sand, going up across the board for everyone, everywhere in the US).

So they killed the golden goose.

Funniest Tweet I read on the matter--- "Parasites always kill their Host(ess)"....

Too true. Once again, a death knell for unions. Hostess will have their assets purchased, the recipe for Twinkies and all that stuff will continue and 18,000 people are now out of a job. Welcome to Obama's Amerika, circa 2012.

Surely thats just capitalism and they weren't strong enough to survive? You should be praising this as it will make everything stronger overall.

Fred

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: tugger
Posted 2012-11-16 08:00:56 and read 2336 times.

Quoting slider (Reply 12):
Too true. Once again, a death knell for unions. Hostess will have their assets purchased, the recipe for Twinkies and all that stuff will continue and 18,000 people are now out of a job. Welcome to Obama's Amerika, circa 2012.

Yes, during this second half of President Obama's time in office the economy will continue to strengthen and economics will continue to function and inefficient and poorly run companies will continue to fail and successful brands will be bought by other companies and continue on.

Funny because I would have thought you would have claimed that President Obama will step in an protect those union jobs. But good to see you didn't.

Tugg

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: bjorn14
Posted 2012-11-16 09:13:40 and read 2339 times.

I guess it's official

http://www.hostessbrands.com/Closing.aspx

I'll miss the Donut Gems. Cherry Pies, Snowballs and Ding Dongs.  

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: Revelation
Posted 2012-11-16 09:19:06 and read 2335 times.

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 16):
I guess it's official

I guess potheads will have to confine themselves to the cheese nachos at 7-Eleven now.

Either that or that inferior "Miss Debbie" stuff.

Sad to say I grew up on junk food, the "real lunch" at high school was more than my lunch money would support, so it was a small milk and a Hostess product or two for me.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: Dreadnought
Posted 2012-11-16 09:20:05 and read 2336 times.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 13):
So what is your answer to the fact that the company has been in CH 11 twice in ten years and yet they sell a ridiculously fast-selling product?

Is that also the fault of the union?

Hostess was in an extremely competitive business. We aren't talking about 80% margins and huge cash generation like in other businesses. I've worked in FMCG (with Nabisco), and margins are thin - very thin in the confectionery business. You can't just cease revenue generation for a week or two and expect that the company can just brush it off.

Quoting flipdewaf (Reply 14):
Surely thats just capitalism and they weren't strong enough to survive? You should be praising this as it will make everything stronger overall.

Generally you are right, but that is small comfort to the workers involved - particularly the ones who voted against the strike or were not part of that union.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: tugger
Posted 2012-11-16 09:21:16 and read 2335 times.

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 16):
I'll miss the Donut Gems. Cherry Pies, Snowballs and Ding Dongs.

Don't worry, you won't. The brands will go on, perhaps even still under the name "Hostess". All the assets will be sold and some smart company will buy the already existing market and your favorites will go on as usual.

Tugg

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: starbuk7
Posted 2012-11-16 09:51:39 and read 2336 times.

I bet that no one at the union offices has taken a pay cut or lost their jobs because of this, just the 18,500 hostess people.

What a nice thing for the union to do to that many people right before the holidays.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: KiwiRob
Posted 2012-11-16 10:04:55 and read 2336 times.

Quoting slider (Reply 12):
Welcome to Obama's Amerika, circa 2012.

Pretty sure this would have happened under a republican America as well.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: Ken777
Posted 2012-11-16 10:51:44 and read 2337 times.

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 3):

Jesus I thought unions were supposed to protect jobs no lose them.

Then are. Yanks with employer nanny care can thank the unions for keeping those benefits going.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 4):
But the Bakery union say “No way” and decided on a strike rather than take a pay cut and reduced benefits.

They've been there before and have given up before. Maybe they were looking at the goodies that management was getting.  
Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 4):
I guess elections DO have consequences

They do, but the election was not related to Twinkies, or Hostess. We have a Hostess bakery and this city is about as red as you can get.

Quoting L-188 (Reply 9):

Yup another kill for orginized labor

As opposed to another kill by folks like Romney? Did you ever see the ad with the guy who was told to build a 30 foot stage, which was used the next day to tell the workers that the plant was closing and that they were fired? Guy talking about building their own coffin - thanks to Romney.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 11):
Anyone care to bet that if Hostess' workers represented themselves (selected spokesmen, negotiators and leaders from among their own employees) that Hostess would still be around?

If they represented themselves then they would be working for minimum wage with zero benefits.

Maybe if we had a minimum wage that was above the poverty like (and a national public health care program) the need to protect workers would diminish.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: 727LOVER
Posted 2012-11-16 11:10:43 and read 2336 times.

Bad timing since two states just legalized marijuana!

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: casinterest
Posted 2012-11-16 11:12:07 and read 2336 times.

There has been great disturbance in the force, I must go make sure my Funyons and Cheetos are still safe.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: KiwiRob
Posted 2012-11-16 11:18:40 and read 2475 times.

Quoting 727LOVER (Reply 23):
Bad timing since two states just legalized marijuana!

Smartest thing that ever happened in the US in my lifetime.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: srbmod
Posted 2012-11-16 11:33:16 and read 2456 times.

There's more than enough value in the brand portfolio of Hostess to resurrect the company or for someone to buy them out. They'll end up in the hands of either some private equity firm or sold to a company within the industry. I'm thinking either Flowers Foods or McKee Foods [Who makes Little Debbies], as I don't see Bimbo Bakeries USA getting the approval to acquire any Hostess assets as Bimbo is the #1 company in the industry and only last year acquired the #3 company to further strengthen their #1 position.

The union in question represents a little over a third of the employees at Hostess and it appears that Hostess management knew that they would never get the requested concessions from them so instead of dragging the demise of the company out, they gave them a date to agree by and when that didn't happen, they shut the doors.

Whether you like unions or not, when one union agrees to concessions only to see another union group within the company refuse to them and costing everyone their jobs, that's just not right nor is it fair and unfairly paints all unions in a negative light.

Hey Hostess could have given all of them the finger and moved production to Mexico......

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: Dreadnought
Posted 2012-11-16 11:54:30 and read 2473 times.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 22):
They do, but the election was not related to Twinkies, or Hostess. We have a Hostess bakery and this city is about as red as you can get.

I was talking about the union elections, where A) they gave negotiation rights to an outside firm, with their own agenda, and B) where they voted 92% to reject the contract proposals.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 22):
If they represented themselves then they would be working for minimum wage with zero benefits.

You have absolutely no basis for that conclusion. Tell me, what benefit did the outside firm bring to the table?

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: Geezer
Posted 2012-11-16 12:06:00 and read 2476 times.

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 3):
Jesus I thought unions were supposed to protect jobs no lose them.

They definitely ARE Rob;

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 4):
I guess elections DO have consequences....92% voted to reject the contract....100% now out of work. I bet those Teamsters drivers are happy with the Bakery union tonight.

Having been a dues paying member of the Teamsters for 41 years, here's my "best guess"; 18,000 union members who are now out of work will ALL be "greatly pissed"; (a few more than others) it's that FEW you need to "keep your eye on" if you're a member of Bakery Workers Union; I won't be surprised if we start seeing stories about Bakery Workers with bloody heads.

Quoting Nitrohelper (Reply 7):
Some other bakers will purchase parts of the company - Twinkies will survive along with some of the other best sellers...
Probably will be made by non-union workers...

Bingo ! You hit the nail right on the head, Nitrohelper ! That's EXACTLY what will happen.

Quoting slider (Reply 12):
Funniest Tweet I read on the matter--- "Parasites always kill their Host(ess)"....

You know, I keep on hearing about "Twitter"; I've never logged onto it; if they have stuff that clever often, maybe I'd better take a look ?

Quoting slider (Reply 12):
Too true. Once again, a death knell for unions. Hostess will have their assets purchased, the recipe for Twinkies and all that stuff will continue and 18,000 people are now out of a job. Welcome to Obama's Amerika, circa 2012.

Another accurate post; that's exactly what will happen, however, in all fairness, in this case............it's NOT all Obama's fault. Sure, I know Obama is "in bed" with more than one union boss, and I KNOW all of said bosses are telling their members to "VOTE DEMOCRAT !", but it's a little more complicated than that. ( the Unions have ALWAYS told their member to "vote democrat"...........until Bobby Kennedy double-crossed the mob, and the Teamsters started telling members to vote Republican for a few years. So if you're a union member.......forget about what the damned union tells you to do.........forget about "what's good for the union, and what's good for you.........worry about what's good for the COUNTRY; ( because in the end, that's the ONLY place you have to live in)
( unless you're Mayor Bloomberg; I hear he has a "place" somewhere else ) (lucky him)

First, the idea of having a union to "represent" and "look out for" the members is a VERY WORTHY "idea"; but like all great ideas, "the devil is in the details" as they say; like all workers, union workers ALL want to make more money, have better working conditions, and have more job security; (who doesn't ?) The problem is, this only works in a "perfect world"; as most intelligent people are aware, we DON"T live in a "perfect world";

So how does a union "work", anyway ? I only feel highly qualified to say a lot about the union I paid dues to for 41 years........The Brotherhood of Teamsters. I have known THOUSANDS of teamster members over the years; but I have only seen pathetically FEW who were "interested enough" to make the slightest attempt to take a HARD, COLD LOOK at the organization they are sending their dues to, month after month, year after year; it's called "apathy"; if you don't pay attention to who's "handling the money", pretty soon, THEY aren't "looking out" for YOU, they're "looking out" for THEM ! And the Teamsters Union is the classic example of WHY unions ALWAYS "run amuck" !

Early on, we elected Jimmy Hoffa to "lead" the Teamsters; Hoffa came to Cincinnati once while I was in Local 100, made a fantastic speech at Music Hall to a packed house; he talked one-on-one to EVERY member who wanted to talk to him; (quite unlike any other Teamster General President, before or since) Hoffa was almost certainly the most qualified man to run a union who ever lived ! He was smart as a whip, he really CARED about the members, and there never has been, never will be, a tougher guy to negotiate with the "schmucks" who ALWAYS have, ALWAYS will, run the trucking companies. The only problem was, like ALL tough guys who get unlimited power, he let it go "straight to his head", (that was just mistake No.1) Fatal mistake No.2 was when he decided to "get in bed" with THE MOB, and that led to MANY things, NONE of which were good for the "rank and file" (as they are so fond of calling the membership.) A LOT of people "at the top" got very rich", many many new casinos "sprang up" in Las Vegas, (every single one of which was bought and paid for out of OUR pension fund, and in the "end" , (just like ALWAYS happens) Jimmy Hoffa got DEAD ! ( you deal with the devil, you pay the price.......every time)

Now.........here's what a lot of people apparently fail to comprehend; the exact same "forces" which wrecked the Teamsters Union didn't just stop there and "go away" ! Those same "forces" have been with mankind from the very beginning, and they will BE with us until the end ! I'm speaking about GREED, APATHY, (don't worry about it, someone else will take care of it) LUST for POWER, LUST for MONEY............(the list goes on and on) Hey.....I'm NOT a preacher; I don't even go to to church; but I have been watching the people in this world for 80 years now, and they ALWAYS have, and they ALWAYS will...........do the exact same things; the people at the top will ALWAYS steal from the people at the bottom; (whether they are at the "top" of the U.S. Government, the securities industry (Wall Street), the health care industry, you name it; it's human nature ! it's there, in your genes, when you're born; and unless something happens to "influence your mind" to stay on the "straight and narrow", there's a 95% chance even YOU will do the same things that ruined Jimmy Hoffa...........unless someone is keeping a very close track of what you're doing............(assuming of course, if you ever rise to a position of power, which seems to be the main "trigger" in this process.)

No, I really don't think I'm smart; (but I AM the most CURIOUS guy who ever became a Teamster ); curious enough, I took the trouble to see what was going on "at the top"; a hell of a lot of the very same things are currently still "going on" at "the top"............(in our Congress, in our Executive Branch, and for all I know, maybe even in our Judicial Branch)

(and please forgive me if I wandered off topic at all )

Charley

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: Silver1SWA
Posted 2012-11-16 12:43:33 and read 2471 times.

So twitter is full of reports of empty store shelves as everyone makes a mad dash for one last Twinkie. These fools just don't get it. The Twinkie will live on, dammit!!   

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: Revelation
Posted 2012-11-16 13:38:29 and read 2459 times.

Quoting 727LOVER (Reply 23):
Bad timing since two states just legalized marijuana!

Yeah, total buzz kill!

Quoting casinterest (Reply 24):
There has been great disturbance in the force, I must go make sure my Funyons and Cheetos are still safe.

Indeed. I just checked, and it seems Kellog's Pop Tarts are ok so far.

Quoting srbmod (Reply 26):
Hey Hostess could have given all of them the finger and moved production to Mexico......

Given how much preservatives are in the Hostess products, they could move production to China and ship them in via container ship!

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: Geezer
Posted 2012-11-16 15:24:40 and read 2447 times.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 22):
If they represented themselves then they would be working for minimum wage with zero benefits.

Maybe if we had a minimum wage that was above the poverty like (and a national public health care program) the need to protect workers would diminish.



A "minimum wage" above the poverty line........." following that line of "reasoning" to it's logical conclusion...........why not just have a "minimum wage" the says all "workers" will be paid $100,000 per year; THEN all of these so-called "poor people" wouldn't have to worry so much about how "poor" they are ! They could all buy a big fine house, big fine Cadillac, giant TV, and live "the good life" ! (like all those "rich folks" (like Mitt Romney) that oughta pay MORE taxes! )

On the other hand...........I have a MUCH better idea ! How about just SCRAPPING the minimum wage laws altogether, leave the free market the hell alone, and let the law of supply and demand take care of EVERYTHING !

Here's an even BETTER idea than that..............what we "shoulda done" ( it's too late now ), we "shoulda" made Milton Friedman president, (while we still had him), then had him draw up detailed instructions for the management of the country for the next hundred years or so, and we wouldn't have to "suffer through" all of this BS very 4 years, and the country would still be doing JUST FINE !

Why does everyone just assume these snotty-nosed kids at McDonald's "need" a 2 dollar an hour "raise", when about half of them don't have enough sense to tie their own shoes ? Hold It...........I'm NOT talking about all of the GREAT young kids who work at McD's, (and all of the great A.net members, (who I'm SURE were dynamite employees when THEY were at McD's). I'm talking about this "new breed"...........(the one's who just stand and give you a blank stare when you order a coke, (and they say "ya wan nuts ?) Oh........I almost forgot..........NOW you want to GIVE them health care ? In case they O.D.? get knocked up ? Guess what: (true story, BTW) Right now, every time Miss A and I go to McD's, the tab is ALWAYS $16, $17, $18; ( for what ?) Every time we go to Ryan's in Terre Haute, (after 1PM and before 4PM, we GORGE on best green beans in Indiana, ditto mac & cheese, ditto fresh spinach, ditto ice cream, plus coconut creme pie, plus great coffee, AND.........about 4 lbs between us, of GREAT sirloin steak.............all for the princely sum of..........$ 11.55 ! ( and you STILL think it's OK for McD's to have to raise prices on their "average burgers" ? ) My next question is.........who's gonna give all the afore-mentioned snotty-noses a job, after Ronald McDonald becomes extinct ?

Charley

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: aloges
Posted 2012-11-16 15:24:52 and read 2450 times.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 30):
Given how much preservatives are in the Hostess products, they could move production to China and ship them in via container ship!

Hmm... wouldn't it be even more economical to dump them in the sea off the Japanese coast and wait for them to float across the ocean?   

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: Ken777
Posted 2012-11-16 16:01:26 and read 2440 times.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 27):
Tell me, what benefit did the outside firm bring to the table?

Higher wages & benefits than the company would have paid otherwise.

BTW, it doesn't seem that the company is managed very well - two previous filings in the last 10 years.

Blame it on the unions all you want, looks like management has been a dog for a decade.

Quoting Geezer (Reply 28):
So how does a union "work", anyway ?

Ask the various airline companies.

Quoting Geezer (Reply 31):
A "minimum wage" above the poverty line........." following that line of "reasoning" to it's logical conclusion...........why not just have a "minimum wage" the says all "workers" will be paid $100,000 per year;



At some point in the future $100K will be the poverty line, but not for a while.

Quoting Geezer (Reply 31):
On the other hand...........I have a MUCH better idea ! How about just SCRAPPING the minimum wage laws altogether, leave the free market the hell alone, and let the law of supply and demand take care of EVERYTHING

Anytime you have an employer paying below the poverty line you have various federal & state programs making up the difference. Stuff like Food Stamps and Medicaid.

I call that Corporate Welfare. Might be your cuppa tea, but it sure isn't mine.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: Dreadnought
Posted 2012-11-16 16:35:22 and read 2449 times.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 33):
Higher wages & benefits than the company would have paid otherwise.

Oh yeah, $0 is so good.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 33):
Quoting Geezer (Reply 31):
A "minimum wage" above the poverty line........." following that line of "reasoning" to it's logical conclusion...........why not just have a "minimum wage" the says all "workers" will be paid $100,000 per year;



At some point in the future $100K will be the poverty line, but not for a while.

And when $100K becomes minimum wage (Which works out to around $50 per hour), guess what happens to all the labor-intesive goods and services that you enjoy now?

Paying someone to mow your yard will cost $100. A McDonalds Happy meal will cost maybe $30. Mechanics will charge $1000 per hour to work on your car.

That will be fun.

Look, you want people at the bottom to get a better wage without triggering inflation? The way you do that is to reduce the number of people who compete for low-wage, low-skill jobs. The easiest way to do that in the short and medium term is to shut down the border to illegal immigration, and better yet, make it impossible for illegals already here to find a job, so that they go home on their own. That's guaranteed to result in such jobs popping up to $10-$20 per hour. A few things might go up in price (like vegetables) but you should not get the widespread inflation you would have if you simply mandated a minimum wage.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: ltbewr
Posted 2012-11-16 16:59:04 and read 2442 times.

Most likely Bimbo Baking of Mexico, which bought up a number of regional bakery brands in the USA as well as selling products made in the USA under the Bimbo brand mainly in markets with significant Mexican immigrants will buy parts of the former Hostess. They tried to buy the company or parts of it before several years ago but apparently some issues, including anti-trust conflicts, ending that bid.

Why did Hostess fail? It isn't just the pay and bennies of union workers, but mainly lousy products people won't buy as they used to and high costs.
Their lead bread product, "Wonder Bread' is chemical loaded phony junk food that is a joke. Wonder brand bread can't compete on price vs. supermarket house brand basic bread as well as the shift by consumers to similarly priced and far more healthier product from in-supermarket baked bread and of competitors.
The 'Twinkies' and similar unhealthy junk foods have are facing overall lower demand. If one wants any 'dessert' items consumers have shifted to better made products including once again from supermarket in-house and local bakeries.
They probably had too many bakery facilities in a declining market in high labor, energy and taxation locations while competitors probably shifted production to more distant locations with lower costs, including in places with low Union involvement contributed as well.

As to the Teamsters, many who drive large trucks should have little trouble getting jobs as truck drivers with the licenses and good experience are in major demand. The bakery workers themselves may have deep problems ever getting a like paying job again, but the cuts they were facing were putting them in not much better positions. I feel sorry for those who were only a few years from retirement or retirees who may see major cuts in their pensions.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: sw733
Posted 2012-11-16 17:04:55 and read 2437 times.

Quoting ltbewr (Reply 35):

I can't wait for a Bimbo Twinkie!!  

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: srbmod
Posted 2012-11-16 18:07:09 and read 2437 times.

Quoting ltbewr (Reply 35):
Most likely Bimbo Baking of Mexico, which bought up a number of regional bakery brands in the USA as well as selling products made in the USA under the Bimbo brand mainly in markets with significant Mexican immigrants will buy parts of the former Hostess. They tried to buy the company or parts of it before several years ago but apparently some issues, including anti-trust conflicts, ending that bid.

I highly doubt that Federal regulators would allow them to acquire any Hostess Brand assets considering Bimbo Baking USA is the #1 company in that market and last year acquired the #3 company, Sara Lee, and the combined company is twice as large as the #2 company, Flowers Foods.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: johns624
Posted 2012-11-16 20:04:01 and read 2426 times.

Eveerybody is concentrating on Twinkies but a major part was Wonder Bread. who eats white bread anymore? Everybody is into wheat and rye. Also, many people are trying to eat healthier. Who eats Twinkies and Ho-Ho's anymore? Sounds like bad management living on their laurels. Just like Pan-Am, they needed to change and didn't.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: EA CO AS
Posted 2012-11-16 20:19:38 and read 2427 times.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 13):
the company has been in CH 11 twice in ten years and yet they sell a ridiculously fast-selling product?

  

Consumption of these products has been falling like a rock due to more health-conscious decisions by consumers.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: Revelation
Posted 2012-11-16 20:21:04 and read 2431 times.

Twinkies are such a part of our culture.
Here's a Twinkies joke:

A young girl walks into a barber shop, eating Twinkies.
The barber begins to cut her hair.
He says, "Hey, you're getting hair on your Twinkies!"
She says, "Yeah, and my boobs are growing in too!"

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: seb146
Posted 2012-11-16 20:34:40 and read 2423 times.

Just before the Mayan calender ends.

Well played, Mayans. Well played.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: zippyjet
Posted 2012-11-16 21:23:26 and read 2430 times.

OMG! holy SH*T this is it the apocalypse/end days are already getting underway. Quick sheeple hoard those funky goodies chock full of chemicals I can't spell or pronounce that will make your poop glow in the dark. Hunker down in shelters with your purloined Twinkies and Ho Ho's. You can also use their white bread for anal/genital hygiene when your TP runs out!. Stick a fork in it peeps, we are done.
Here at A-Net in Non Av we can now start T vs. Kb> threads that is Twinkies vs. Krimpets or Ho Hos!     

I wonder if people will suceede from the United States to form a nation of Twinkies?

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: seb146
Posted 2012-11-16 22:20:45 and read 2425 times.

For some of us, no more twinkies is a good thing. Doc knows what I am talking about.

tryin' to lighten the mood....

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: QFA380
Posted 2012-11-17 02:29:40 and read 2412 times.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 43):
For some of us, no more twinkies is a good thing.


Gummi Bears for your confectionary needs?

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: Superfly
Posted 2012-11-17 08:20:16 and read 2408 times.

Will they get a bailout? Hostess is too big to fail....

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 4):
the Bakery union say “No way” and decided on a strike rather than take a pay cut and reduced benefits.

But wait a minute. Wouldn't they be covered by Obamacare if they took a cut in benefits?   

Quoting 727LOVER (Reply 23):
Bad timing since two states just legalized marijuana!


  

Quoting seb146 (Reply 41):
Just before the Mayan calender ends.

Well played, Mayans. Well played.


So THAT's what the calendar was about.

Quoting johns624 (Reply 38):
Also, many people are trying to eat healthier. Who eats Twinkies and Ho-Ho's anymore? Sounds like bad management living on their laurels. Just like Pan-Am, they needed to change and didn't.


Interesting you say that. Back when Hostess was popular with kids some 30+ years ago, childhood obesity wasn't an issue. Today we're supposedly all health conscious and yet more people are overweight. Goes to show little has to do with diet. These kids need to get outside and play.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: MD-90
Posted 2012-11-17 08:34:00 and read 2404 times.

Hostess was paying its workers 35% more than the national average. No wonder they couldn't stay in business.

http://www.thenewamerican.com/review...es-unions-and-the-death-of-hostess

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: Dreadnought
Posted 2012-11-17 08:53:17 and read 2406 times.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 33):
Higher wages & benefits than the company would have paid otherwise.

BTW, it doesn't seem that the company is managed very well - two previous filings in the last 10 years.

Blame it on the unions all you want, looks like management has been a dog for a decade.

Just a bit more information. The deal that the Union turned down, and would have saved the company, included "wage, benefit and work rule concessions but also gave Hostess Brands' 12 unions a 25 percent ownership stake in the company, representation on its Board of Directors and $100 million in reorganized Hostess Brands' debt."

And as the MD-90's post shows, the wage concessions still kept them way over the national average for similar workers, would have been made back within 3 years.

Quoting ltbewr (Reply 35):
The bakery workers themselves may have deep problems ever getting a like paying job again, but the cuts they were facing were putting them in not much better positions. I feel sorry for those who were only a few years from retirement or retirees who may see major cuts in their pensions.

Sorry, but they (the 92% who voted against a very fair and generous deal considering the position of the company) did this to themselves. I have absolutely no pity for them. I do pity the 8%, and the ones who crossed the picket lines in the final days who were willing to do what they could to save their company.

I hope that whatever is left of the pension funds is given to the 8%. Let the 92% suck air. Their greed and avarice killed their employer. The irony is striking, given the usual union talking points.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: Ken777
Posted 2012-11-17 09:21:50 and read 2404 times.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 34):
And when $100K becomes minimum wage (Which works out to around $50 per hour), guess what happens to all the labor-intesive goods and services that you enjoy now?

There is this thing called inflation.

My first car was a '68 BMW 2002 which was just over $3,000. Gas was about 32¢ a gallon.

A well made suit (say a 5 make) is up 10 fold.

And a dime was a nice tip when you helped ladies take groceries to their car.

It is reasonable to expect the minimum wage & poverty level to hit $100K. The poverty level will be the first to hit that level as conservatives will be working hard to keep minimum wage at a fraction of that level.

What you need to remember is that the wages will follow increases in pieces. COLA increases.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: IMissPiedmont
Posted 2012-11-17 09:29:37 and read 2398 times.

And all this argument and bickering over a company that has probably already lined up a buyer. Not to mention, but I will, it is a company that makes products that are hardly important to the US economy. Now if we could just McDonalds to shut down we'd be getting somewhere.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: seb146
Posted 2012-11-17 09:36:50 and read 2398 times.

Here is how I see the right-wing plan in action:

They don't want unions so workers can be paid less and have no benefits. Workers then have to pay hundreds or even thousands every month out of pocket for medical and retirement. They have to decide between food and rent and health care and retirement. But, they don't have to worry about retirement, because the right-wing would take away Social Security. So, people will just work for low wages until they die. That could be from starvation because, if the right-wing has it's way, there would be no more food stamps, either. All so corporations can make profits. No one would be able to get any schooling for a "good" job because the right-wing wants to put out of reach any funds for education for low and middle class families. Then, they turn around and blame the low and middle class families that they are not doing enough to support themselves and the ultra rich. Take away their bootstraps and tell them they have bootstraps to pull themselves up by.

We are only as strong as the weakest among us. I don't think multi-millionares are the weakest among us.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: DocLightning
Posted 2012-11-17 09:37:18 and read 2404 times.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 43):
For some of us, no more twinkies is a good thing. Doc knows what I am talking about.

Well, I'm sure I have NO idea...   

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: tugger
Posted 2012-11-17 09:37:40 and read 2412 times.

Quoting johns624 (Reply 38):
who eats white bread anymore? Everybody is into wheat and rye. Also, many people are trying to eat healthier. Who eats Twinkies and Ho-Ho's anymore? Sounds like bad management living on their laurels.

Are you serious? Many, many people still eat white bread and Twinkies and Ho-Ho's. I can't think of many people that don't buy white bread in addition to whatever healthy version they also buy. The thing is the "white bread" isn't the same as Wonderbread, it is store branded "white bread" (butter top, split top, "healthy white", etc). I myself prefer sourdough bread but most always have a loaf of some type or "white bread" as well.

The good and sad thing is that Ho-Ho's and WonderBread and Twinkie's will be fine and continue on, made by someone else. It is just these union jobs that this union decided to play chicken with that are lost. I believe it was a dumb move on their part but it was calculated on their part and they thought worth the risk, and they lost by not realizing that the brands don't need to same people making them to still survive, have value, and be popular.

Tugg

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: DocLightning
Posted 2012-11-17 09:38:11 and read 2409 times.

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 39):
Consumption of these products has been falling like a rock due to more health-conscious decisions by consumers.

And pot just got legalized in two states. Go figure.  

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: johns624
Posted 2012-11-17 10:55:46 and read 2406 times.

Quoting MD-90 (Reply 46):
Hostess was paying its workers 35% more than the national average. No wonder they couldn't stay in business.

What I found so sad about this is not how much Hostess paid but how little the other workers are paid. $12 an hour with no benefits isn't much at all. I'm sure the execs all are making many times that with benefits. On second thought, since that median included Hostess' wages, the average is probably less. That's even sadder.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: PHX787
Posted 2012-11-17 11:33:16 and read 2409 times.

Quoting Braniff747SP (Reply 2):
No job is better than some job, apparently.
Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 3):
Jesus I thought unions were supposed to protect jobs no lose them.
Quoting slider (Reply 12):
The dogs bark and the caravan marches on...
Quoting slider (Reply 12):
Too true. Once again, a death knell for unions. Hostess will have their assets purchased, the recipe for Twinkies and all that stuff will continue and 18,000 people are now out of a job. Welcome to Obama's Amerika, circa 2012.

I always tell Union supporters, especially the ones who support strike action: Would you rather sacrifice some things and keep your job, or lose 18,000 jobs altogether? Unions are done for after this mess (non-essential unions, that is.)

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 39):
Consumption of these products has been falling like a rock due to more health-conscious decisions by consumers.

I do agree we may see some lowering in obesity rates   

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: Superfly
Posted 2012-11-17 11:46:19 and read 2408 times.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 55):
I do agree we may see some lowering in obesity rates



Hardly.
As I said above, people need to exercise if they want to lose weight. As I said in reply #45;
Hostess was popular with kids some 30+ years ago, childhood obesity wasn't an issue. Today we're supposedly all health conscious and yet more people are overweight. Goes to show little has to do with diet. These kids need to get outside and play.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: iowaman
Posted 2012-11-17 18:10:18 and read 2397 times.

Six boxes of twinkies just sold on eBay for $202.50.  Wow!http://www.ebay.com/itm/6-boxes-HOST...sh=item1c2d7770a5&autorefresh=true

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: Mir
Posted 2012-11-17 18:57:33 and read 2391 times.

Quoting johns624 (Reply 54):
What I found so sad about this is not how much Hostess paid but how little the other workers are paid. $12 an hour with no benefits isn't much at all. I'm sure the execs all are making many times that with benefits.

Reportedly, they did triple their CEO's salary as they were going through bankruptcy earlier this year. Several other executives also received raises. That's pretty much a textbook way to turn the employees against you.

-Mir

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: WrenchBender
Posted 2012-11-17 19:06:05 and read 2391 times.

Quoting iowaman (Reply 57):
Six boxes of twinkies just sold on eBay for $202.50.  http://www.ebay.com/itm/6-boxes-HOST...sh=item1c2d7770a5&autorefresh=true

LMAO, we still have an ample supply up here and will have for a long time. Saputo makes Twinkies in the GWN under the Vachon brand name.

http://www.chicagonow.com/show-me-ch...rands-twinkies-rip-or-not-so-fast/

WrenchBneder

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: zippyjet
Posted 2012-11-17 19:49:43 and read 2396 times.

Quoting iowaman (Reply 57):

What drugs did those E-Bay buyers take?   

Quoting tugger (Reply 52):
Quoting johns624 (Reply 38):
who eats white bread anymore? Everybody is into wheat and rye. Also, many people are trying to eat healthier. Who eats Twinkies and Ho-Ho's anymore? Sounds like bad management living on their laurels.

The Honey Boo Boo gang of rednecks; that's their diet staple. With Hostess and Wonderbread gone they will be a case of failure to thrive and be an historical footnote in the macabre when it comes to bad taste.   

I'm waiting for a Law And Order SVU episode: Ripped from the headlines! bizarre sex cult arrested who fornicate with Wonder Bread and Twinkies!

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: RayChuang
Posted 2012-11-17 20:28:22 and read 2393 times.

Don't think Twinkies, Ho-Hos and Ding Dongs will be gone forever. These products have a LOT of production recognition in the USA (especially among the Baby Boom generation!) and you know someone will buy up the assets of Hostess and restart production of these products again--probably within 18 months.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: Dreadnought
Posted 2012-11-17 22:18:42 and read 2390 times.

LOL! The Union is declaring victory in the case of Hostess.

http://bangordailynews.com/2012/11/1...a-strong-message-of-union-resolve/

Quote:
Hopefully, this will be an example to other companies not to [try to] break their unions.”

“I think we’re the first ones who have stood up and said, ‘We’re not going to let you get away with it,’” said Sue Tapley, the strike captain on hand Friday morning at the Biddeford plant, which employed nearly 600 people. “You can fight them. You can shut them down.”

They do have a lot of nerve, I'll give them that...

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: jetblueguy22
Posted 2012-11-17 22:39:39 and read 2391 times.

Quoting zippyjet (Reply 60):
What drugs did those E-Bay buyers take?  

People are nuts. I remember when the xbox (possibly the Wii) came out someone bought the box for like 500 bucks!

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 62):
LOL! The Union is declaring victory in the case of Hostess.

Now I'm trying my best here not to be anti union. But that is absurd. A victory is if they got what they wanted and they kept their jobs. Instead, they are now unemployed. I'm all for everybody getting their fare share, but their ignorance cost 18,000 people their jobs. It's quite a shame. All these snack foods were horrible for you, but they are apart of American culture. If people feel the need to unionize that is their thing. But there has to be a point, where you realize there is nothing else to be gained. But it sounds like management didn't help their cause with the nice raises they received.
Blue

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: Dreadnought
Posted 2012-11-17 23:26:40 and read 2386 times.

Quoting jetblueguy22 (Reply 63):
Now I'm trying my best here not to be anti union. But that is absurd. A victory is if they got what they wanted and they kept their jobs. Instead, they are now unemployed.

It's the point I've been trying to make for years. It's one thing when workers organize within a company, elect spokesmen and negotiators from among themselves. It's something completely different when you hire a third party business (which is what these big unions are) to come in and represent you. They say their business is to protect your interests, but they have their own agenda, their own profits to think about.

Quoting jetblueguy22 (Reply 63):
But it sounds like management didn't help their cause with the nice raises they received.

Where did you hear about raises?

[Edited 2012-11-17 23:27:31]

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: Geezer
Posted 2012-11-18 00:18:00 and read 2389 times.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 33):
Anytime you have an employer paying below the poverty line you have various federal & state programs making up the difference. Stuff like Food Stamps and Medicaid.

I call that Corporate Welfare. Might be your cuppa tea, but it sure isn't mine.

Ken......

Anytime you have an employer paying below the poverty line you have various federal & state programs making up the difference. Stuff like Food Stamps and Medicaid.

Those are your words, not mine; where do you suppose all of those "various federal & State programs" come from ?

They all started with guys like FDR, then guys like LBJ, then bozo's like Jimmy Carter..........everyone of which "appealed to the masses" with free this, free that, don't worry, your gubmint will take care U......and then there's the incredible invention of the ONE outfit that can "make SOMETHING out of NOTHING" , the ONLY outfit that can take PAPER, put green ink on it, and say......"That's money!" Just like that ! Ever wonder why a damned scrap of paper one minute is suddenly "worth" a thousand buck the next minute ? I doubt that you've ever worried about it; you said something a ways back about "inflation"; like "inflation" is BAD ! Don't you understand what causes "inflation" ? Do you think it's just "bad luck" like hurricane Sandy ?

Why do you suppose the government (under FDR) in 1935 told ALL AMERICANS.........you are NOT allowed to own gold any more ! Just like that ! Why you suppose they did that ? What if Obama tells you, "you can't own no more Macs ! All Macs are to be "turned in", to be run over by a thundering herd of buffalos ! From now on.......you'll buy PC's ! Period. Think it can't happen? It's ALREADY happening ! he's ALREADY told everyone...you GOTTA buy insurance!
All my life, the Feds said you can't buy this and that, now you must buy something they tell you to.

And all these so-called "laws"; can't do this, can't do that, can't smoke dope, or they stick you in the joint for a LONG time ! all of a sudden, you can jump in your Cadillac, take a little drive, and buy your "pot", dope, weed, MJ, whatever you call it ..........at Wal Mart ? (I'm not sure where they're gonna sell it just yet)

Does all this sound crazy? No wonder......it IS crazy! Brought to us by a crazy government, run by crazy people!
Oh....about those "laws"; actually, there's two kind of "laws"; the kind that the bunch in DC makes; which you can either "obey or break", depending on your mood; then there the other kind; the kind you CAN"T break, even if you try to. (and the federal government has been "trying to" break a few for a long time now; like saying that piece of green paper is "worth" so much $$$$ That "inflation" you mentioned is the proof that you can't make money out of thin air, paper, and green ink! Oh, you can print it, but the law of supply and demand sooner or later makes it worth nothing! You've already noticed that; you said so when you said $100,000 will BE the "poverty line" "someday"; the way things are going now........"someday" might become "next month" ! I have no idea what causes hurricanes, droughts, stuff like that; but it's crystal clear what causes money to become worthless; and the "process" is accelerating as we speak !

Fortunately, we have this forum, where everyone can blame everyone else, we can all point fingers at the guy on either side, but if you throw a republican "up", he's gonna come right back down ! (That's another one of those "laws" you can't break.......(the law of gravity) there's a WHOLE bunch of them; and a lot of people are trying two break all of them. but they can't....not for long.......because it's impossible !

I know I haven't explained all this as well as I wanted to, but she says I gotta get to bed now; maybe I'll be back later.

Charley

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: Revelation
Posted 2012-11-18 06:47:20 and read 2380 times.

Quoting Mir (Reply 58):
Reportedly, they did triple their CEO's salary as they were going through bankruptcy earlier this year. Several other executives also received raises. That's pretty much a textbook way to turn the employees against you.

See, it's not just the poor who vote for Santa Claus, these clowns gave themselves a raise during bankruptcy!

So much for the makers vs the takers, here the makers are the takers.

Quoting RayChuang (Reply 61):
you know someone will buy up the assets of Hostess and restart production of these products again--probably within 18 months

Capitalist theology at its best.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 64):
It's the point I've been trying to make for years. It's one thing when workers organize within a company, elect spokesmen and negotiators from among themselves. It's something completely different when you hire a third party business (which is what these big unions are) to come in and represent you.

I can see why you've failed to make your point after years of trying, because it's wrong. Why should the labor movement be divided? Just because you don't like big labor? I'm sure you know that management hires "labor consultants" from third party businesses to get as much knowledge and experience on their side, and it'd work to their favor to have the workforce organized by inexperienced locals.

However, certain people saw this one coming a long time ago:



[Edited 2012-11-18 06:48:52]

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: Dreadnought
Posted 2012-11-18 08:00:29 and read 2379 times.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 66):
See, it's not just the poor who vote for Santa Claus, these clowns gave themselves a raise during bankruptcy!

I've heard this twice now. Source please.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 66):
I can see why you've failed to make your point after years of trying, because it's wrong.

Agency theory and Moral Hazard theory is wrong, he says. LOL!

Quoting Revelation (Reply 66):
Why should the labor movement be divided? Just because you don't like big labor? I'm sure you know that management hires "labor consultants" from third party businesses to get as much knowledge and experience on their side, and it'd work to their favor to have the workforce organized by inexperienced locals.

Such consultants work in the background, and management is 100% free to ignore their recommendations entirely - and often do. The consultants also are also paid by the hour, and not a percentage of the company's revenue. The consultants do not stand to benefit from an adversarial relationship between Labor and Management - a Union does. Big Labor is a business, with their own revenues, payroll, political and social agenda to worry about - introducing them into the mix brings in elements that may be contrary to the desires of both employees and management, as the Hostess case shows.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 62):
LOL! The Union is declaring victory in the case of Hostess.

http://bangordailynews.com/2012/11/1...olve/

As you can see in this article. Either the Union is lying, they had no intention of causing Hostess to go under and really thought that they could get Hostess to cave, or what they are saying in the article is true, that they stood to gain either way - in which case the employees' trust in them was sorely misplaced do to severe Moral Hazard issues.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: mt99
Posted 2012-11-18 09:02:13 and read 2375 times.

So guys. quick poll..

How many Hostess Products have you bought in 2012:

mt99: 0


#lackofinnovation

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: Revelation
Posted 2012-11-18 10:03:46 and read 2374 times.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 67):

Such consultants work in the background, and management is 100% free to ignore their recommendations entirely - and often do. The consultants also are also paid by the hour, and not a percentage of the company's revenue. The consultants do not stand to benefit from an adversarial relationship between Labor and Management - a Union does. Big Labor is a business, with their own revenues, payroll, political and social agenda to worry about - introducing them into the mix brings in elements that may be contrary to the desires of both employees and management, as the Hostess case shows.

Nice to focus on the consultant side of the discussion instead of explaining how it benefits labor to be divided.

How is it then that labor consultants benefit most by labor peace?

Quoting mt99 (Reply 68):
#lackofinnovation

Come now, Twinkies are like the cockroach and the alligator: they've been perfected across the eons of time, so there's no need for innovation. 

However, we shouldn't joke during such a somber occasion:



[Edited 2012-11-18 10:12:43]

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: seb146
Posted 2012-11-18 10:09:36 and read 2374 times.

Quoting Geezer (Reply 65):
everyone of which "appealed to the masses" with free this, free that, don't worry, your gubmint will take care U

Corporations sure as hell won't take care of their workers! When a worker is being paid $8 an hour, has an education but also has to pay for housing, food, health care, they turn to the government because their corporate overlords refuse to help by paying a living wage.

I am all for making profits, but what about people? Don't we need people to make those profits?

Not according to the corporate eliete. The people are just there to make and sell the products. If they get sick and die, it is their fault. If they get scurvy and can not work, that is the worker's fault. If a worker is homeless, that is the worker's fault.

Quoting mt99 (Reply 68):
How many Hostess Products have you bought in 2012:

mt99: 0

seb146: 0

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: Revelation
Posted 2012-11-18 10:20:06 and read 2376 times.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 67):
I've heard this twice now. Source please.

New York Times:

Quote:

The Teamsters, which has 6,700 members at Hostess, said it played an instrumental role in ousting Hostess’s previous chief executive, Brian J. Driscoll, this year after the board tripled his compensation to $2.55 million.

The article also explains a lot of background people here seem to be ignoring. It really is a combination of coming out of the last BK with lots of debt, indeed the high price of labor, bad blood between management and the employees, and of course a poor market for many of its products.

Ref: http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2012/11/...ess-brands-says-it-will-liquidate/

Quoting seb146 (Reply 70):
Not according to the corporate eliete.

Indeed.

Quote:

It's good to be chief executive.

American CEOs saw their pay spike 15 percent last year, after a 28 percent pay rise the year before, according to a report by GMI Ratings cited by The Guardian. Meanwhile, workers saw their inflation-adjusted wages fall 2 percent in 2011, according to the Labor Department.

That's in line with a trend that dates back three decades. CEO pay spiked 725 percent between 1978 and 2011, while worker pay rose just 5.7 percent, according to a study by the Economic Policy Institute released on Wednesday. That means CEO pay grew 127 times faster than worker pay.

Seems the bad economy isn't reaching the executive suite.

Ref: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0.../ceo-pay-worker-pay_n_1471685.html

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: Dreadnought
Posted 2012-11-18 14:53:26 and read 2376 times.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 69):
Nice to focus on the consultant side of the discussion instead of explaining how it benefits labor to be divided.

Unity within a company is fine. Unity with other companies' workforce is irrelevant.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 69):
How is it then that labor consultants benefit most by labor peace?

You mean the consultants hired by management? They will get called back and improve their reputation (and thus earning ability) by leaving their clients with a happy/satisfied workforce with the productivity that comes with it. That's what management wants.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 71):

The article also explains a lot of background people here seem to be ignoring. It really is a combination of coming out of the last BK with lots of debt, indeed the high price of labor, bad blood between management and the employees, and of course a poor market for many of its products.

No question the company had big problems. One possible explanation for the salary raises is that the Board of Directors was afraid of losing key people at this time.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 71):

Seems the bad economy isn't reaching the executive suite.

A problematic trend, I agree. On another subject I, I would agree with much higher taxation levels on salaries greater than $1 million per year (including stocks and options), if Cap gains taxes are kept low. But in the end the money for those salaries belongs to the shareholders and the BODs. If they want to pay absurd amounts for their management team, that's their decision.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: Geezer
Posted 2012-11-18 15:41:27 and read 2371 times.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 71):
Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 67):
I've heard this twice now. Source please.

That's in line with a trend that dates back three decades. CEO pay spiked 725 percent between 1978 and 2011, while worker pay rose just 5.7 percent, according to a study by the Economic Policy Institute released on Wednesday. That means CEO pay grew 127 times faster than worker pay.

There's the beginning of the problem, right there!

New York Times:
[/quote]

Giving the NYT as a "source" has about as much credibility as giving the National Enquire, (or any other super-market tabloid) let's face it; the ONLY people who even bother to read the Times any more, are liberals looking for another dose of "liberal cool-aide.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 71):
The Teamsters, which has 6,700 members at Hostess, said it played an instrumental role in ousting Hostess’s previous chief executive, Brian J. Driscoll, this year after the board tripled his compensation to $2.55 million.

Not having the slightest knowledge about the inner working of Hostess, I will assume the above is true; if it is, (and if the Teamsters DID in fact do as they said they did, then I think the Teamsters did a very good thing. So Brian J. Driscoll got the "axe"? I only hope the people "wielding the axe" had the forethought to KEEP about $2.25 million of that ridiculous sum in the company treasury.

But this begs yet another question............WHO was responsible for Brian J. Driscoll being "compensated" this ridiculous amount in the first place ? I sincerely hope the "Board of Directors" still has that axe.......as I think there are a few more "heads" which need to roll.


The article also explains a lot of background people here seem to be ignoring. It really is a combination of coming out of the last BK with lots of debt, indeed the high price of labor, bad blood between management and the employees, and of course a poor market for many of its products.

Read the above paragraph a few times and ask yourself a few questions; obviously, companies coming out of BK are ALWAYS going to have "a lot of debt"; and.....the "high price of labor"....."high" relative to "what" ? Some jamoke named Brian J. Driscoll who sits on his fat ass 90% of the time, and "plays" at being a "big shot" ? I can guarantee you, there is a LOT of so-called "high priced labor" out there, working for companies that are "doing" just fine, and no one is screaming about them being so "high priced" !

Hostess Brands, (or what ever they call the company) has been and is suffering from a combination of very common "ailments" (all of which have already been accurately pointed out on this thread) you can sit around and make jokes about "twinkles", and "ding dongs" and all of the rest of the "stuff" this company produces all day long, but you are coming no closer to a solution for the 18,000 people who find themselves OUT OF WORK, out of income, just before Christmas, (and for anyone not "believing" in Christmas), just at the beginning of the season where you need money to keep your house warm, your children fed, and some gas for your car so you can go look for more work. For anyone seeing this as an "opportunity" to "make silly jokes"...........apparently YOU have never "been there"......I have; so I don't think it's "funny" at all.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 71):
American CEOs saw their pay spike 15 percent last year, after a 28 percent pay rise the year before, according to a report by GMI Ratings cited by The Guardian. Meanwhile, workers saw their inflation-adjusted wages fall 2 percent in 2011, according to the Labor Department.


I won't even ask for a source about that, as I have no problem believing it's absolutely true; this is the way it works, it's the way it has ALWAYS worked, and it's the way it will CONTINUE to work.........until SOMEONE takes the initiative
to change it. The BIG problem is..........most of the time, people who "come out of the woodwork" with grand ideas for "changing things" are almost ALWAYS charlatans, scam artists, and schmucks; ( I can give you an excellent example if you so desire)


IMO, (notice there is no H), it's almost certainly TOO LATE for the unfortunate folks at Hostess Brands; when you decide to work for an employer, you'd better choose one who is engaged in a business that has a long and bright future; This company had all of their "eggs in one basket"...........hey....don't believe me ? when I was a kid, going to high school, my father operated a narrow gauge train at Armco Steel, in Middletown, Ohio. When I got out of school, I got a job at Armco; anyone just hiring into Armco always started out on "labor reserve"; youn went to Armco everyday, hoping for an "opening"........some days you worked, some days you didn't. but you ended up working all over the place........there were a few "great" jobs there, and a hell of a lot of "lousy" jobs; don't laugh.......one of the "great" jobs......(because it was "easy",,,,,was actually scraping the pigeon s**t off of the railroad trestles ! working in "blue furnace" was the absolute WORST......140 degrees, even with a bunch opt big fans blowing 140 degree hot air on you all day. Finally, I just quit ! My father said........Armco will BE THERE.......there will ALWAYS be a demand for steel ! Guess what........he was half right ! the problem being, the people buying the steel don't give a damn where it comes from!

Every time we go to the super market, Krogers, Aldi, Wal Mart.........there are always lots and lots of cookies, do-nuts, and other less than nutritious "stuff:, so I KNOW there is still quite a demand for stuff like Hostess makes / made; but the demand is not nearly as big as it was, there is a LOT of competion, (much of which isn't encumbered by greedy schmucks like Brian J. Driscoll), so that gives them and "edge"; and that's all it takes......just a tiny "edge"......and bingo..........18,000 people out of work, a month before New Years. It's sad; very, very sad.

Charley

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: Ken777
Posted 2012-11-18 16:43:18 and read 2372 times.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 55):
Would you rather sacrifice some things and keep your job, or lose 18,000 jobs altogether?

They pretty well made their decision clear. But this is something like the second or third time in bankruptcy. Woner how much the "workers" gave up and how much more the executives were able to make. it's a privately held company so

Quoting zippyjet (Reply 60):
The Honey Boo Boo gang of rednecks; that's their diet staple.

IIRC, there is a group of rednecks who believe Twinkies is a breakfast food.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 62):
They do have a lot of nerve, I'll give them that...

Maybe their tired of games. The reality is that a cut in pay might last for a brief time. Or it might not even last until the company failed to go out of bankruptcy. If the company folds in the FIRST week of a strike while in bk protection than it is hard to see any real opportunity for them to move forward - even with another employee cut.

Quoting Geezer (Reply 65):
Anytime you have an employer paying below the poverty line you have various federal & state programs making up the difference. Stuff like Food Stamps and Medicaid.

Which is what I call Corporate Welfare. It's the government subsidizing businesses with taxpayer funds. It's not enough that we give industries all the loopholes the lobbyists can pay for, we gotta pay more with below poverty level wages and related corporate welfare.

Quoting Geezer (Reply 65):
where do you suppose all of those "various federal & State programs" come from ?

It comes from people who won't stand for kids going hungry, sick people lying in the gutter, etc. We have real poverty in this country and a real need for programs that don't leave us looking like the Streets of Calcutta.

Quoting Geezer (Reply 65):
he's ALREADY told everyone...you GOTTA buy insurance!

Well I gotta agree that I prefer a system that simply delivers an effective universal system based on taxes, with the ability to buy private insurance if desired. Cuts the price of private insurance 80% (based on my experience) and delivers better overall care. (Did I ever mention that the US is 22nd in the world in infant mortality? And that we are tied at 22nd place with Cuba? Bloody Cuba? Pretty hard to brag about that one.)

Quoting Geezer (Reply 65):
And all these so-called "laws"; can't do this, can't do that, can't smoke dope, or they stick you in the joint for a LONG time ! all of a sudden, you can jump in your Cadillac, take a little drive, and buy your "pot", dope, weed, MJ, whatever you call it ..........at Wal Mart ? (I'm not sure where they're gonna sell it just yet)

And the long haul truck drivers can make a brief pot stop, pick up a joint or two for the road. Sorry, my preference is to keep it illegal. Stop going after the small time uses, but keep it something that we make an effort to avoid. Some years ago on a business trip Down Under I watched an ABC (Aussie version of the BBC) TV show on some of the medical problems related to pot. Having part of a tongue cut out (cancers) and a long rehab learning to speak was at the top of the list.   

BTW, with all the blame thrown on the unions maybe we should take some time to recognize that Hostess basically made nutritional crap. A diabetic generator that will not be missed any place related to good health. It's one of those products that should have a health care tax added on based on the medical conditions it can cause. Just like soda.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: mt99
Posted 2012-11-18 17:11:05 and read 2368 times.

Quoting Geezer (Reply 73):
Every time we go to the super market, Krogers, Aldi, Wal Mart.........there are always lots and lots of cookies, do-nuts, and other less than nutritious "stuff:, so I KNOW there is still quite a demand for stuff like Hostess makes / made; but the demand is not nearly as big as it was, there is a LOT of competion, (much of which isn't encumbered by greedy schmucks like Brian J. Driscoll), so that gives them and "edge"; and that's all it takes......just a tiny "edge"......and bingo..........18,000 people out of work, a month before New Years. It's sad; very, very sad.

So did you buy Hostess products? or did you buy the competition?

News flash Geezer: Price is very very rarely the #1 driver for a purchase....

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: WrenchBender
Posted 2012-11-18 17:37:55 and read 2367 times.

Quoting mt99 (Reply 68):
How many Hostess Products have you bought in 2012:

mt99: 0

WrenchBender: 0, but if you really need a fix we still have Canadian Twinkies (for a price- Shipping Extra)

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: jpetekyxmd80
Posted 2012-11-18 19:58:23 and read 2376 times.

Quoting Geezer (Reply 73):

There's the beginning of the problem, right there!

New York Times:

Giving the NYT as a "source" has about as much credibility as giving the National Enquire, (or any other super-market tabloid) let's face it; the ONLY people who even bother to read the Times any more, are liberals looking for another dose of "liberal cool-aide.[/quote]


This is the absolute height unconscionable delusion and hypocrisy. Time, after time, after time we have all seen you post the most outrageous examples of absolutel lies and drivel (particularly about the President. i.e. how he never even attended college etc) almost exclusively from your treasure trove of e-mail forwards that are almost always proven to be total BS. And then you have the balls to dismiss the NYT for 'credibility'! Incredible! I'm not even talking about Fox News vs. CNN or NYT or whatever. I wish I had kept a list of absolute crap 'sources' you have used to support your fairytales and how 95% of people would think you're a complete whack job for it.

There are people- many people from many spectrums- who simply believe what they want to believe, and don't care what the truth is. Some can be liberal, some can be conservative. But you are most certainly one of them. Do you really doubt the massive disparity in upper management salaries and standard salaries that has developed just because the New York Times happened to report it?

I thought age was supposed to bring wisdom. You are about as clueless and out of touch with reality as anyone I have yet to encounter, it is absolutely astounding.

[Edited 2012-11-18 20:01:36]

[Edited 2012-11-18 20:10:55]

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: itsjustme
Posted 2012-11-18 20:30:51 and read 2376 times.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 67):
I've heard this twice now. Source please.
http://americablog.com/2012/11/hoste...Americablog+%28AMERICAblog+News%29

The CEO prior to the current one (a guy named Rayburn) not only tripled his salary but cut himself a deal so that even if he was fired "for cause" (say for embezzlement), he would still collect nearly a $2 million severance. Not bad for a CEO who played a role in his company going bankrupt. And the current CEO, Mr. Rayburn took charge in March. He promptly cut the "annual" salaries of four top executives to $1 (while continuing to pay himself $125,000 a month) with the understand the salaries of the 4 execs would return to their regular amount in January of 2013. So for about 9 months, they took a pay cut. Smoke and mirrors. Also, Hostess went through six CEO's in 10 years. Each was charged with turning the company around but instead, looted the company.

I wouldn't be too quick to fault the employees or the union in this case.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: seb146
Posted 2012-11-18 20:44:01 and read 2375 times.

Quoting itsjustme (Reply 78):
I wouldn't be too quick to fault the employees or the union in this case.

As long as there are unions, they will always blame the unions.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: stratosphere
Posted 2012-11-18 21:46:46 and read 2376 times.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 79):
As long as there are unions, they will always blame the unions.

While I have my issues with particular unions..I can maybe relate to these people.. It doesn't matter if they made above industry average for their job functions. When the workers see that their company is asking for concessions to survive all the while the top executives are lining their pockets it leaves a pretty bad taste in their mouths..I know I lived it at NWA when I took my first concession that was voted down and brought back until it passed by the Iam in 1993. Well funny how the executives treated themselves to a huge raise and bonus for getting us to swallow that paycut.. Do not know the circumstances in this case but it sounds pretty similar. Ok they might have lost their jobs much like I did in 2005. Sometimes you just have to say enough is enough. I had to start over and am better for it.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: Geezer
Posted 2012-11-18 21:49:39 and read 2380 times.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 70):
Corporations sure as hell won't take care of their workers! When a worker is being paid $8 an hour, has an education but also has to pay for housing, food, health care, they turn to the government because their corporate overlords refuse to help by paying a living wage.

Seb;

Let me ask you something.....how much do you actually know about how corporations "work" ? Have you even taken a college business course ? Have you ever applied for, and held a securities license......either a state license, or a NASD license, (which you must have to sell any product which sells in more than one state, such as mutual funds, or any stock which is traded on a national stock exchange ?) The reason I ask is this; if you ever have, or if you ever do apply for a NASD license, you will be required to do a WHOLE LOT of studying, and you will be required to take an examination; in order to have any chance of passing that exam, you will NEED to know A LOT about corporations, how they are organized, and a WHOLE bunch of other "stuff".

Now.......at one point in my years of driving trucks, I thought it would be "cool" to sell life insurance, so I studied for, and took the insurance exam, passed it, got my license, and became a "general agent" for Puritan Life, (all while working for Transcon Lines in the city ). I had fun selling insurance, but something else took my attention, as being "in insurance" got me "around" a lot of "higher class" people than I was working with in trucking. At that time, mutual funds were just "catching on"; but to sell them, you need a NASD license; (which took 6 months of intensive study, a lot of instruction, etc. and the exam.......two days, ALL DAY, both days! (it was a "bitch"!) But exams are only difficult if you don't know the answers to the questions. (I have ALWAYS had an easy time with exams, partly because I have a hell of a memory, and partly because I'm a VERY "determined" individual ). ( or used to be ) While studying for that test, I learned a LOT about corporations, how and why they sell shares to the public, etc. Now.......here's why I'm telling you all of this..........

A "chairity",( such as th Salvation Army, etc. etc.) is an organization which solicits funds from people who work (and are generous), and they HELP "other people" who have no money, are "down on their luck", or whatever.

A "corporation" is NOTHING like a charity; it is an organization which is set up by issuing common stock, then selling those "shares" to people as an "investment", and it's operated by a board of directors, who in turn nominate candidates for managerial positions, and the shareholders have a vote, according to the number of shares they own; ( which is called "having an equity position"); (completely different from being a "bond holder")

Almost all corporations are formed for the specific task of making a profit for their shareholders: (as technically, they are the "owners" of the corporation ). Now.....all corporations are required by law to do.........many, many things, among which are...they must have an annual share holders meeting. It's at this meeting, where "Joe Blow" who owns 3 shares can get up, and ask questions of the "big boys"; are you starting to get the picture here ?

People who run corporations "handle" other peoples money; they are paid to make smart decisions; (many of them actually DO make smart decisions ) ! But then we have the 'Brian J. Driscolls" of the world; THEY tend to see the corporation as a "big white horse", and they "ride" that big white horse for all he's worth ! (and many of these same schmucks end up in "the slammer" because of their greed, their selfishness, and their other "less than noble characteristics" ). (Remember Ken Lay ?)

ALL businesses MUST employ "labor"; (and again, if you know the slightest thing about business, you will realize that...."people tend to be compensated in direct proportion to the difficulty of replacing them"; as I'm sure you know, (and I'm NOT saying this to insult anyone, or to sound unkind), but it's MUCH less expensive to replace a kid working in the mail room, than it is a surgeon who spent half his life QUALIFYING to operate on your "whatever". THAT's just how business "works".

So when you say.....Corporations sure as hell won't take care of their workers! When a worker is being paid $8 an hour, has an education but also has to pay for housing, food, health care, they turn to the government because their corporate overlords refuse to help by paying a living wage.

They aren't supposed to ! It's NOT THIER JOB ! IT's YOUR job to "look out for you ! But after years and years of listening to the likes of the Clintons, the Pelosi's, the Reid's, and all the rest of the liberal cool aide dispensers, they have YOU thinking that A. it's any company you work for responsibility to provide you with a "living wage"; sorry, but it just isn't ! It's YOUR responsibility !

Let me ask you something.........( if this doesn't get you to thinking, nothing will ) I'm sure you have noticed how much money
NBA players, NFL players, MLB players, and other people like that make; millions, right ? why don't you ask Obama to DEMAND that all of these exorbitantly paid people "give up",say, 75% of their income, so we can "redistribute" it to all of these poor people being who are being "exploited" by their "corporate overlords" ? ( And let me know what he tells you )
And while we're at it, how about all of the "Hollywood hypocrites" giving up 75% of THEIR exorbitant income ? And the rappers?
Give me an hour, and I can think of where we can raise a few billion this way!

I am all for making profits, but what about people? Don't we need people to make those profits?

I think I have already answered that question adequately..........

Charley

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: seb146
Posted 2012-11-18 23:25:07 and read 2378 times.

Quoting Geezer (Reply 81):
A "chairity",( such as th Salvation Army, etc. etc.) is an organization which solicits funds from people who work (and are generous), and they HELP "other people" who have no money, are "down on their luck", or whatever.

A "corporation" is NOTHING like a charity; it is an organization which is set up by issuing common stock, then selling those "shares" to people as an "investment",

Try it from this angle:

"Charity" can only help as much as people give. So, if masses of people are working just to survive, the "charities" do not have much coming in and, therefore, can not help those who need it.

"Corporations" are for-profit for an elite few. I get that.

"Government" is the hated entity that is in between. Who understands that corporations will not ever help it's workers ever with things like food and health care and "government" also understands that charities can not help as much as they want because the funds are not there. So, government tries to help workers when unions can not. Like when pensions and health care are taken from workers.

Government is us and we understand that giving up power to an elite few is a very bad thing.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: SmithAir747
Posted 2012-11-18 23:39:36 and read 2380 times.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 69):
However, we shouldn't joke during such a somber occasion:

I love that photo (of the pallbearers carrying the Twinkie "casket" from church to hearse)!

The photo made me think of something:

Why has no casket manufacturer (eg, Batesville Casket Company) thought of designing a casket that looks like a Twinkie, for the Twinkie junkies to RIP in?

Similarly, how about a Subway sandwich shaped casket?

SmithAir747

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: Dreadnought
Posted 2012-11-19 06:02:02 and read 2373 times.

Quoting itsjustme (Reply 78):
I wouldn't be too quick to fault the employees or the union in this case.

The overall ill health of the company was not all the union's fault, surely. But going on strike when times are tough is a severe blow. Your defence of the union's action is like saying, "That man over there was dying of cancer, so you can't charge me with murder after I shot him and robbed him."

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: Revelation
Posted 2012-11-19 06:42:22 and read 2362 times.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 84):
The overall ill health of the company was not all the union's fault, surely. But going on strike when times are tough is a severe blow.

I agree going on strike during a poor economy isn't the most rational thought these people could have, but sometimes employees get to that point. One example is the AA pilots refusing offer after offer because they had gotten to the point where they weren't going to allow management to throw "last and best final offers" at them. The relationship between management and labor had soured so bad that the employees just weren't going to take a low-ball offer. If that meant the end of Hostess, one can argue that was coming anyway. It was burdened by huge debt from the last bankruptcy (set upon them by vulture capitalists) and its products indeed were falling out of favor in the market (Wonder Bread? Yuck!).

The last time I bought Wonder Bread was during the ice storm two years ago when there was nothing else on the shelf. 2/3rds of the loaf went uneaten. Before that it literally had been decades since I'd had Wonder Bread in my house.

Hostess, well, that's another story. From time to time, I get my sugar fix at the local convenience stores, and many times Hostess would be the product of choice. Honey buns, chocolate cup-cakes and the occasional apple pie worked just fine for me, but of course in moderation.

Personally, not much of a Twinkie fan. Maybe had them once every few years to see if they still tasted the same, and that was that for another few years.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: blrsea
Posted 2012-11-19 09:38:32 and read 2364 times.

Apparently, Hostess is asking the bankruptcy judge to allow giving bonuses to 14 executives who will oversee the bankruptcy!

Unions fight bonuses for Hostess execs

Quote:
...
NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- Hostess Brands will ask a bankruptcy judge on Monday for approval to shut down the company and pay $1.75 million in executive bonuses.
...
Under the plan, bonuses ranging from $7,400 to $130,500 will be paid to 19 executives. The company argues the bonuses are below market rates for such payments.

But the unions, which blame mismanagement for the company's demise, say the bonuses are unjustified and should be rejected by the judge.
...

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: Dreadnought
Posted 2012-11-19 11:19:17 and read 2362 times.

Quoting blrsea (Reply 86):
Apparently, Hostess is asking the bankruptcy judge to allow giving bonuses to 14 executives who will oversee the bankruptcy!

You always do that for the people who shut the doors - conditional on their staying until they are no longer needed. For instance, a CFO might be needed for a whole year, but if he leaves halfway through because he got a job offer, it will be next to impossible to find someone else to come in and do the job for a company about to shut down. If they accept another job offer someplace else before the contracted date, they don't get the bonus.

It's called a Completion Bonus, is very common, and is aimed at not only executives but also accountants, mechanics and anyone else required for an orderly shut-down.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: EA CO AS
Posted 2012-11-19 18:17:55 and read 2353 times.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 70):
a living wage.

  

I have a real problem with this "living wage" bullshit; there's no such thing. There are wages, plain and simple. A wage is an agreed-upon amount of compensation to perform work, and BOTH SIDES AGREE UPON IT. The employee that accepts a job has no right to complain that it's "not enough" since they:

1. accepted it as a term of employment
2. have the option of leaving said employment for greener pastures if they feel it's not acceptable

Plain and simple. Somewhere along the line people got the idea that the minimum wage should be enough to support a family, and that's not what it is; it's a MINIMUM and the market determines whether or not the wage for a certain type of work is justified.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: jpetekyxmd80
Posted 2012-11-19 18:20:55 and read 2354 times.

I can't understand the people who are both anti-union and anti-minimum wage (or any form of 'living wage'). Do you really want neither to exist? You'd get along real well in China!

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: EA CO AS
Posted 2012-11-19 18:26:08 and read 2354 times.

Quoting jpetekyxmd80 (Reply 89):
I can't understand the people who are both anti-union and anti-minimum wage (or any form of 'living wage'). Do you really want neither to exist?

Tell me what you'd define as a "living" wage; be specific.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: jpetekyxmd80
Posted 2012-11-19 18:44:16 and read 2353 times.

I don't know, i've heard that used in several different ways, particularly in areas with a very high cost of living. I don't know how to define that or judge it, but its not really a focal point of my argument, just throwing it in there.

I just fail to understand how people can seemingly believe there should be absolutely no intrusion on the 'market' in determining wages. Limit any worker organization or any government interference for minimum labor standards.

I have no idea how that is desirable, in any way. The jokes on them, have they learned nothing from history? When you throw the balance of power that far out of whack, all they're doing is digging their own grave in the long run. Not by some 'revolution' in our case, but our democracy (or pretty much any) would simply not tolerate not having basic standards of labor in some form.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: Geezer
Posted 2012-11-19 18:50:09 and read 2358 times.

Quoting mt99 (Reply 75):
So did you buy Hostess products? or did you buy the competition?

News flash Geezer: Price is very very rarely the #1 driver for a purchase....

As for your question; I don't think I've bought anything made by Hostess in the last 40 years; I'm not "into" cup cakes, twinkles, dong dongs ? (yuk) The only thing like that that I eat now and then is an occasional banana-nut muffin from Kroger's. I'm fortunate to live with the world's best apple, peach and black berry pie maker, so I have a few of those during the summer months. If hostess would have had to depend on me for business, they would have gone out of business right after WW2 !

About "price is very rarely the the deciding factor........

You must be a mindreader ! I've been mulling over buying this "electronic gadget" for my D SLR for a month now; about 15 people make the thing, they differ very little, and I had narrowed it down to just TWO makers; one of them sells for $149, and the other one sells for $99; very, very similar product; the $99 one has been in business a little longer, but I'm not concerned about that; I have decided to buy the one for $149. The reason being........the $99 one is made, and shipped from......Istanbul, Turkey ! The $149 one is made in W. Lafayette, Indiana, (about 60 miles from where we live.) (not that I have anything against Turkey's, mind you !)

Charley

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: cmf
Posted 2012-11-19 19:13:28 and read 2353 times.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 87):
You always do that for the people who shut the doors

No, they do not always do that.

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 88):
I have a real problem with this "living wage" bullshit; there's no such thing. There are wages, plain and simple. A wage is an agreed-upon amount of compensation to perform work, and BOTH SIDES AGREE UPON IT. The employee that accepts a job has no right to complain that it's "not enough" since they:

That would be true if both sides negotiated as equals.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: Ken777
Posted 2012-11-19 19:58:08 and read 2353 times.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 87):
It's called a Completion Bonus, is very common, and is aimed at not only executives but also accountants, mechanics and anyone else required for an orderly shut-down.

Or the Court can kick them out and bring in others - who will probably do as good a job as well as find a LOT of abuses in the company's books.

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 90):
Tell me what you'd define as a "living" wage; be specific.

Start with the poverty line. Go below that and we will need to spend your tax dollars on Food Stamps, Medicaid, etc.

Look at it that way - your tax dollars being spent so more will be needed - and it is easier to set a level you think is realistic.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: seb146
Posted 2012-11-19 20:17:00 and read 2354 times.

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 88):
1. accepted it as a term of employment
2. have the option of leaving said employment for greener pastures if they feel it's not acceptable

So, even if I have a masters degree and a family of six, I can walk into a McDonalds, be offered employment and say "By the way, I need to be paid $20 an hour, at least 30 hours a week. Do you really think McDonalds will do that? No, they will not. Neither will anyone else. No company anywhere will help out the employee. If the employee is on food stamps and state medical, that is "their fault" even if their good paying job was shipped overseas by vulture capitalists.

The right still does not get it: they take money and benefits from employees, then blame the same employees for being lazy and electing Santa Clause. Uh.... huh??

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: Geezer
Posted 2012-11-19 20:30:32 and read 2354 times.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 70):
I am all for making profits, but what about people? Don't we need people to make those profits?

Seb; You're all for making profits ? How ? How do you propose to make that profit ? Let's start all over.
First; someone has convinced you that all corporations "are evil"; A few DO have some very greedy people running them, and it sounds to me like Hostess Brands is / was en example of that. To start with, corporations EMPLOY about half of all the "workers"; they also MAKE 100% of all the cars, they supply 100% of all the oil and gas, all the light bulbs, and I couldn't list all the other things we depend on them for, if I took all night.

Not to mention.........ever hear of........."the stock market" ? It plays a very significant part in the commerce of this country also, but without corporations, we wouldn't need, (and there wouldn't BE any "stock market", (because there wouldn't BE any "stock" ! ) So if you "kill" all the corporations tomorrow, you just put about 60% of Americans out of work.

Now......about "people"; You ask......."don't people need to make "profits"; you're getting several things a little mixed up here; what "people" need to make.....is a living! The most common way to do that is to have a job and get paid. And now about "profit"; The only way to "make profit"........is to "invest" something............usually money, but also hard work, experience, and even luck are required to make "profit"; and something I think maybe you may not be clear about; just because you put money "into" something, is absolutely NO GUARANTEE that you will make a profit; if you go to a casino and put money "into" a black jack game, that's NOT "investing" ! (that's GAMBLING !) which usually gives you about a 90% chance of LOSING ALL YOUR MONEY ! ( one of the main reasons I NEVER gamble, BTW)

Sure, it would be just great if ALL people would make a profit ! But I can GUARANTEE you one thing............that will NEVER happen in the next million years ! I'M POSITIVE of that ! Know why I'm so positive ? It's very simple.
Take a look around........how many people do you see ? How many people you think there are in the whole country ?
I'm not sure exactly, but it doesn't matter; of ALL those people "out there", only a few % of them will ever become "wealthy" ( have a WHOLE bunch of money ) MOST people will NEVER get rich; some of them will "survive", a few will do "quite well", but MANY, MANY will stay POOR; You know why so many people stay poor Seb ? Because almost ALL of them do "poor things"; (they "follow" the next guy  they sit around and wait for someone to give them something, they waste their time, they have all manner of bad habits, they never bother to educate themselves, they spend their entire lives, "working for the "other guy"), and that other guy always ends up with all the money. Look at the Hostess boondoggle; 18,000 people have no job, while a handful of "people" "get rich", live happily ever after. And it happens EVERY DAY ! (usually on a smaller scale)

Incidentally, I need to make something clear here; I am DEFINITELY NOT anti-union; (if I was, I wouldn't have paid the Teamsters dues for 40m years.) What I AM ANTI-, I'm "anti-unions being run by crooks", (and stealing millions from the pension fund.) I'm VERY anti-that.

I'm going to pass on some very useful information here; the guy who told me this was a VERY wealthy man; he "pointed out" to me......there are only three ways to get rich; you can have a lot of PEOPLE working for you, or you can have a lot of MONEY working for you, (or any combination of the two), OR you can inherit it. and that's about it.
So far, I'm still not "rich", and I'm sure I never will be, but I feel that I have already had a very successful life up to this point, and the immediate future looks very bright.

(Incidentally, the fellow that told me that was Mr. Carl Lindner........)

Charley

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: jpetekyxmd80
Posted 2012-11-19 20:32:48 and read 2356 times.

And the same people who always hate unions, and don't want anything like the minimum wage also hate social programs and want to gut that government spending.

It's unreal. And then they blame liberals for 'class warfare'.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: EA CO AS
Posted 2012-11-19 22:11:45 and read 2354 times.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 95):
So, even if I have a masters degree and a family of six, I can walk into a McDonalds, be offered employment

You CAN do that if you choose, yes. Not sure why you'd want to however, as your education would likely command you more than McDonald's would be willing to pay you to flip burgers.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 95):
and say "By the way, I need to be paid $20 an hour, at least 30 hours a week. Do you really think McDonalds will do that?

Not a chance, but then again they don't need someone with a masters degree to flip burgers, clean and stock restrooms, etc.


You've managed to completely miss the point; it's up to both sides to agree on employment terms. If you don't like the wage, you don't agree to work there. If the employer isn't willing to pay you the wage you desire, they don't have to hire you.

Quoting jpetekyxmd80 (Reply 97):
And the same people who always hate unions, and don't want anything like the minimum wage

A minimum wage is a fine idea in theory; where it gets bogged down is when well-intentioned but misguided people start talking as if everyone is entitled to earn a wage that at 40 hours per week permits them to comfortably own a home, drive a reasonably nice car, and raise a family.

That's a simply unreasonable expectation, and forcing all employers to compensate workers to such a minimum standard would either put them out of business in short order, or raise the prices of their goods and services to such astronomical levels that only the wealthy could afford them.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: seb146
Posted 2012-11-19 23:43:57 and read 2354 times.

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 98):
Not sure why you'd want to however, as your education would likely command you more than McDonald's would be willing to pay you to flip burgers.
Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 98):
it's up to both sides to agree on employment terms. If you don't like the wage, you don't agree to work there. If the employer isn't willing to pay you the wage you desire, they don't have to hire you.

Gotta pay the bills. If no one is hiring in your field and you wanna get off "big gub'mint" then you gotta do something! But, it is the worker's fault for trying to support their family, according to the right.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: Revelation
Posted 2012-11-20 05:52:47 and read 2350 times.

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 98):
You've managed to completely miss the point; it's up to both sides to agree on employment terms. If you don't like the wage, you don't agree to work there. If the employer isn't willing to pay you the wage you desire, they don't have to hire you.

That's exactly what's going on here. Management offered the workers a wage (actually a contract with both wage and benefit cuts!) and labor refused to accept it. Management decided it could not run a business at the wages that labor wanted (along with the debt level it accepted in the last bankruptcy as well as the declining market for white bread and junk food), so the business is being liquidated. It should make a capitalist happy, no? Something better will rise from the ashes, no? That's what Mitt wanted for GM, no? Let Twinkies, Suzy Qs, and the Ho Hos go Bankrupt!

When push comes to shove, I think the point you and others might actually be trying to make seems to boil down to your feeling that labor should not organize itself, and may be using some pretty indirect paths to try to make that point, and are failing.

Quoting ltbewr (Reply 35):
Most likely Bimbo Baking of Mexico, which bought up a number of regional bakery brands in the USA as well as selling products made in the USA under the Bimbo brand mainly in markets with significant Mexican immigrants will buy parts of the former Hostess

Bimbo? Hmm, I think I'm seeing a trend here towards sleezy names in the junk food industry!

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: cmf
Posted 2012-11-20 05:53:54 and read 2354 times.

Quoting Geezer (Reply 96):
what "people" need to make.....is a living

Why don't we see you propose that throughout the organisation chart  

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: Dreadnought
Posted 2012-11-20 06:52:51 and read 2354 times.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 100):
That's exactly what's going on here. Management offered the workers a wage (actually a contract with both wage and benefit cuts!) and labor refused to accept it. Management decided it could not run a business at the wages that labor wanted (along with the debt level it accepted in the last bankruptcy as well as the declining market for white bread and junk food), so the business is being liquidated. It should make a capitalist happy, no? Something better will rise from the ashes, no? That's what Mitt wanted for GM, no?

Well, first of all, Mitt was not recommending liquidation - just bankruptcy and reorganization, with the consumer guarantees being backed up by Federal assistance. Which is basically what happened anyway except the UAW made a killing on the backs of the bondholders (which were mostly held by people's pension funds).

One of the things that this situation illustrates is the preposterous nature of one of Organized Labor's principle demands - a fixed pension scheme. They are still stuck to this concept, and as long as it persists, US companies and governments at local state and federal level will continue to be screwed up.

For those who don't know the difference (and for those outside the US), when Americans say "pension", they mean (put very simply) an arrangement where the company agrees to pay you, after X years of service, a pension equal to Y% of your salary for the rest of your life. And maybe medical benefits too. The point is that the future payout is fixed by contract, and does not take at all into account the financial health of the company during the life of the employee, or of how the pension fund is funded or how well it performs. If you retired 20 years ago, and the pension promised you $1000 per month, and the pension fund can only afford to pay you $700 (because of the losses it took in the stock market), then the company has to shell out $300 out of its current account.

Generally growth hides these factors. Exxon Mobil, for example, has grown tremendously in the past 30 years, and can afford to cover any such shortfalls. But what of companies like Hostess or GM, who have only a fraction of the sales and manpower they had 30 years ago? Shoring up the pension fund would be ruinous - and sure enough have driven many of these countries into bankruptcy.

Companies are not perpetual. They live, and sometimes die, mutate and are born again. Sometimes they die altogether. I would hate to be beholden to the financial health of a company that I worked at years ago. What's my pension from (say) Circuit City worth now? Nothing.

Labor wants the employer to take 100% of the risk involved in retirement planning and investment, and be insulated from all the pitfalls. I'm sorry, but that is not fair. First of all, it's stupid for them to presume that the company will still be around in 50 years and capable of paying you. Secondly, why should not each individual share in some of the risk (and rewards) as anyone else? That's the idea of a 401K - the company pays you and your 401K every month, and you have flexibility on where that money is invested. And if you leave the company, you take your 401K with you - you need never hear from your ex-employer again, and your ex-employer has paid you everything he owes you or will ever owe you. 20 years down the road, paying your medical bills will no longer be an albatross around its neck.

Pensions are also subject to abuse. A company in financial difficulty can under-fund its pension fund for a few years to save money, hoping to make it up later (that hardly ever works out well). Employers can't do that with a 401K. And God forbid you give control of pensions to politicians - they will promise you generous pensions along with the moon and stars above in order to get labor support, while not having to pay for it themselves, or even be answerable for it. State pensions have sunk several countries and many states in the US, because government workers' unions sold their support to politicians who promised them a lifetime guaranteed salary and perks after 20 years of service or something.

You would find that much of the hostility to unions disappear entirely if the Unions would agree to convert all pensions to 401K-style retirement funds. The Unions could even open up their own financial services division which would service those 401Ks, provide advice etc.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: mt99
Posted 2012-11-20 07:11:46 and read 2356 times.

Quoting Geezer (Reply 92):
You must be a mindreader ! I've been mulling over buying this "electronic gadget" for my D SLR for a month now; about 15 people make the thing, they differ very little, and I had narrowed it down to just TWO makers; one of them sells for $149, and the other one sells for $99; very, very similar product; the $99 one has been in business a little longer, but I'm not concerned about that; I have decided to buy the one for $149. The reason being........the $99 one is made, and shipped from......Istanbul, Turkey ! The $149 one is made in W. Lafayette, Indiana, (about 60 miles from where we live.) (not that I have anything against Turkey's, mind you !)

There are cameras that are less that $100. For the purpose of taking pictures you can use one of these $7.99 at Walgreens



You choose to pay more more for the features. The features are your reason for buying - not the price.

Quoting Geezer (Reply 92):
I don't think I've bought anything made by Hostess in the last 40 years; I'm not "into" cup cakes, twinkles, dong dongs ? (yuk)

Exactly. They make (made) products that very few people liked. If a product is well liked - price does not matter. Do you know how many overpriced ipads apple sold last year?

Again price alone is very very rarely the #1 deciding factor in a purchase,

PS - Whats with the "quotation marks"?

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: EA CO AS
Posted 2012-11-20 09:24:36 and read 2359 times.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 100):
Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 98):You've managed to completely miss the point; it's up to both sides to agree on employment terms. If you don't like the wage, you don't agree to work there. If the employer isn't willing to pay you the wage you desire, they don't have to hire you.

That's exactly what's going on here. Management offered the workers a wage (actually a contract with both wage and benefit cuts!) and labor refused to accept it. Management decided it could not run a business at the wages that labor wanted (along with the debt level it accepted in the last bankruptcy as well as the declining market for white bread and junk food), so the business is being liquidated.

While regrettable, what's inherently "wrong" with any of this? Both sides decided they couldn't accept the terms of the other and agreed to part ways. Then management, as part of their fiduciary responsibility to shareholders, elected to liquidate the company to maximize the return to the shareholders since they couldn't continue as a going concern.

Again, regrettable - but part of how business works. If you can't accept that, I don't know what to tell you.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 100):
labor should not organize itself

Let's not turn this into a discussion of how merit-based systems are superior to organized labor; you'll just get upset.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 102):
Labor wants the employer to take 100% of the risk involved in retirement planning and investment, and be insulated from all the pitfalls. I'm sorry, but that is not fair

  

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: seb146
Posted 2012-11-20 17:06:43 and read 2353 times.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 102):
The Unions could even open up their own financial services division which would service those 401Ks, provide advice etc.

Like BECU? Boeing Employee Credit Union is one of the largest financial services divisions. And still, the right hates unions and blames unions for everything. Even when they do something right, they are wrong.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: Dreadnought
Posted 2012-11-20 19:08:04 and read 2331 times.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 105):
Like BECU? Boeing Employee Credit Union is one of the largest financial services divisions. And still, the right hates unions and blames unions for everything. Even when they do something right, they are wrong.

Are you saying that all pensions are in the hands of independent financial institutions? That BECU provides predetermined fixed incomes in perpetuity in excess of sure rates (i.e. no more than 2% capital growth or therabouts?

Don't mix apples and oranges. We aren't talking about credit unions, which have nothing to do with organized labor or labor unions.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: Revelation
Posted 2012-11-20 19:23:28 and read 2318 times.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 102):
One of the things that this situation illustrates is the preposterous nature of one of Organized Labor's principle demands - a fixed pension scheme.

Such pensions came about because Management/Ownership offered them as a way to attract employees, just like health insurance, so it's preposterous to label it as a labor demand. If anything, it's fairer to call them a management take-back.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 102):
You would find that much of the hostility to unions disappear entirely if the Unions would agree to convert all pensions to 401K-style retirement funds.

Extremely doubtful. This sounds like another idea that sounds sensible to you but senseless to most others, just like your idea about how the labor movement should divide itself just because it sounds sensible to you.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 102):
The Unions could even open up their own financial services division which would service those 401Ks, provide advice etc.

Such services routinely are provided by institutions that manage 401Ks.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: Dreadnought
Posted 2012-11-20 19:37:11 and read 2326 times.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 107):
Such pensions came about because Management/Ownership offered them as a way to attract employees, just like health insurance, so it's preposterous to label it as a labor demand.

Correct - they were an early form of retirement benefits initiated (in their current form) during the industrial revolution when the only direction was up.

But now they are indeed a labor demand. Every attempt in the past 30 years to convert pensions to 401K-style setups have been vigorously opposed by the unions. These days, no company (or government) in their right minds would want a fixed pension scheme.

Topic: RE: No More Twinkies!
Username: jetblueguy22
Posted 2012-11-20 21:17:34 and read 2321 times.

The discussion has turned away from the Hostess closure to a union/political debate. This thread will be locked.

Blue


The messages in this discussion express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of Airliners.net or any entity associated with Airliners.net.

Copyright © Lundgren Aerospace. All rights reserved.
http://www.airliners.net/