• 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!

The starving Baker's Union salaries...

joko104

Banned
Suspended
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 21, 2009
Messages
65,981
Reaction score
23,408
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Bakers’ Union has 8 Vice Presidents and 2 Million in Executive Salaries

The Bakers’ Union, aka the Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers’ International Union (BCTGM), and that’s a mouthful, has kept blaming the plight of Hostess and its Twinkies on company executives who paid themselves too much money.

“Our members were aware that while the company was descending into bankruptcy and demanding deep concessions, the top 10 executives of the company were rewarding themselves with lavish compensation increases,” Frank Hurt, President of the Bakers’ Union said.

So let’s take a look at the number of executives in the Bakers’ Union, their salaries and titles. What does a humble baker president like Hurt rake in? A mere $262,654. His assistant, Harry Kaiser has to get by with a mere $149,764.

The Bakers’ Union (BCTGM) has 58 employees. 29 of them make more than $100,000 a year.
The Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers’ International Union has 8 Vice Presidents. (One is an Executive Vice-President).
These 8 Vice Presidents make anywhere from $218,989.00 to $161,789.00 for a combined total of over 2 million dollars. Additionally there’s a Secretary Treasurer who makes $244,396.00.
Does a union with 58 employees really need 8 Vice Presidents at a ratio of one Vice President to every employee?

BCTGM also has 12 representatives who make between $100,000 and $150,000. Its highest paid organizer makes $148,851.
While 18,000 workers may lose their jobs, the Bakers’ Union execs will keep their jobs and their six figure compensation packages. And even if BCTGM folds, they’ll just fetch up in another union.

Frank Hurt has worked as a Shop Steward at the United Auto Workers, with the Teamsters, a Union Trustee of the AFL-CIO Housing Investment Trust and President of the International Union of Food, Agricultural, Hotel, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco and Allied Workers’ Associations. Being a union boss is his job and as long as there are unions, there will be high paid compensation packages for union bosses. Companies may go out of business, but guys like Frank Hurt will always land on their quarter-of-a-million a year.

Bakers’ Union has 8 Vice Presidents and 2 Million in Executive Salaries
 
Bakers’ Union has 8 Vice Presidents and 2 Million in Executive Salaries

The Bakers’ Union, aka the Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers’ International Union (BCTGM), and that’s a mouthful, has kept blaming the plight of Hostess and its Twinkies on company executives who paid themselves too much money.

“Our members were aware that while the company was descending into bankruptcy and demanding deep concessions, the top 10 executives of the company were rewarding themselves with lavish compensation increases,” Frank Hurt, President of the Bakers’ Union said.

So let’s take a look at the number of executives in the Bakers’ Union, their salaries and titles. What does a humble baker president like Hurt rake in? A mere $262,654. His assistant, Harry Kaiser has to get by with a mere $149,764.

The Bakers’ Union (BCTGM) has 58 employees. 29 of them make more than $100,000 a year.
The Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers’ International Union has 8 Vice Presidents. (One is an Executive Vice-President).
These 8 Vice Presidents make anywhere from $218,989.00 to $161,789.00 for a combined total of over 2 million dollars. Additionally there’s a Secretary Treasurer who makes $244,396.00.
Does a union with 58 employees really need 8 Vice Presidents at a ratio of one Vice President to every employee?

BCTGM also has 12 representatives who make between $100,000 and $150,000. Its highest paid organizer makes $148,851.
While 18,000 workers may lose their jobs, the Bakers’ Union execs will keep their jobs and their six figure compensation packages. And even if BCTGM folds, they’ll just fetch up in another union.

Frank Hurt has worked as a Shop Steward at the United Auto Workers, with the Teamsters, a Union Trustee of the AFL-CIO Housing Investment Trust and President of the International Union of Food, Agricultural, Hotel, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco and Allied Workers’ Associations. Being a union boss is his job and as long as there are unions, there will be high paid compensation packages for union bosses. Companies may go out of business, but guys like Frank Hurt will always land on their quarter-of-a-million a year.

Bakers’ Union has 8 Vice Presidents and 2 Million in Executive Salaries

Hate me some unions.
 
When Obama proposed top treat "the rich" as anyone who made more than 250K I heard many tears dripping here about how $250K wasn't really very much money. So, why is $262K so lavish of a reward?

My son works for a Corporation that pays its CEO close to $30 million, the CEO has 48 VPs who don't do anything but play golf and draw over a million a year. My son is well paid at about $85K and great benefits but his workload constantly increases since anyone who leaves is not replaced. My son asked to attend his Grandfathers funeral last Friday but was refused because they are so far behind in their work.

I'm no fan of Unions and when trhey are unreasonable, I support Management but honestly, without Unions, everybody would be making $10 an hour or less while CEOs would then triple their own paychecks.
 
Seriously, have you ever seen a Socialist state where the political class existed at the same level as the labor class?

Soviet Union? Hell no.
China? Not even close.
North Korea? uh-uh.
Cuba? Nope.
DDR? No.
Romania? Hungary? Czechoslovakia? Nnnnnnnnnnnope!

That's just kind of the way things work. It's easy to give stuff away for free when there's nothing to give!
 
Reports of Hostess' death are exaggerated:



Hostess Not Going Out of Business

Twinkies may yet have an infinite shelf life. Hostess Brands Inc. and one of its largest unions have agreed to go into mediation, so the company will stay in business for the time being. Hostess filed for bankruptcy last Friday, claiming a union strike ruined its operations and announcing plans to lay off all 18,500 of its employees. But a bankruptcy judge on the case said the dueling parties have to go through mediation before Hostess Inc. can sell off its assets. It won’t be a cake walk, but at least you can cancel your $1,000 Ho Ho bid on eBay.
 
When Obama proposed top treat "the rich" as anyone who made more than 250K I heard many tears dripping here about how $250K wasn't really very much money. So, why is $262K so lavish of a reward?

My son works for a Corporation that pays its CEO close to $30 million, the CEO has 48 VPs who don't do anything but play golf and draw over a million a year. My son is well paid at about $85K and great benefits but his workload constantly increases since anyone who leaves is not replaced. My son asked to attend his Grandfathers funeral last Friday but was refused because they are so far behind in their work.

I'm no fan of Unions and when trhey are unreasonable, I support Management but honestly, without Unions, everybody would be making $10 an hour or less while CEOs would then triple their own paychecks.

How much of that was cash compensation and how much was stock?

Let's say, hypothetically, that you're talking about Dave Novak at Yum Brands; his cash compensation was $6.5M in cash and everything else (for a grand total of roughly $30M) was stock gains. Yum has just under 35,000 stores nationwide (KFC, Pizza Hut, Taco Bell) so his cash compensation comes out to less than $200 per store per year. Are you really going to try to tell us that such an "exorbitant" compensation package is going to ruin the company?
 
These 8 Vice Presidents make anywhere from $218,989.00 to $161,789.00 for a combined total of over 2 million dollars. Additionally there’s a Secretary Treasurer who makes $244,396.00.

Poorly written story IMO.

The union has probably earned more for the employees than it has cost the employees. The closing/trouble is obviously a mismanagement issue.
 
Last edited:
Poorly written story IMO.

The union has probably earned more for the employees than it has cost the employees. The closing/trouble is obviously a mismanagement issue.

It cost 18,000 employees their jobs...jus' sayin'!
 
Uh, I didn't say anything about anything ruining anything so I'm not sure what your point is.

I have no idea how much cash or stock is paid. I do however hold the opinion that this elaborate type of compensation is a cost that is passed along to consumers, in my sons case, a public utility, which has steadily increased their prices past the point of affordability. Sine I read so much bitching about other taxes etc. that causes higher prices, I think this applies equally well.

However, my actual point was that the $262K for the Union guy wasn't all that much in perspective.


How much of that was cash compensation and how much was stock?

Let's say, hypothetically, that you're talking about Dave Novak at Yum Brands; his cash compensation was $6.5M in cash and everything else (for a grand total of roughly $30M) was stock gains. Yum has just under 35,000 stores nationwide (KFC, Pizza Hut, Taco Bell) so his cash compensation comes out to less than $200 per store per year. Are you really going to try to tell us that such an "exorbitant" compensation package is going to ruin the company?
 
When Obama proposed top treat "the rich" as anyone who made more than 250K I heard many tears dripping here about how $250K wasn't really very much money. So, why is $262K so lavish of a reward?

My son works for a Corporation that pays its CEO close to $30 million, the CEO has 48 VPs who don't do anything but play golf and draw over a million a year. My son is well paid at about $85K and great benefits but his workload constantly increases since anyone who leaves is not replaced. My son asked to attend his Grandfathers funeral last Friday but was refused because they are so far behind in their work.

I'm no fan of Unions and when trhey are unreasonable, I support Management but honestly, without Unions, everybody would be making $10 an hour or less while CEOs would then triple their own paychecks.

That's so silly. If everyone were making $10 an hour or less, there wouldn't even BE any CEO's. Who'd be buying their products?
 
Just sayin its not because of the unions.

In this case is very much would have been. They had the financial paperwork in front of them, the company had new management and drastically diminished executive pay, and the bankruptcy court had supported/guided Rayburn on the steps taken up to the strike. The union knew very well that they didn't have much, if any, wiggle room...and when Rayburn told them to read the writing on the wall they closed their eyes and didn't even allow a secondary vote, on the premise that the union members had already voted....a claim many of those same members would later deny.
 
I did not mean to represent my opinion as being a "Universal Truth". So, I'm not referring to "everyone", I'm referring to millions of jobs that are currently unionized.

For example, lets start with Walmart, America's largest employer that is not unionized. Maybe I'm wrong but my impression is that $10 is what they may the great majority of their employees.

As another, closer to home example, lets take the unionized casinos of Nevada. Housekeepers are unionized and make around $14 an hour. IMHO, they would be paid $10 an hour or less if they were not unionized.

So, it's important to realize that there ae many job categories that pay more than $10 per hour. Some are union based and some are not.

Millions of people earn these low wages. They still have to eat and live somewhere. Some do this by sharing residences, some by various welfare methods. They still represent a substantive portion of the population.

Perhaps if "everyone" made $10 an hour, prices would fall and they would go on living as well as anyone else.

Of course, I could be wrong. Do you think that basic labor jobs would be paid more than $10 an hour? Do you think that CEOs concern themselves with the "greater good" and pay more than that because that's their societal contribution? Frankly, I doubt that. Each CEO is concerned with their own income and lifestyle. I have several friends who make $12.50 an hour (non-union) that haven't had a raise in 5 years while the CEOs have investing hundreds of thousands in making their offices more elaborate and have concerned themselves not a bit how degrading this is to their workers. My best friend who works for a cremation company has been bought out by the largest cemetery operator in America. They have announced there will be pay reductions and most paid holidays (such as the upcoming Friday after Thanksgiving) will be eliminated.

Nonetheless, I see there are no parking spaces at Walmart so either America is richer than I assumed or low wages work just fine.

My usual OPINION disclaimer applies.




That's so silly. If everyone were making $10 an hour or less, there wouldn't even BE any CEO's. Who'd be buying their products?
 
I should also add that we no longer live in a world where America is the only market. Chinese don't make $10 an hour but their consumerism is expanding rapidly.

At least we know that union officials make $262K a year so maybe they are the ones supporting the economy that supports the CEOs.


That's so silly. If everyone were making $10 an hour or less, there wouldn't even BE any CEO's. Who'd be buying their products?
 
I was always under the impression that the warriors of the right were 100% fully supportive of all the money that people could make.

I guess that goes out the window when it involves union officials. :roll:
 
However, my actual point was that the $262K for the Union guy wasn't all that much in perspective.

I was always under the impression that the warriors of the right were 100% fully supportive of all the money that people could make.

I guess that goes out the window when it involves union officials. :roll:

The Union is casting blame on the executives of Hostess making around the same amount. If the executives at Hostess are in the wrong....

It's just another case of hypocrisy writ large.
 
The Union is casting blame on the executives of Hostess making around the same amount. If the executives at Hostess are in the wrong....

It's just another case of hypocrisy writ large.

I would be happy to look at a list side by side of the top twenty Hostess compensation packages and compare them to the top twenty union compensation packages.
 
I would be happy to look at a list side by side of the top twenty Hostess compensation packages and compare them to the top twenty union compensation packages.

As of March, the top four executives at Hostess will earn $1 each for this year.
 
If all the workers at Hostess would reduce their salaries to $1 for the coming year, we'll be drowning in low cost Twinkies and Ding-Dongs. Indeed, if all Americans would have the patriotism and common decency to work for the next year for just $1, why America will be on top again.

I'm sure that most Americans can live on the millions they've saved up in the past. Certainly those executives can but don't union workers also get multi-million dollar bonuses? Why are they being so self-centered?

As of March, the top four executives at Hostess will earn $1 each for this year.
 
The Union is casting blame on the executives of Hostess making around the same amount. If the executives at Hostess are in the wrong....

It's just another case of hypocrisy writ large.

Judging by an interview I read with a Hostess baker, the employees (or certainly at least this employee) didn't even understand the final offer the company made. It was in one of our posts here -- with a credible link. The guy thought they were taking 8% away this year; 3% away next year; 3% away next year; 3% away next; and, wait for it! 3% away the next year. He had his hourly salary down to, like, $10.00 an hour. That is factually wrong.

All of the unions involved at Hostess were offered:

  • Two seats on the 8-member board
  • A 25% stake in the company
  • An 8% pay cut for one year
  • A 3% pay increase each of the next three years
  • a 1% pay increase in the fifth year of the contract
  • Pension payments were suspended until 2015
  • Health costs to employees were going to go up by 17%
  • There was probably more to it, but I've gleaned the above for dozens of sites on the internet...credible, I think.

These cuts were on top of employees having foregone $10/week to help salvage their company for the past year...PLUS pension contributions collected from the employees of $3.60 a week were apparently NOT made by the company, and the money that should have gone INTO the employee pension funds was ending up part of the bankruptcy.

Because they only took a voice vote to accept/decline the terms of the contract, I have a real question as to whether or not the rank-and-file even understood what was being offered. I'm thinking the union made their recommendation after an outline of the terms, and everyone just parroted the unions line.

There was no vote taken to strike, as the president of the union figured he had that mandate from them going in. (It appears there was plenty of support for it, however, since picket lines have been maintained.)

At the very least, I hope these negotiations going on will culminate in the union's presenting their employees with a very clear understanding of the offer on the table and a private vote.
 
If all the workers at Hostess would reduce their salaries to $1 for the coming year, we'll be drowning in low cost Twinkies and Ding-Dongs. Indeed, if all Americans would have the patriotism and common decency to work for the next year for just $1, why America will be on top again.

I'm sure that most Americans can live on the millions they've saved up in the past. Certainly those executives can but don't union workers also get multi-million dollar bonuses? Why are they being so self-centered?

Welcome to the Club. The dining room is serving filet tonight but we can sneak in a quick 9 holes if we hurry. Do you want me to show you which locker is yours?
 
Unions were formed to prevent employers from taking advantage of workers but now the unions themselves are the ones taking advantage of the workers. The "union" is more concerned with itself as an entity than the workers it supposedly represents. They make decisions that will hurt their members if in the long run they feel it will promote and protect the union itself.
 
As of March, the top four executives at Hostess will earn $1 each for this year.

And for the last few years? And their stock options and other such fringes?
 
Bakers’ Union has 8 Vice Presidents and 2 Million in Executive Salaries

The Bakers’ Union, aka the Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers’ International Union (BCTGM), and that’s a mouthful, has kept blaming the plight of Hostess and its Twinkies on company executives who paid themselves too much money.

“Our members were aware that while the company was descending into bankruptcy and demanding deep concessions, the top 10 executives of the company were rewarding themselves with lavish compensation increases,” Frank Hurt, President of the Bakers’ Union said.

So let’s take a look at the number of executives in the Bakers’ Union, their salaries and titles. What does a humble baker president like Hurt rake in? A mere $262,654. His assistant, Harry Kaiser has to get by with a mere $149,764.

The Bakers’ Union (BCTGM) has 58 employees. 29 of them make more than $100,000 a year.
The Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers’ International Union has 8 Vice Presidents. (One is an Executive Vice-President).
These 8 Vice Presidents make anywhere from $218,989.00 to $161,789.00 for a combined total of over 2 million dollars. Additionally there’s a Secretary Treasurer who makes $244,396.00.
Does a union with 58 employees really need 8 Vice Presidents at a ratio of one Vice President to every employee?

BCTGM also has 12 representatives who make between $100,000 and $150,000. Its highest paid organizer makes $148,851.
While 18,000 workers may lose their jobs, the Bakers’ Union execs will keep their jobs and their six figure compensation packages. And even if BCTGM folds, they’ll just fetch up in another union.

Frank Hurt has worked as a Shop Steward at the United Auto Workers, with the Teamsters, a Union Trustee of the AFL-CIO Housing Investment Trust and President of the International Union of Food, Agricultural, Hotel, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco and Allied Workers’ Associations. Being a union boss is his job and as long as there are unions, there will be high paid compensation packages for union bosses. Companies may go out of business, but guys like Frank Hurt will always land on their quarter-of-a-million a year.

Bakers’ Union has 8 Vice Presidents and 2 Million in Executive Salaries

I don't think I see your point. What if the CEO of Hostess was making 500,00, would that make the CEO the worst person in the whole issue? What is the logic, because I am not following it? I guess I should hate unions because of their executives pay, right? I am pretty sure union executives at the top of the union are paid by the union members and NOT paid by Hostess.
 
Here's what happens when you don't have a Union.

Organized Labor's Newest Heroes: Strippers - Atlantic Mobile

Unions were in decline for many years. However, from what I see (OPINION FOLLOWS) the Corporations are increasingly taking advantage of our weakened economic status and paying less and less while CEOs are paid more and more. That's not something I'm wishing for but something I see as a response. This worker abuse is very short-sighted but why should a CEO care about the future when he/she is making so much money now. Getting fired when you have 100 million in the bank really isn't all that painful.....
 
Back
Top Bottom