No more ding dongs!

[wht_scorpion]

I heard another company is going to buy hostess and open it with a new name to get unions out of their.

[Disclaimer]

Most workers I know have had pay cuts, no raises, no cost of living, along with increases in health care over the last three years. Not to mention modified pensions. Along with other changes like no over time, less personal days, no hiring, hiring part timers, etc. I wouldn't expect anyone to see anything different right now.

And...? So, just because it's happening to everyone else makes it ok for the greed to continue to perpetuate? This is exactly why unions still need to exist. It's the only thing left that forces "big business" to honor their commitments to the little guy. The ones without unions still need that fear of unions to keep them honest. This "suck it up and bear it" is a tired sad song sung by the ones who don't have to sacrifice (management) and jealousy from the rest of the non-union crowd that "If I have to sacrifice and get boned by mgmt, then everyone else should have to as well". That's a sad selfish way of thinking.

You think if I went to the bank and asked to modify my mortgage because everyone else was doing it and getting foreclosed on, they'd let me?

They made a mistake.

Disagree. They did exactly what they should've done if someone didn't honor a contract agreement.

[Tonik]

Wouldn't it be cool if someone like Bain Capital bought it without any taxpayer/government money, kept it open and kept the union workers? Just from the standpoint of hippie heads exploding it would be awesome.

http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2012/11/19/hostess-sun-buyout/?iid=Lead

[Kritz]

I'm going to throw this out there - the fear of having unions created in some places keeps them playing fair. I worked in a factory for about 6 months and they pretty much came out and said, we want to make sure that you're happy so that you don't form a union. That was the only reason, not because they want a happy healthy work environment, because they didn't have to deal with a union.

True:) Treat your workers fairly and the won't want a union. Look at Honda for example. Unions have been trying to get in there for years with no luck.

[Tpoppa]

True:) Treat your workers fairly and the won't want a union. Look at Honda for example. Unions have been trying to get in there for years with no luck.

Yep. The UAW has not had much luck with any 'foreign' automaker plants in the US. Unions also tend to prevent new businesses from building new facilities in heavily unionized areas.

http://www.newgeography.com/content/00107-the-south-rises-again-in-automobile-manufacturing

Lots of foreign auto plants are located in the Southern US, specifically to avoid the union mentality in more traditional automotive areas like Ohio and Michigan. Good work UAW

[Disclaimer]

Kind of interesting that they're heading south of the Mason-Dixon for "cheap" labor.. history repeating itself?

There are a few reasons why foreign automakers don't have unions, but to say "They don't need a union" discounts the fact that they are run the way they are run BECAUSE of the unions like the UAW. And, honestly, if your source of income was from a non-union job, you'd be crazy to start talking about a union. Despite the fact that anti-union propaganda is everywhere from management, but as soon as you speak of unionizing and being a supporter thereof, you might as well paint a target on your back. Others' might agree with you, but you'd never know. Even if they did agree, most of them are too spineless to stand up for their beliefs either if it meant potentially sacrificing their jobs.

Would you argue politics with your boss if you disagree with him/her?

How Germany Builds Twice as Many Cars as the U.S. While Paying Its Workers Twice as Much

http://www.forbes.com/sites/frederickallen/2011/12/21/germany-builds-twice-as-many-cars-as-the-u-s-while-paying-its-auto-workers-twice-as-much/

[Tpoppa]

Kind of interesting that they're heading south of the Mason-Dixon for "cheap" labor.. history repeating itself?

There are a few reasons why foreign automakers don't have unions, but to say "They don't need a union" discounts the fact that they are run the way they are run BECAUSE of the unions like the UAW. And, honestly, if your source of income was from a non-union job, you'd be crazy to start talking about a union. Despite the fact that anti-union propaganda is everywhere from management, but as soon as you speak of unionizing and being a supporter thereof, you might as well paint a target on your back. Others' might agree with you, but you'd never know. Even if they did agree, most of them are too spineless to stand up for their beliefs either if it meant potentially sacrificing their jobs.

Would you argue politics with your boss if you disagree with him/her?

How Germany Builds Twice as Many Cars as the U.S. While Paying Its Workers Twice as Much

http://www.forbes.com/sites/frederickallen/2011/12/21/germany-builds-twice-as-many-cars-as-the-u-s-while-paying-its-auto-workers-twice-as-much/

If the UAW got significant traction in the South...I'd bet a dollar that foreign auto makers would look elsewhere to build. Including outside the US alltogether.

What benefits does the UAW provide over non-union labor to the company or the consumer? Little if any. The UAW is a self serving group that is even willing to screw it's younger members to benefit the old timers.

[cOoTeR]

Here's the f^€<ing union causing more issues.

http://m.yahoo.com/w/legobpengine/news/hostess-liquidation-too-sweet-managers-u-says-191817929--sector.html?orig_host_hdr=news.yahoo.com&.intl=US&.lang=en-US&.tsrc=yahoo

[Disclaimer]

If the UAW got significant traction in the South...I'd bet a dollar that foreign auto makers would look elsewhere to build. Including outside the US alltogether.

Did you bother reading my link?

What benefits does the UAW provide over non-union labor to the company or the consumer? Little if any.

Well, considering that communities can grow and be sustainable when you pay your workers a living wage where they can afford to buy the products they produce... that'd be a benefit. And again, it's a race to the bottom if the unions weren't there to at least keep the companies in check. Even the non-union people benefit from the labor agreements, benefit packages, and working conditions the unions have fought for. I know a lot of people enjoy having vacation days.

The UAW is a self serving group that is even willing to screw it's younger members to benefit the old timers.

There's the "damned if you do, damned if you don't" issue. No pleasing people. The unions make concessions and they're "screwing the younger members", but if they don't they're "greedy union thugs". If I've put in 20 years and promised a pension after 10yrs of service and a certain hourly wage for my labor, why would I give that up?

[NinjaNick]

Could they be staying!

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/11/19/hostess-union-hopes-buyer-will-put-employees-back-to-work/?test=latestnews

[cOoTeR]

Could they be staying!

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/11/19/hostess-union-hopes-buyer-will-put-employees-back-to-work/?test=latestnews

Your a couple posts behind.

Here's the f^€<ing union causing more issues.

http://m.yahoo.com/w/legobpengine/news/hostess-liquidation-too-sweet-managers-u-says-191817929--sector.html?orig_host_hdr=news.yahoo.com&.intl=US&.lang=en-US&.tsrc=yahoo

I hope they stay around just to show the idiots paying $300 for twinkies how bad of an investment that wad.

Edited November 19, 2012 by cOoTeR

[NinjaNick]

Your a couple posts behind.

I hope they stay around just to show the idiots paying $300 for twinkies how bad of an investment that wad.

That was the first thought on my mind too.

[Scruit]

That was the first thought on my mind too.

Those people spending stupid money on Hostess products obviously believed the myth that Twinkies last for years. Nope, baked, 25 day shelf life. Your $300 in cookies will expire before the stores are all out.

[snot]

I bought the last package at work for $0.85....i did share with mutt.

But not as good as i remember.

[Scruit]

The executive pay raises have been rescinded, according to snopes;

http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/hostess.asp

Five days after that article was published, the Wall Street Journal reported that Hostess' new CEO, Gregory F. Rayburn, had announced he was slashing executive compensation, and that the company's top four executives had temporarily agreed to cut their annual salaries to $1 while four other executives had agreed to return to their previous salary levels.

That was a scummy move on their part, upping their own salaries. Looting the ship as it sinks? They should be jailed for that shit.

[Disclaimer]

Golden parachutes are heavy and expensive, so it's only fair they hand out less than 20 of them... not to the 18,000 employees that made them.

http://www.nbcnews.com/business/hostess-liquidation-draws-more-100-bidders-1C7325957

Hostess Brands also is asking for a judge's approval to give its top executives bonuses totaling up to $1.8 million as part of its wind-down plans.

The company says the incentive pay is needed to retain the 19 corporate officers and "high-level managers" during the liquidation process, which could take about a year. Two of those executives would be eligible for additional rewards depending on how efficiently they carry out the liquidation. The bonuses would be in addition to their regular pay.

The bonuses do not include pay for CEO Gregory Rayburn, who was brought on as a restructuring expert earlier this year. Rayburn is being paid $125,000 a month.

...

Hostess noted that the company is no longer able to pay retiree benefits, which come to about $1.1 million a month. Hostess stopped contributing to its union pension plans more than a year ago.

I throw that to the pro-business pro-corporate hounds on here and see how you justify that one. Executives don't honor contractual obligations to their own employees, and then request over $1M in bonus to kill the company.

Unions fault, obviously.

[Scruit]

Golden parachutes are heavy and expensive, so it's only fair they hand out less than 20 of them... not to the 18,000 employees that made them.

http://www.nbcnews.com/business/hostess-liquidation-draws-more-100-bidders-1C7325957

I throw that to the pro-business pro-corporate hounds on here and see how you justify that one. Executives don't honor contractual obligations to their own employees, and then request over $1M in bonus to kill the company.

Unions fault, obviously.

When my last employer wound down their Ohio operations I was picked to be part of the team that helped shut the place down. We were all offered bonuses of 50% our annual salary to be paid on the day the office went dark, as long as you still worked there. And this was a team of IT folks with 10+ years experience each, so we where we all hovering right around 6 figure salaries so we're talking $50-55k in bonuses, on top of severance AND unemployment

The reason for the large bonuses is that people on the transition team were dropping like flies, getting new jobs. If they didn't offer any bonuses then the office operations/assets/datacenter would never have been successfully transitioned. Nobody wants to be out of a job with no job to go to. It took a year to complete, and those who lasted it out made enough money to not be worried about having to find a new job quickly.

I understand bonuses paid to the transition team to keep them in place until they are no longer needed. I also understand that even big bonuses are no guarantee. I gave up my $50k bonus in exchange for leaving early to jump on a job that gave me better long-term career. It paid off, and I'm better off now than I would have been if I'd taken the bonus + any available job. I did the math and figured out that if it took me more than 3mo to find a job at the same salary then I'd be losing money. Most people took 2-4 months to find new jobs. My new job took 2 months from responding to the ad to getting the offer.

Edited November 30, 2012 by Scruit

[Disclaimer]

That's hardly a golden parachute though... you're still a worker bee, no? Unless you consider yourself an exec... You didn't make key strategic decisions to run the company into the ground in the first place did you? And then expect to be compensated on top of it?

[ninjachic]

I was at the store the other day. And came across this innocent-looking, sweet old lady staring at where the these products used to be in the stores. She looks at me and very loudly says, "what the fuck is with people these days? Why cant every one just be gracious for what they have? The stupid people HAVE a job be grateful for that in this damn ecomony." and walked away. I about fell on the floor.

[Scruit]

That's hardly a golden parachute though... you're still a worker bee, no? Unless you consider yourself an exec... You didn't make key strategic decisions to run the company into the ground in the first place did you? And then expect to be compensated on top of it?

They need certain people, even execs, to complete the shutdown. Those people have to be tempted to stay to the bitter end or they will leave the company unable to close down and getting sued by creditors etc.

You have to consider how much each person is paid. If an exec earns $350k a year then what do you pay them to make them stay versus quit for a new 350k/yr job? I dunno.

I'm just talking about the transition team and why you need to pay them extra to stay - human nature. I agree that the bonuses they voted themselves before the shutdown was announced are borderline criminal.

[Cdubyah]

http://www.hulu.com/watch/433386