End of the Twinkie?

[MJ5150]

Those striking workers sure showed Hostess didn't they?

-Mike

[HeavyDuty]

Please keep the overly rabid union comments in check, people - it's trolling and will be handled accordingly.

[chuck norriss]

There's a box of twinkies on feebay at $122.50, 3 hours left. What beef wit is going to pay that?
10 boxes not 1.

[bassistjoe93]

Originally Posted by pasta4lnch

A union is a business. Period! This country has too much of an attitude of entitlement already. The unions only make the matter worse. Much much worse...and for their benefit might I add.

This anger towards businessmen/women as the rich enemy is disgusting! (And I'd LOVE to see what these naysayers would do given similar opportunities and situations...take the money and run I strongly suspect!!)

I'm no poor because someone else is rich!

Sorry for the rant. Just getting so angered by attitudes lately.

Back ot...never cared for twinkies. Always been an ice cream man myself.

Im'ma just +1 this right here...

Also, tastycakes eats hostess' breakfast as far as I'm concerned.

[jmattbassplaya]

Originally Posted by hdracer

Even the Teamsters did their part to help keep the business going.

This.

Originally Posted by slobake

Yup, let's not jump to conclusions here. The union is an easy target, but there are more things involved.

Definitely.

Originally Posted by Eric Perry

Go figure. Wonder what his salary is?

Stop making sense

Originally Posted by One Drop

Blaming this on current government and the workers seems just a little too easy.

Bad management, tired brands, short-sighted strategy by venture capital owners, union intransigence, changing consumer habits, slow economy, etc.

+100

My friend posted on Facebook about how against unions he was because of this story. I asked him whether or not he thought it was the union's fault for getting them into that mess or if it was possibly due to incompetent leadership from the top that got them there. He actually ended up siding with me

Originally Posted by 1958Bassman

This was posted in another forum by one of the Teamsters who approved their part of the contract and it may have a bit of truth to it-

"The workers simply wanted to keep what they had. Back in 2008 all the union employees at Hostess were asked to give wage and benefit concessions to help the company get out of bankruptcy. They complied, the company did not adhere to their plan to turn the company around. Instead most of the management got bonuses. The company did not reinvest modernization as they had proposed.
They did not want to see this happen again. I am one of the Teamsters who accepted the new proposal. The bakers chose not to. It's too bad that they chose to shut down. It is also questionable if these concessions would have been enough to turn things around. The company was poorly managed on almost every level."

If that is true then that just further proves my thoughts on the matter.

Originally Posted by pasta4lnch

A union is a business. Period! This country has too much of an attitude of entitlement already. The unions only make the matter worse. Much much worse...and for their benefit might I add.

This anger towards businessmen/women as the rich enemy is disgusting! (And I'd LOVE to see what these naysayers would do given similar opportunities and situations...take the money and run I strongly suspect!!)

I'm no poor because someone else is rich!

Sorry for the rant. Just getting so angered by attitudes lately.

Back ot...never cared for twinkies. Always been an ice cream man myself.

So do you think only middle class people have a sense of entitlement, or is it possible that corporate executives, who increase their own salaries while simultaneously laying off employees and then ship jobs overseas to increase their bottom line, might have a sense of entitlement, too?

[jmattbassplaya]

Originally Posted by HeavyDuty

Please keep the overly rabid union comments in check, people - it's trolling and will be handled accordingly.

Might be too late for that. I vote moving this thread to the lobby if this is going to be an issue.

[VitalSigns]

I would post something, but I'd probably offend some people and end up breaking alot of rules in the process. So I'll just quote this and be on my way...

Originally Posted by jmattbassplaya

So do you think only middle class people have a sense of entitlement, or is it possible that corporate executives, who increase their own salaries while simultaneously laying off employees and then ship jobs overseas to increase their bottom line, might have a sense of entitlement, too?

[LiquidMidnight]

Originally Posted by One Drop

Blaming this on current government and the workers seems just a little too easy.

Bad management, tired brands, short-sighted strategy by venture capital owners, union intransigence, changing consumer habits, slow economy, etc.

Hey hey, now! We won't have any of those complex answers regarding complex phenomena here in TB OT! We need reductionist answers that confirm are own preconcieved uninformed biases.

[Richland123]

13 Delicious Hostess Products In Danger Of Extinction

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/1...6pLid%3D235571

Hostess also makes Nature's Pride, Dolly Madison, Butternut Breads, and Drake's brands and all their subsequent products will cease as well.

[pasta4lnch]

Originally Posted by jmattbassplaya

So do you think only middle class people have a sense of entitlement, or is it possible that corporate executives, who increase their own salaries while simultaneously laying off employees and then ship jobs overseas to increase their bottom line, might have a sense of entitlement, too?

I want to heed the mods warning and not got too nuts on the topic, but if I may try to politely answer your question:

Businesses exist to make a profit. I think we can all agree? Now before we get nuts I whole heartedly believe there needs to be some sort of governing body to protect workers rights (just as I believe there should be an organization to protect business owners rights). Unions are set up to make a profit themselves - and what a captive market. Who wouldn't want more from their employers for doing less? Who wouldn't want more benefits, break time, perks etc? Listen, I love my job, but yeah, I'd want more too. Problem is someone has to pay the tab. A man/woman who takes the risk and makes the sacrifice to start and nurture a business and assume responsibility for that business should be able to reap the reward from that business, should they not? Should they be salaried? Have nominally more reward then a line worker? Not to say a line worker doesn't deserve their due. But it is relative. And yes, I'll concede there are some unscrupulous people who milk the proverbial boob unethically, but this is not the norm as people would like to believe. And why do they believe it? Because they have what every one wants. They are rich, they must be evil. They must be screwing someone. It's a lot easier to blame someone else then yourself.

When I used to be a business owner almost all my employees (granted it was a small operation) thought they should get paid simply for showing up. Think of it - how many times do you come across someone who isn't doing their jobs properly? I come across it daily. This is the entitlement I speak of. There are jobs that deserve higher salaries, better benefits and more perks for sure. But I think there are a LOT more workers who want, and quite frankly are expecting this for doing less.


A business owner making a profit is doing his job.

The great thing about this country is freedom - if you don't like your employer quit, and find another job. You want to make more, educate yourself and get a better job. Save and start a business. NOTHING is stopping you! (of course not talking of "you" specifically)

I'm jumping around a lot, but I feel strongly about all of this and haven't engaged in conversation a lot on the topic and want to get a lot out . . .

[LiquidMidnight]

Originally Posted by pasta4lnch

Unions are set up to make a profit themselves

Labor organizations are 501(c)(5) organizations, so they're set up particuarly not to make a profit. Yes, they require inputs (i.e., dues). Just about any systems theory is going explicitly state that any system or organization that survives is going to require inputs. I never understood why people act indignant concerning that when it comes to this discussion.

- and what a captive market. Who wouldn't want more from their employers for doing less? Who wouldn't want more benefits, break time, perks etc?

They're not doing a very good job of organizing then. In the private sector, only about 7% of the workforce is organized. While I haven't checked the numbers in a while, IIRC, the NLRB has consistently reported lower certification elections over the past couple of years.

[sneha1965]

Good riddance. Hostess never made anything healthy and did nothing but contribute to peoples cavities and bad health. I hope the employees are able to find other jobs soon.

[SBsoundguy]

Originally Posted by sneha1965

Good riddance. Hostess never made anything healthy and did nothing but contribute to peoples cavities and bad health. I hope the employees are unable to find other jobs soon.

Are you not a fan of dessert or sweets in general?

[Epitaph04]

Or maybe it was the people who wouldnt binge on sweets and not brush atter eating...maybe its their fault..

I have plenty of cavities and used to be 50-60 pounds overweight. Not once did I blame the food.

[tastybasslines]

Originally Posted by sneha1965

Good riddance. Hostess never made anything healthy and did nothing but contribute to peoples cavities and bad health. I hope the employees are unable to find other jobs soon.

Talk about "get off my lawn"...geez

[Reticle]

It's not like the Unions made HUGE concessions and lost THOUSANDS of workers to keep Hostess from going bankrupt in 2009. Also, it's not as if the company gave it's CEO a 300% pay raise and several top execs were given huge raises as well. All as they were nearing bankruptcy.

While the company was filing for bankruptcy, for the second time, earlier this year, it actually tripled its CEO’s pay, and increased other executives’ compensation by as much as 80 percent.

At the time, creditors warned that the decision signaled an attempt to “sidestep” bankruptcy rules, potentially as a means for trying to keep the executive at a failing company. The Confectionery, Tobacco Workers & Grain Millers International Union pointed this out in their written reaction to the news that the business is closing:


BCTGM members are well aware that as the company was preparing to file for bankruptcy earlier this year, the then CEO of Hostess was awarded a 300 percent raise (from approximately $750,000 to $2,550,000) and at least nine other top executives of the company received massive pay raises. One such executive received a pay increase from $500,000 to $900,000 and another received one taking his salary from $375,000 to $656,256.

Of course none of that happened, Because that would be managements fault.

[sneha1965]

Originally Posted by SBsoundguy

Are you not a fan of dessert or sweets in general?

I wouldn't call what Hostess made as desert. More like junk food. You figure a Herseys chocolate bar has 19 grams of sugar as opposed to a Twinkie at 35 grams. It's not even healthy junk food.

[sneha1965]

Originally Posted by tastybasslines

Talk about "get off my lawn"...geez

What?! Weren't you the guy who was saying it was bizarro food?

[tastybasslines]

Originally Posted by sneha1965

What?! Weren't you the guy who was saying it was bizarro food?

No

[VitalSigns]

Originally Posted by sneha1965

I wouldn't call what Hostess made as desert. More like junk food. You figure a Herseys chocolate bar has 19 grams of sugar as opposed to a Twinkie at 35 grams. It's not even healthy junk food.

I just ate a Twinkie. It was pretty sick, can't say I'll be missing them.

Oh and Ho Ho's taste like pool water.