Death of a Twinkie: Hostess Brands to close

[FriendlyFire]

Zombie Land?

In any case, labor striking themselves out of a job and lagging brand value has a predictable result. You can blame health conciousness as a cause of declining brand value (which I am sure had an effect), but I also blame the reemergence of local bakeries and especially the internal super market bakeries and brands. I have not bought a aisle stocked baked good in years, and why would you when there are fresh backed ones right there?

I am sure several of their more popular snack item brands will be sold off as part of the bankruptcy, Twinkies and HoHos being two I would bet on. Granted, I assume whomever buys them will produce them in limited volume as a novelty vice a flagship product.

Stupid Unions should have accepted the pay cut, on condition that the CEO and board be immediately removed without compensation.
No mismanagement here Patroklos, nope.

According to Becker, most of the company's employees had approved an 8 percent pay cut for the coming year, but the members of the Bakery, Confectionary, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers International Union had voted against the reduction and a change in the pension plan.

Union President Frank Hurt said the company's failure was not the fault of the union but the "result of nearly a decade of financial and operational mismanagement"

Reportedly the CEO of Hostess was awarded a pay increase from approximately $750,000 to $2,550,000. At least nine other top executives of the company received massive pay raises. One went from $500,000 to $900,000 in compensation. Nice money to make when you're heading a company on its way to bankruptcy.

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/20...ont-shoulder-the-blame-for-hostesss-downfall/

 

[Disgustipated]

It's not the unions fault, and it's not the management's fault. The company is not, and would never be profitable no matter what. Their demise was inevitable.

I actually have respect to the unions, and management for sticking to their principles. Unions shouldn't have accepted lower wages, that hurts their union workers at other similar companies. And management shouldn't cave in to unacceptable union demands. Both sides did the right thing. The company was a lost cause, and had to go.

 

[fishjie]

the CEO compensation was already low. 750k? that's chump change. there were roughly 18k workers. the raise was 1.5 million dollars. divide that by 18k, and everyone paid 83$ for that raise. let's say they had not raised the CEO pay. well whoop tee doo, everyone gets 83$.

but wait. the CEO's job is to run the business. most of the unskilled labor in the union would eventually be replaced by robots in a few years anyway. if the union thinks the pay is too low, they are free to buy the company now that its for sale and run it themselves. then they can give everyone super huge raises, healthcare, pensions, while keeping CEO pay low.

 

[Traitorfish]

So ....... company says it has to cut pay to stay profitable. the union goes on strike. the company says they cant afford it. union ignores threats and continues strike. now instead of a paycut, they have nothing. good job union!

what i dont get is why more people arent blaming the unions instead of yelling at the management. do they not understand that crap like pensions and pay raises cost money? money that doesn't exist unless the company stays profitable? smh

"If we can't exploit you harder, we might not be able to keep exploiting you at all! And wouldn't that be terrible?"

 

[fishjie]

"If we can't exploit you harder, we might not be able to keep exploiting you at all! And wouldn't that be terrible?"

well all those workers who think they're being exploited are free to run companies themselves. and the thing is, despite your sarcasm they actually are not being exploited any longer. so they win, although its a pyrrhic victory. and as robotics and ai gets better and better, the low skilled jobs will automated away in the future anyway, so they'll never have to worry about exploitation again. its simply unrealistic to think unskilled labor pay will go up. it won't. it will only go down as time goes on.

 

[Traitorfish]

Well, my official position on this is that instead of talking to bosses we should just put them all into a big pit and then set them on fire, so I can't say that I disagree with you entirely. I'm just pointing out how absurd the wage-system is when you step back and look at it without presuming the legitimacy of capital.

 

[Antilogic]

well all those workers who think they're being exploited are free to run companies themselves. and the thing is, despite your sarcasm they actually are not being exploited any longer. so they win, although its a pyrrhic victory. and as robotics and ai gets better and better, the low skilled jobs will automated away in the future anyway, so they'll never have to worry about exploitation again. its simply unrealistic to think unskilled labor pay will go up. it won't. it will only go down as time goes on.

And how does society function in this robot-dominated future?

 

[fishjie]

Well, my official position on this is that instead of talking to bosses we should just put them all into a big pit and then set them on fire, so I can't say that I disagree with you entirely. I'm just pointing out how absurd the wage-system is when you step back and look at it without presuming the legitimacy of capital.

so your solution is to kill all the rich people? let's look at all the countries where they've tried that. china. vietnam. north korea. cambodia. the soviet union. do i need to go on? didn't really work out so well did it? when poor people revolt against the rich, all that happens is that some poor people become the new rich people, AND they become dictators as well. everyone else is worse off than before, because of all the bloodshed, plus dictators are douchebags.

what is your alternative to the wage system?

 

[emzie]

TASTYKAKE TRIUMPHS

 

[Traitorfish]

so your solution is to kill all the rich people? let's look at all the countries where they've tried that. china. vietnam. north korea. cambodia. the soviet union. do i need to go on? didn't really work out so well did it? when poor people revolt against the rich, all that happens is that some poor people become the new rich people, AND they become dictators as well. everyone else is worse off than before, because of all the bloodshed, plus dictators are douchebags.

Well, somebody has all the good humour of a mountain goat with a urinary infection.

what is your alternative to the wage system?

I don't have one- or, at least, what alternatives might emerge are in not specifically "mine".

 

[potatokiosk]

I don't have one- or, at least, what alternatives might emerge are in not specifically "mine".

I think if we go down a road of "let's overthrow capitalism without having any idea what will replace it and just hope for the best" we might encounter some problems. I prefer to plan ahead.

 

[Traitorfish]

I think if we go down a road of "let's overthrow capitalism without having any idea what will replace it and just hope for the best" we might encounter some problems. I prefer to plan ahead.

As if we had a choice in the matter! Capitalism doesn't end when we want it to, or because we think its a good idea; it ends when circumstances demand that it must,and permit that it can (the two, tragically, being rare to coincide).

 

[FriendlyFire]

the CEO compensation was already low. 750k? that's chump change. there were roughly 18k workers. the raise was 1.5 million dollars. divide that by 18k, and everyone paid 83$ for that raise. let's say they had not raised the CEO pay. well whoop tee doo, everyone gets 83$.

but wait. the CEO's job is to run the business. most of the unskilled labor in the union would eventually be replaced by robots in a few years anyway. if the union thinks the pay is too low, they are free to buy the company now that its for sale and run it themselves. then they can give everyone super huge raises, healthcare, pensions, while keeping CEO pay low.

If you company is in trouble and heading into bankrupcy, you would increase your own pay. Ironicly this pay increase was to bypass bankrupcy laws which tie CEO pay to something called "performance" and "bonuses".

Hostess has been sold at least three times since the 1980s, racking up debt and shedding profitable assets along the way with each successive merger. The company filed for bankruptcy in 2004, and again in 2011. Little thought was given to the line of products, which, frankly, began to seem a bit dated in the age of the gourmet cupcake.

Since this has come up in the comments, I need to remind everyone that Hostess Brands acquired Drake’s Cakes in one the many of the misbegotten mergers it was involved in.

Failed mergers, Failed ceos, outdated products, failed unions.
Companies should not promise employee future pensions in exchange for lower wages it is unworkable. Ceos should not expect fat pay increases for bankrupting the company.

 

[potatokiosk]

As if we had a choice in the matter! Capitalism doesn't end when we want it to, or because we think its a good idea; it ends when circumstances demand that it must,and permit that it can (the two, tragically, being rare to coincide).

Okay then. If you're just trying to predict the future, I think saying you don't know what will happen is very reasonable.

 

[capslock]

You've said nothing new for this conversation. You think workers should accept lower wages instead of management accepting lower wages. I get it. Stop trying to pretend this is "logical" and see it for the heartless profiteering that it is.

It is labor's duty to defend the wages of their members. Just because they got fired doesn't mean the fight wasn't worth fighting. As I tire of saying, it was management who chose to fire the workers. The workers didn't quit out of protest.

Face it. This is a fantastic example of how your precious capitalism only works in the favor of the business owners, and no one else.

Is management allowed to strike if they aren't getting paid enough?

 

[Kaitzilla]

1) Buy the Twinkie factories
2) Write "America's #1 Diet Food" on the package
3) Have a cop/fireman eating one surrounded by American flags and puppies on the box
4) Write $4.99 on the box and tell the stores to sell it for $2 so people think they are getting a deal
5) Advertise on Fox News as supporting America's workers every time you eat a twinke
6) Make twinkie 100% larger and serving size 10 times smaller to minimize fat/calories per serving
7) Profit? If profit, quickly sell company to an idiot. Pay yourself a huge bonus first.

 

[ace99]

This is all Obama's fault. He gets elected and just weeks later Twinkies are gone!!! What's next Obama??? You going to take down Papa Johns too?? McDonalds? Taco Bell? Five Guys? Double bacon six cheese.

 

[MagisterCultuum]

Don't panic, Twinkies have about a year shelf life. You may still have a chance!

Actually, the manufacturers claim that Twinkies have a shelf life of only 25 days.

 

[MobBoss]

Labor can't strike itself out of the job.

Guess what...it just did. You see the teamsters had actually agreed with management on a compromise. But the bakers union objected to that and continued to strike regardless of the compromise.

I dont feel sorry for those union idiots one bit. They've gotten precisely what they asked for.

 

[downtown]

I'm sorry but you work in a Twinkie Factory - how much money exactly should these works be earning?

I dont know what the pay was before the cut and after, but it's amazing that they get more than minimum wage for a no skilled job that a trained monkey could do.

Thats just ignorant. I recruit for the food processing industry, and there is quite a bit of skilled labor involved. The sanitation engineers needed to handle industrial levels of food will be making near six figures. It's not just pumping sticking a twinkie in an oven...these facilities have more in common with chemical factories.