• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Hostess threatens to lay off 18,000 employees unless strike ends[W:521]

No reason for them to lose their jobs. The Union can simply employ them. Give them jobs. Good lord...its about time the Unions stopped being parasites. Id LOVE to see them actually buy the plant and run it AS a union plant. Time to step the **** up for once. Live your word.

Maybe the "job creators" should step up and do that.
 
Maybe the "job creators" should step up and do that.
They have...18000 of them. Those 18000 dont like the terms. So we have an impasse. Now...maybe instead those with all the 'better ideas' ought to step up. A little bit of put up or shut up.
 
Maybe the "job creators" should step up and do that.

They have already discussed the options and it's come now down to either continuing the strike and losing their jobs, or ending the strike and remaining employed... Logic dictates that this is a no-brainer.
 
They have already discussed the options and it's come now down to either continuing the strike and losing their jobs, or ending the strike and remaining employed... Logic dictates that this is a no-brainer.

Look, the Union is being idiotic here. But anybody who thinks it's all that simple...really it's not.
 
They have...18000 of them. Those 18000 dont like the terms. So we have an impasse. Now...maybe instead those with all the 'better ideas' ought to step up. A little bit of put up or shut up.

We keep hearing from the GOP "cut taxes on job creators so they can create jobs." Nobody's taxes have gone up yet.
 
Look, the Union is being idiotic here. But anybody who thinks it's all that simple...really it's not.

The choices they are faced with now, couldn't be any more simple. The rest doesn't matter anymore...

Either they continue the strike and lose their jobs, or they end the strike and keep their jobs.
 
We keep hearing from the GOP "cut taxes on job creators so they can create jobs." Nobody's taxes have gone up yet.
Yet. Regardless...you always have better ways...you always are so much better at the notion of job creation than those that have actually spent...oh...I dont know...decades actually CREATING jobs....so...why this timidness? Why is it when challenged to actually stand by your own ideas do you fail to do so?
 
That time has already come and gone...

What the Union and their workers are left with is a choice between:

a) Ending the strike, accepting the 8% pay cut and keeping their jobs

b) Continuing the strike, the company folding, and all 18,000 workers losing their jobs.


What in your estimate, is the best choice of action here... "a" or "b" ?

They should take a temporary pay cut with contract guarantees of returning to nominal pay scale in the future.
 
They should take a temporary pay cut with contract guarantees of returning to nominal pay scale in the future.

Look, the negotiations are over. I don't know what Hostess was offering, nor what the unions were demanding, but it's obvious that they couldn't come to an agreement... You are still in negotiation mode here, and that time has long passed.

What we have now is 2, and only 2 choices... Either workers continue the strike and lose their jobs, or they end the strike and keep their jobs at an 8% reduction in pay... There's nothing else available here.
 
Look, the negotiations are over. I don't know what Hostess was offering, nor what the unions were demanding, but it's obvious that they couldn't come to an agreement... You are still in negotiation mode here, and that time has long passed.

What we have now is 2, and only 2 choices... Either workers continue the strike and lose their jobs, or they end the strike and keep their jobs at an 8% reduction in pay... There's nothing else available here.

I gave you my answer, sorry if you don't like it.
 
Yet. Regardless...you always have better ways...you always are so much better at the notion of job creation than those that have actually spent...oh...I dont know...decades actually CREATING jobs....so...why this timidness? Why is it when challenged to actually stand by your own ideas do you fail to do so?

I didn't say I was better at it. I'm just waiting for the "experts" to actually do it.
 
I gave you my answer, sorry if you don't like it.

It's not a matter of liking it or not, it's a FACT that it's not an option that is on the table.

Why do so many refuse to face reality head on?
 
It's not a matter of liking it or not, it's a FACT that it's not an option that is on the table.

Why do so many refuse to face reality head on?

I did not refuse to face reality head on. I very clearly stated that when both sides are going for the whole pie, this is what you get. The solution which would have worked is not presented and now you're at a breaking point.
 
I gave you my answer, sorry if you don't like it.

I must have missed it... Was your answer:

a) End the strike and keep their jobs at an 8% reduction in pay.
b) Continue the strike, force the company to fold, and lose their jobs.

Responding with an "a" or "b" is all you have to do.
 
I must have missed it...

You missed it because it wasn't what you wanted to hear. The company hasn't folded yet, there's plenty of time for management to present a new contract to avoid failure.
 
God, how thick can we lay on the partisan bull****?

18,000 people are going to lose their jobs, but I guess it's OK since they're Democrats. :roll:

The only one laying on the partisan bull**** is you.

I said absolutely nothing about wanting to see 18,000 people lose their jobs.

I would prefer it if everyone kept their job but that involves labor reading the writing on the wall and it says quite clearly that they are not worth the $18+/hour they're currently being offered. That's not because management is "greedy" either. This just isn't the 1950's where a high school education is all that is needed to guarantee a cushy union job doing some sort of menial labor. We're moving into a highly specialized economy and the market price for unskilled labor is basically nothing.

Management is being very generous in offering $18+/hour for such unskilled work. Labor certainly isn't going to find that on the open market if they thick-headedly choose to strike their way into unemployment.
 
Last edited:
The likely view of the union is that those employees should be sacrificed for the "national contract" price. If Hostess salaries goes down, then other companies will demand doing the same. So by throwing those employees overboard, maybe they can keep other employees wages higher. In unions, an employee is one of the herd. The good of the many outweight the good of the few - as the union sees. Not so good if you are one of the few.

Because it is union, employees don't have individual choice. Rather, this is policy decisions being made at some the union HQ far away.
 
You missed it because it wasn't what you wanted to hear. The company hasn't folded yet, there's plenty of time for management to present a new contract to avoid failure.

So instead of giving your opinion on the actual situation, you'd rather pretend that the situation is something that it's not, in order to avoid giving your opinion...

Anyone who can't answer a simple question about their beliefs, must embrace some really flawed beliefs... Why else would they refuse to publicly express them?
 
So instead of giving your opinion on the actual situation, you'd rather pretend that the situation is something that it's not, in order to avoid giving your opinion...

Anyone who can't answer a simple question about their beliefs, must embrace some really flawed beliefs... Why else would they refuse to publicly express them?

I've given my answer to you clearly several times. I can't help it if English isn't your primary language.
 
I didn't say I was better at it. I'm just waiting for the "experts" to actually do it.

It can't be done while half the country is venomously anti-business.
 
It is best that both sides work towards a mutually acceptable solution. This isn't a one party thing. The aggressiveness of unions was in response to the aggressive nature of companies to take advantage of workers. And once the trust and loyalty between company and worker were lost, we escalated up to the "mutually ensured destruction" scenario we have now. It would be great if the unions would take the hit with the company making assurances and contract as to improving pay and hours back to their nominal levels when crisis is adverted; but when both sides are clamoring for the whole pie, this is what we get.

There is nothing mutual about it.

Management has an extremely useful and profitable skill set. Labor does not.

Management will be employed in similar jobs with similar salaries within a few months. These laborers will almost certainly never again be offered what management is graciously offering them.
 
There is nothing mutual about it.

Management has an extremely useful and profitable skill set. Labor does not.

Management will be employed in similar jobs with similar salaries within a few months. These laborers will almost certainly never again be offered what management is graciously offering them.

OMFG! Are you the CEO of Hostess or something?
 
There is nothing mutual about it.

Management has an extremely useful and profitable skill set. Labor does not.

Management will be employed in similar jobs with similar salaries within a few months. These laborers will almost certainly never again be offered what management is graciously offering them.

Labor isn't free. A man owns the sweat of his brow. And I'm not sure your contention is correct. With a brand name like Hostess, someone will pick that up if it goes through bankruptcy and they will also need workers.
 
Back
Top Bottom