• 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!

Twinkies maker Hostess going out of business

Oozlefinch said:
I honestly believe that they never negotiated in good faith. They smelled blood on the water, and thought they could milk the company for every cent they could. However, the underestimated how bad the financial trouble was.
Click to expand...
This could be the case. Could be their negotiating team mishandled themselves and got things painted into a corner. *shrug* Would not be the first. Maybe there was a screw-up between management negotiation team and the Baker’s team with dick-moves from around the table, that is pretty common source of negotiations reaching an intractable state.

But the evidence for being convinced of that is, to put it mildly, sparse.

The Teamsters statements fit perfectly fine with the above, but just as well as simply with having obtained a more acceptable to them contract for themselves (for whatever reason) so, having something than they felt was better than nothing, had a vested interest in the Bakers conceding that had nothing to do with (and could be at odds with) the Baker’s interest.

Really the later really would be the case even in your scenario suggestion, too.
 
Last edited:
Paschendale said:
So people should just accept when they are forced into a bad situation and not seek to change it? That's not very American. We should meekly accept the lot given to us? I thought striving and taking risks is something we reward in this country.
Click to expand...

People should use their brains and commen sense. Hostess has been struggling for years just to stay in business. Company after company after company, from mega-corporations to mom-and-pop groceries are struggling to stay in business, asking employees for concessions in return for still having a damned job. Most people with two sparking brain cells look at the global economic crisis, the unemployment crisis in America, and think, "what's better for me? Having a job with less money and fewer benefits, but still bringing cash into my pocket, or meekly accepting that my employer is unable to give me what I want, so I should close the company down so we can have another 18,500 jobless people on the street?"

This was a no-brainer. And that Bakers union not only had no brains, they now have no jobs, and they took 7,000 other people who were willing to compromise for the good of everyone down with them.

So, how did "seeking to change that bad situation" work out for them? This wasn't rocket science. They'll get no sympathy from me.
 
Paschendale said:
And for some people, that can mean the difference between making your rent or not. Or being able to afford an expensive medical procedure for your child. The difference in pay looks pretty small when you describe it as the difference between the numbers 18 and 20. But it can mean a whole lot more than that to those bakers.

Frankly, I think we'll be better off without Twinkies. Though I'll have to wonder what we'll eat when the zombie apocalypse comes. Twinkies were a staple of the 28 Days Later diet.
Click to expand...

ok, so what's the difference between 18 an hour and 0 an hour make a difference in?
 
DiAnna said:
People should use their brains and commen sense. Hostess has been struggling for years just to stay in business. Company after company after company, from mega-corporations to mom-and-pop groceries are struggling to stay in business, asking employees for concessions in return for still having a damned job. Most people with two sparking brain cells look at the global economic crisis, the unemployment crisis in America, and think, "what's better for me? Having a job with less money and fewer benefits, but still bringing cash into my pocket, or meekly accepting that my employer is unable to give me what I want, so I should close the company down so we can have another 18,500 jobless people on the street?"

This was a no-brainer. And that Bakers union not only had no brains, they now have no jobs, and they took 7,000 other people who were willing to compromise for the good of everyone down with them.

So, how did "seeking to change that bad situation" work out for them? This wasn't rocket science. They'll get no sympathy from me.
Click to expand...

Next year.... Twinkies are made in China. Whatcha wanna bet?
 
Paschendale said:
So people should just accept when they are forced into a bad situation and not seek to change it? That's not very American. We should meekly accept the lot given to us? I thought striving and taking risks is something we reward in this country.
Click to expand...

Striving and taking risks as individuals is fine but not when it relates to taking down people who are opposed to your ideas with you.
 
Dwight said:
Or. An example of management screwing up so badly that the company could not afford to pay wages that people will accept rather than no job.

Or. An example of brands losing some luster because of shifting market preferences (concerns over nutritional value).

Or, to put the above all together: Ownership insistence of some set profit margin that was not in line with market realities of operating expenses and product demand.

So now it all get ripped down into pieces and becomes fertilizer for, hopefully, more competent management with a more market appropriate vision. *shrug*
Click to expand...

Or these people have skills that will get land them a job somewhere else? Or more like them landing in the unemployment line...

Union zombies, think for yourselves or BOHICA.
 
Last edited:
Μολὼν λαβέ;1061158264 said:
Or these people have skills that will get land them a job somewhere else? Or more like them landing in the unemployment line...

Union zombies, think for yourselves or BOHICA.
Click to expand...

They don't have any skills - that's why they need the unions to protect them in the first place. Anyone can do what they do. The machines do most of the work, most of these workers just pour cake mix into a blender and let the machines do the rest.
 
Dwight said:
They need to man up! That isn’t the other guy’s problem! :mrgreen:

My guess is for the current wage? There are breaking points, people have their price. *shrug*
Click to expand...
Yes, they need to man up. That would be closing down and liquidating the company since the first instance of their bankruptcy in 2004. The company didn't man up but dragged on into 2012 which gave rise to the workers having their jobs and incomes for so long. What a travesity!

Certainly, that isn't the other guy's problem. It certainly isn't the now defunct company's problem that all the workers now have no job.

Congratulation is now in order. The bakers' union won. The company's mismanagement is no longer their problem. The little David defeated the giant Goliath. Everybody can now go home singing kumbaya. Now enjoy your thankgiving and merry Christmas for a victorious good fight. America can now go on without the unheathy fat-laden junk foods stuffing their waistlines.
 
Paschendale said:
So people should just accept when they are forced into a bad situation and not seek to change it? That's not very American. We should meekly accept the lot given to us? I thought striving and taking risks is something we reward in this country.
Click to expand...
Or they can just go look for a better job somewhere else like any other decent Americans who find themselves in such a bad situation.
 
Dwight said:
No need to pretend, you would never accept it. ;) I say that because one does not exclude the other, does not have much to do with the other really.

It wasn’t that the bakers offered no concessions. The gap just wasn’t closed.
Click to expand...
Maybe the gap "just wasn’t closed". Now they got what they want: the gap is completely closed.
 
clownboy said:
So, if Hostess goes the way of the dinosaur can we stop honoring the Twinkie Defense?
Click to expand...

Nooooooooo!!!!!!!!!! What ever would we do with out it????? :shock: On a serious note, a defence attornony and the associated cliet should be able to bring up ANY defence they like.
 
Μολὼν λαβέ;1061158264 said:
Or these people have skills that will get land them a job somewhere else? Or more like them landing in the unemployment line...

Union zombies, think for yourselves or BOHICA.
Click to expand...

I know what BOHICA means! I saw on a sign in Camp Doha in Kuwait next to the signs for SNAFU and FUBAR. Took me two years to figure it out. Bend Over Here It Comes Again. BOHICA. Yep the Hostess former employees definately BOHICA.
 
DiAnna said:
People should use their brains and commen sense. Hostess has been struggling for years just to stay in business. Company after company after company, from mega-corporations to mom-and-pop groceries are struggling to stay in business, asking employees for concessions in return for still having a damned job. Most people with two sparking brain cells look at the global economic crisis, the unemployment crisis in America, and think, "what's better for me? Having a job with less money and fewer benefits, but still bringing cash into my pocket, or meekly accepting that my employer is unable to give me what I want, so I should close the company down so we can have another 18,500 jobless people on the street?"

This was a no-brainer. And that Bakers union not only had no brains, they now have no jobs, and they took 7,000 other people who were willing to compromise for the good of everyone down with them.

So, how did "seeking to change that bad situation" work out for them? This wasn't rocket science. They'll get no sympathy from me.
Click to expand...

Do brains cells really spark?
 
dolphinocean said:
Congratulation is now in order. The bakers' union won. The company's mismanagement is no longer their problem. The little David defeated the giant Goliath. Everybody can now go home singing kumbaya. Now enjoy your thankgiving and merry Christmas for a victorious good fight. America can now go on without the unheathy fat-laden junk foods stuffing their waistlines.
Click to expand...

I think some of the most fascinating comments I have read about this debacle is from The New Yorker, by James Surowiecki. And while the entire commentary is worth reading, the ending is particularly important I think:

The real issue here is that people’s image of unions, and their sense that doing something like going on strike is legitimate, seems to depend quite a bit, in the U.S., on how common unions are in the workforce. When organized labor represented more than a third of American workers, it was easy for unions to send the message that in agitating for their own interests, union members were also helping improve conditions for workers in general. But as unions have shrunk, and have become increasingly concentrated in the public sector, it’s become easier for people to dismiss them as just another special interest, looking to hold onto perks that no one else gets. Perhaps the most striking response to the Hostess news, in that sense, was the tweet from conservative John Nolte, who wrote “Hostess strikers had pension. PENSIONS! What is this 1962?” It was once taken for granted that an industrial worker who worked for a big company for many years would get a solid middle-class lifestyle, and would be taken care of in retirement. Today, that concept seems to many like a relic. Just as Wonder Bread does.
Click to expand...
Who Killed the Twinkie? : The New Yorker

I had long questioned unions, and my disgust at them has only increased with almost every strike or protest. Back before I left LA in 2003, there had been a grocery workers strike going on. And I carefully listened to what the demands were. And frankly, they turned my stomach.

I remember when jobs like "stock boy" and "bag boy" was generally held by a High School student, making a little extra after school. Well, in a place like LA it is now a union career. I remember seeing the "bag boy" with a 15 year employment pin, and was seriously going WTF over there. No wonder teens have increasing trouble finding jobs, their parents are doing them now as union jobs.

Making as a starting wage $18 an hour, with full medical benefits at no cost.

Holy crap, and that is really what I said to myself. These people start at about the same wage an experienced computer technician make, but with 100% free medical. Maybe I got into the wrong industry, to hell with education and training, I can just stick cans of soup on the shelf and make a lot more cause of the union!

Well, while this strike was going on I left LA, and thankfully have only been back for visits. And in the settlement, the compromise essentially was increased benefits for the current employees, but reduced for any future employees hired.
 
Oozlefinch said:
I think some of the most fascinating comments I have read about this debacle is from The New Yorker, by James Surowiecki. And while the entire commentary is worth reading, the ending is particularly important I think:


Who Killed the Twinkie? : The New Yorker

I had long questioned unions, and my disgust at them has only increased with almost every strike or protest. Back before I left LA in 2003, there had been a grocery workers strike going on. And I carefully listened to what the demands were. And frankly, they turned my stomach.

I remember when jobs like "stock boy" and "bag boy" was generally held by a High School student, making a little extra after school. Well, in a place like LA it is now a union career. I remember seeing the "bag boy" with a 15 year employment pin, and was seriously going WTF over there. No wonder teens have increasing trouble finding jobs, their parents are doing them now as union jobs.

Making as a starting wage $18 an hour, with full medical benefits at no cost.

Holy crap, and that is really what I said to myself. These people start at about the same wage an experienced computer technician make, but with 100% free medical. Maybe I got into the wrong industry, to hell with education and training, I can just stick cans of soup on the shelf and make a lot more cause of the union!

Well, while this strike was going on I left LA, and thankfully have only been back for visits. And in the settlement, the compromise essentially was increased benefits for the current employees, but reduced for any future employees hired.
Click to expand...
Maybe in the long past when workers were treated like slaves during the early industrial period unions were blessings. But, nowadays I haven't heard anything good or sensible coming out from the unions.

From your link, here's the pertinent quote that describes the situation:

"Perhaps the most striking response to the Hostess news, in that sense, was the tweet from conservative John Nolte, who wrote “Hostess strikers had pension. PENSIONS! What is this 1962?”
 
dolphinocean said:
Maybe in the long past when workers were treated like slaves during the early industrial period unions were blessings. But, nowadays I haven't heard anything good or sensible coming out from the unions.
Click to expand...

Actually, I do still support unions in dangerous jobs, such as mine workers and steel workers. In an industry like that, the unions oversee both OSHA and the companies, and take care of the workers and their families in the event of something dreadfull happening.

But come on, a professional sports union? This is just getting out of hand, when somebody with a starting wage of over $750,000 (and your guaranteed salary after 5 years is over $1 million) needs a union. Personally, I think unions should come and go as needed, not become permanent fixtures in the workplace. Because then they become exploitive.

Personally, I think that every single ballot in a union should be a secret ballot. That way the workers can vote how they wish, with no fear of backlash because they did not vote the way the union bosses wanted them to vote.
 
Harshaw said:
And now they have a pay of $0, which is going to make all of those things considerably more difficult, over a take-home pay difference of about one DirecTV payment per month.

And that includes everyone who now has no job, not just the people involved in the strike.
Click to expand...

No, WE-THE-PEOPLE are going to pay them $10 to $11 per hour in unemployment benefits, give them food stamps, housing assistance and medicad. It will instead be us, not Hostess, that will be paying their salary and to do nothing rather than labor. Sounds like they're getting laid off really is more like a promotion.
 
joko104 said:
No, WE-THE-PEOPLE are going to pay them $10 to $11 per hour in unemployment benefits, give them food stamps, housing assistance and medicad. It will instead be us, not Hostess, that will be paying their salary and to do nothing rather than labor. Sounds like they're getting laid off really is more like a promotion.
Click to expand...

Lest forget those employees paid into the system
 
Vulture capitalists took over Hostess and borrowed 450 million against Hostess - not against the hedge funds who owned Hostess. Some of the plants had production machinery that was built in the 1920's. We might assume that investment in equipment, long before now, might have increased efficiency and profit. The hedge fund owners then asked the union to kick in 100 million. They did. Mismanagement continued, Hostess continued to dive. The hedge fund held owners then asked for more concessions from the union, which included salary reductions and loss of retirement benefits. Management including the CEO awarded themselves huge salary increases. There is no record how much the hedge fund owners took out of the company compared to how much they put in. It is reported that they covered their investment and made money, but not as much as they had hoped as they sucked the company dry and milked the workers for everything they could.
 
rathi said:
The competitors of Hostess also have employees that are part of the bakers union and yet they are still afloat. Its clear the management at hostess is incompetent, especially since they already went bankrupt back in 2004. QUOTE] There is a bigger management mismanagement story here. I know someone who worked there before 2004 who saw some very bad stuff going on with the Wall street boys. How dumb to think these money people were there to bake Twinkies. In the end, having scraped the assets clean and dumped their pension obligations, I guess all that is left is to screw the employees to the floor before throwing in the towel. Why won't they co-operate. Oh well, it may keep these managers in their houses for a few more years. The employees there must truly be inspired to work for such great leaders.
Click to expand...
 
Ohhh of course the typical "its the union's fault" card right?
Typical...

Anyways something to think about:
1jvoma.jpg
 
Dwight said:
Or. An example of management screwing up so badly that the company could not afford to pay wages that people will accept rather than no job.

Or. An example of brands losing some luster because of shifting market preferences (concerns over nutritional value).

Or, to put the above all together: Ownership insistence of some set profit margin that was not in line with market realities of operating expenses and product demand.

So now it all get ripped down into pieces and becomes fertilizer for, hopefully, more competent management with a more market appropriate vision. *shrug*
Click to expand...
Although this is usually the result of promoting no-talent brown-noses who are willing to humiliate themselves in indentured-servitude education, Hostess does make the highest-quality products in its field. What I've noticed instead is that, especially in immigrant-owned convenience stores, the managers replace the good stuff with off-brand junk. I suspect these are concocted by slave-wage companies that can offer a bigger profit margin to the stores.
Compounding this is the fact that the customers themselves are subject to low-wage tyranny and can no longer afford quality products, which were able to compete in America before the Capitaliban seized ownership of our economy.
 
CalGun said:
Common sense, lost by far too many in unions. Not all just too many.

At this I can't help but think it'd be cool if Bain Capital swooped in and saved the company and jobs. I'd say they could put in for a union bail out and maybe get a Michelle Obama sponsorship :)
Click to expand...
If the Capitaliban own a man's work, they own the man. If you're not a union man, you're not a man. You're just a boytoy of the rich.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom