Hostess is Toast

[jen0610]

A friend of mine's dad worked for Hostess. Most Hostess workers had already taken pay cuts over the last couple of years. And the majority of them gave up even more this year! Most plants had already made more concessions, it was only a few plants that went on strike. So don't try and say they are all to blame for the company folding. It was in reality a few of them who decided to be stubborn. And everyone who worked for Hostess (even those who had already made concessions) lost their jobs.

I am sure there are a lot of former employees who wish that the BCTGM had listened to the Teamster's financial experts. My sympathies to your brother and all the others held captive by the union officials who, it is my understanding, did not permit their members to hold a secret ballot to determine whether or not to return to work.

Maxiesmom - nobody on here said that EVERYBODY who worked at Hostess was to blame. Pretty much everybody on here knows that is was one union group that put the screws to the rest of them. How many of the 18,500ish losing their jobs are actually members of the BCTGM? I am sure that it was a smaller percentage of the 18,500.

 

[3boymthr]

I lay this clearly on the hand of the unions, but not the current unions, rather the unions of the past - those employees of the 70s and 80s who have since retired. For those of you saying "unfunded" pensions and where is the money that was supposed to fund these pensions, I'm thinking that this obligation dates way back to the original companies that were bought back before Hostess became a conglomerate - the original Drakes and Wonder and... before they merged into one company. The BIG Companies of old where the employees got 100% employer paid pension for life after retirement and 100% employer paid medical for life after retirement (of course this was offered back when most people died 4 or 5 years after they retired). I read somewhere that it was not unfunded pension liabilities but rather pension "legacies". This would imply that they are operating under the onus of paying the salaries and medical insurance of people who retired 20 and 30 years ago (and maybe longer - possibly as far back as the 70s). I know that when I worked at Texas Instruments they had HUGE pension and medical liabilities that they had to budget for. The pension liabilities exceeded the salaries of all the active employees by 5 or 6 times. The same could be said for a hospital for which I use to do some HR benefit work. People are living way longer than they did when the promises to pay these pensions were made and many companies with these types of liabilities have long since foundered or folded. Most of the companies with these liabilities are just hoping to last longer than the employees to whom they are paying these benefits.

 

[akcire]

I am pretty sure the collapse of Hostess is the first sign of the apocalypse.

Also aren't Isreal and Palastine reving up again?

I need to go start digging my underground bunker. Seriously I have seen the new Fantasyland, I am at peace with the world.

 

[yeartolate]

I am pretty sure the collapse of Hostess is the first sign of the apocalypse.

Also aren't Isreal and Palastine reving up again?

I need to go start digging my underground bunker. Seriously I have seen the new Fantasyland, I am at peace with the world.

On a positive note, the twinkies have a postapocalyptic shelf life so the cockroaches should survive.

 

[Albort]

On a positive note, the twinkies have a postapocalyptic shelf life so the cockroaches should survive.

its okay... we still got these...

 

[MolonLabe]

While you don't like to see people lose their jobs, sometimes they have no one but themselves to blame for that. As a company, Hostess was in trouble. The union workers knew that, but instead of working with Hostess to try and work out a deal that would help keep Hostess open and keep people in jobs, they didn't so now there are no jobs, instead of a number of jobs at a lesser wage.

I just don't get why people have a hard time understanding, a little of something is a whole lot better than nothing.

Me either. If you don't like your job, quit and get another one. How hard is that?

Hostess may well have went under anyway next year but 1,500 idiots cost the other 17,000~ at least 8 weeks of pay.

I've got zero sympathy for the 1,500 union workers in this case.

I feel awful for the other 17,000 though.

Living the midwest, unions are huge here. It seems like every week, one of them is in front of some store, strip mall or construction site with a big inflatable rat. I feel like rolling down my window and yelling at them "Get back to work you lazy so-and-so's!"

It's absurd, in the worst economy since the great depression, so many idiots have the nerve to go on strike.

Hey buddy, if you are that good at your job, you should have no problem finding a better one... right?

 

[dakcp2001]

It is easy to blame the unions here, but it is pretty obvious with just a TINY bit of research that the company has been planning to liquidate for well over a year. They used the strike as an excuse. And while knowing the company was going under and that they hoped to sell the brand (which really is what they are hoping to do) they made sure all the muckety-mucks got their cash bonuses and raises on the way out the door. This company has been a sinking ship since 2005, and all the workers that took the cuts then should have had an eye on the horizon for the end of this company. I worked for a company like this before and when the red flags started coming, I went back to school and jumped ship. You need to look ahead. So some of these workers are to blame for not seeing what was coming. The strike, eh, just an excuse. They were getting fed a crap sandwich, so I don't blame them for saying no thanks. It is pretty short sided to blame one side or the other. Both are to blame. But there is no doubt that this company, whether the bakers skipped the strike or not, was circling the drain as it HAS been for many years.


Here is one workers actual cost of concessions since 2005 (http://money.cnn.com/2012/11/16/news/companies/hostess-workers/index.html?iid=Lead):

Mike Hummell, a receiving clerk and a member of the Bakers' union working in Lenexa, Kan., said he was making about $48,000 in 2005 before the company's first trip through bankruptcy. Concessions during that reorganization cut his pay to $34,000 last year, earning $16.12 an hour. He said the latest contract demands would have cut his pay to about $25,000, with significantly higher out-of-pocket expenses for insurance.


How many people can afford to go from making 48k to 25K? Not many. If the CEOS and Management was also taking these types of concessions and pay cuts, then maybe. But they were not.

 

[yeartolate]

Me either. If you don't like your job, quit and get another one. How hard is that?

Hostess may well have went under anyway next year but 1,500 idiots cost the other 17,000~ at least 8 weeks of pay.

I've got zero sympathy for the 1,500 union workers in this case.

I feel awful for the other 17,000 though.

Living the midwest, unions are huge here. It seems like every week, one of them is in front of some store, strip mall or construction site with a big inflatable rat. I feel like rolling down my window and yelling at them "Get back to work you lazy so-and-so's!"

It's absurd, in the worst economy since the great depression, so many idiots have the nerve to go on strike.

Hey buddy, if you are that good at your job, you should have no problem finding a better one... right?

I am not sure it is strictly a union issue.

I remember growing up and everybody had a hoho , yo ho . yo yo , ding dong, or twinkie in their lunch.

As a mom, I think we had twinkies once in the house in 18 years. Lunch bags had an apple and carrot chips rather than twinkies .

Ha their sales as a whole stayed up all these years? I have no clue, but certainly I do not see the treats around.

Certainly excessive union demands in can be harmful or deadly to a company...but I do just have to wonder )) if the company was on strong footing and holding its own.

 

[dakcp2001]

And for the record I have not had a Twinkie for awhile now, but the last time I did they did not taste good anymore. They did something that made them less tasty and more dry. I remember thinking yuck. Its been several years though.


Guess we will need to fins somthing else to deep fry at county fairs next year. Oh wait, people are already deep frying BUTTER. Sticks of BUTTER. Eat your veggies, kids.

 

[MolonLabe]

How many people can afford to go from making 48k to 25K? Not many. If the CEOS and Management was also taking these types of concessions and pay cuts, then maybe. But they were not.

It's pretty simple dak. Companies, for profit ones, are in business to make money, not provide people with hand outs or cut them in on higher profits for simply doing a job.

Low stress, menial task jobs get low stress menial pay. Want to make more money, make yourself more useful.

The questions are many.

Did the worker deserve 48,000 to begin with? Considering he took a 12,000 pay cut and stayed at the job for several years, as opposed to finding a higher paying job, I'd say that 36,000 a year was more in line with what he was worth.

Being cut from 36,000 to 25,000. Again, if he was worth more, why not go where he could earn what he was worth?

Unless, through any number of reasons (including artificially inflated union wages), this guy was sticking around because he wasn't even 25k.

I was in a similar situation almost 2 years ago. Cut backs and what not would have led to a nearly 50% pay cut. I left and struck out on my own.

I now make significantly more working for myself, as opposed to someone else. Guess what though? All those risks and worries I didn't have when someone else had that other stress and risk... it's all on me now.

It's much easier to show up, punch a clock and collect an hour wage, then it is to have the stress and burdens of managing and owning a company and what comes with it. Compensation is and should be in line with that.

It's about being grateful for what you have and not looking at someone else and being greedy or envious of them.

These workers should have been grateful to hostess for giving them jobs.

This is America, no one is forcing you to work for hostess (or anyone else). If you don't like your job and think you can do better, then do better.

Sticking around and complaining and striking? They have no one to blame but themselves.

Unions were obsolete when they replaced canaries with machines.

 

[MolonLabe]

And for the record I have not had a Twinkie for awhile now, but the last time I did they did not taste good anymore. They did something that made them less tasty and more dry. I remember thinking yuck. Its been several years though.

I thought the same thing... I sort of figured I had grown up and since I eat as much organic, GMO free, HFCS free and grass fed / free range food as I can, I figured my body just didn't like poison anymore, lol.

 

[dakcp2001]

It's pretty simple dak. Companies, for profit ones, are in business to make money, not provide people with hand outs or cut them in on higher profits for simply doing a job.

Low stress, menial task jobs get low stress menial pay. Want to make more money, make yourself more useful.

The questions are many.

Did the worker deserve 48,000 to begin with? Considering he took a 12,000 pay cut and stayed at the job for several years, as opposed to finding a higher paying job, I'd say that 36,000 a year was more in line with what he was worth.

Being cut from 36,000 to 25,000. Again, if he was worth more, why not go where he could earn what he was worth?

Unless, through any number of reasons (including artificially inflated union wages), this guy was sticking around because he wasn't even 25k.

I was in a similar situation almost 2 years ago. Cut backs and what not would have led to a nearly 50% pay cut. I left and struck out on my own.

I now make significantly more working for myself, as opposed to someone else. Guess what though? All those risks and worries I didn't have when someone else had that other stress and risk... it's all on me now.

It's much easier to show up, punch a clock and collect an hour wage, then it is to have the stress and burdens of managing and owning a company and what comes with it. Compensation is and should be in line with that.

It's about being grateful for what you have and not looking at someone else and being greedy or envious of them.

These workers should have been grateful to hostess for giving them jobs.

This is America, no one is forcing you to work for hostess (or anyone else). If you don't like your job and think you can do better, then do better.

Sticking around and complaining and striking? They have no one to blame but themselves.

Unions were obsolete when they replaced canaries with machines.

So it is all the unions fault? No fault in the poorly run company and crappy finances? That is not biased at all. And how could you know what a worker in his job is worth? Do you know what his day to day operations are? What machines he operates? What skill he needs? You know Hostess agreed to those terms. SO they must have felt it was fair at some point. They have been hemorrhaging money for close to a decade. Oh and stealing. But it must be the unions fault entirely.

 

[dakcp2001]

I thought the same thing... I sort of figured I had grown up and since I eat as much organic, GMO free, HFCS free and grass fed / free range food as I can, I figured my body just didn't like poison anymore, lol.

I think they changed the recipe or something some years back it was noticeable. Just wait til the brand gets bought and the twinkies get made in Mexico or something. Wonder what they will taste like then.

 

[MolonLabe]

And how could you know what a worker in his job is worth? Do you know what his day to day operations are? What machines he operates? What skill he needs?

Pretty easily to figure out. If he was worth 48,000 and got dropped to 35,000 he could have went else where and got paid what he was worth.

He stuck around for several years, no one who was capable of making 25%~ more money would stick around for that long if they were worth more.

You know Hostess agreed to those terms. SO they must have felt it was fair at some point.

Either that or they union threatened to strike and hostess caved and capitulated.

All we know for sure is, because of the actions of 1,500 union workers, 17,000 people are now unemployed when they should have had jobs for at least another 8 weeks and possibly many more months and years to come.

Because of them, we won't know if hostess could have emerged from this latest problem.

Doesn't effect me*, I don't own stock in them and personally, I feel their 'food', if you can call it that, contributes to all sorts of diseases and chronic conditions.

Then again, just like if someone wants to work a low paying job, I think people should be allowed to eat whatever they want. Even if I think it's 'poison'.



*beyond the fact as a taxpayer, now I'll have to pick up the tab for many fo these people going on unemployment and social welfare programs.

 

[dakcp2001]

Pretty easily to figure out. If he was worth 48,000 and got dropped to 35,000 he could have went else where and got paid what he was worth.

He stuck around for several years, no one who was capable of making 25%~ more money would stick around for that long if they were worth more.



Either that or they union threatened to strike and hostess caved and capitulated.

All we know for sure is, because of the actions of 1,500 union workers, 17,000 people are now unemployed when they should have had jobs for at least another 8 weeks and possibly many more months and years to come.

Because of them, we won't know if hostess could have emerged from this latest problem.

Doesn't effect me, I don't own stock in them and personally, I feel there 'food', if you can call it that, contributes to all sorts of diseases and chronic conditions.

Then again, just like if someone wants to work a low paying job, I think people should be allowed to eat whatever they want. Even if I think it's 'poison'.

Actually, we do know. It was going to be liquidated. All the steps had already been put in place. They were just waiting for the moment to do it.

 

[S. C.]

And when hostess starts a new company, with a new name, and hires workers at half the pay with no benefits, I will never buy a product from them.
It would be different if CEO's all made wage and benefit cuts too.

But plenty of people will! I know I will just to spite those who won't!

Enjoy your twinkies, wherever, and whatever they are made with!

Sure you will.

You think there is not other bakers I can buy from?

Actually, we do know. It was going to be liquidated. All the steps had already been put in place. They were just waiting for the moment to do it.

I agree!

 

[Planogirl]

I imagine that there is enough blame to go around to Management and the Union and who knows who else. It's still sad that they are going under no matter what happens after this.

I always did like Chocolate Zingers. I haven't had one in years.

 

[dakcp2001]

I imagine that there is enough blame to go around to Management and the Union and who knows who else. It's still sad that they are going under no matter what happens after this.

I always did like Chocolate Zingers. I haven't had one in years.

What is a chocolate zinger?

 

[nathalee81]

This thread got me curious so I did some digging. I don't know how accurate this is, as it is late and I am a little tired so haven't googled other results.

Apparently, earlier this year the CEO of Hostess was awarded with a 300 percent raise and other executives were awarded massive pay raises (at least, nine others that I saw).

It seems absurd to me that is you can't afford to pay the pensions you promised to your employees and your company is going belly up, you think you deserve a 300 percent pay raise. Yeah, that makes a ton of sense. Because, you know, you are doing such a great job!

Until, CEO's and big executives take some major pay cuts (and also take some personal responsibility when their companies profits take a nose dive), I don't see why their employees (who make significantly less) should have to take a pay cut or deduction in benefits, either. I know everyone says they should get paid more because they have more responsibility, I think that is bull. I have never seen a CEO take personal responsibility for any failed business. You know what they do? Take their golden parachutes, blame the unions (or the government, or the banks, or anyone else they can point the finger at) and move onto their yacht or vacation home.

I will never understand this hatred of unions in this nation. While they are not all perfect, you can thank them for your 40 hour work weeks, overtime pay and child labor laws. Sorry, they are not the root of all evil, as far as I am concerned.

Edited to add: I went back and saw on an earlier post that someone had already brought this up. I missed it in one of the pages.

 

[Albort]

This thread got me curious so I did some digging. I don't know how accurate this is, as it is late and I am a little tired so haven't googled other results.

Apparently, earlier this year the CEO of Hostess was awarded with a 300 percent raise and other executives were awarded massive pay raises (at least, nine others that I saw).

It seems absurd to me that is you can't afford to pay the pensions you promised to your employees and your company is going belly up, you think you deserve a 300 percent pay raise. Yeah, that makes a ton of sense. Because, you know, you are doing such a great job!

Until, CEO's and big executives take some major pay cuts (and also take some personal responsibility when their companies profits take a nose dive), I don't see why their employees (who make significantly less) should have to take a pay cut or deduction in benefits, either. I know everyone says they should get paid more because they have more responsibility, I think that is bull. I have never seen a CEO take personal responsibility for any failed business. You know what they do? Take their golden parachutes, blame the unions (or the government, or the banks, or anyone else they can point the finger at) and move onto their yacht or vacation home.

I will never understand this hatred of unions in this nation. While they are not all perfect, you can thank them for your 40 hour work weeks, overtime pay and child labor laws. Sorry, they are not the root of all evil, as far as I am concerned.

Edited to add: I went back and saw on an earlier post that someone had already brought this up. I missed it in one of the pages.

Toe be fair though, the top 4 executives have been paid $1 since March 2012. sucks to work 8 month for $1...