Is this the end of Twinkies?

[CitizenKain]

Which is why he was trying to get a deal with the Unions. 13,000 people agreed with the deal. 5000 people decided everyone should be unemployed.

Hostess planned on closing plants long before the union complained, but the unions make a convenient scapegoat when companies are being raided. The equity firms that owned Hostess didn't want to save it, they simply wanted to sell the assets and be done with the company. The fact they could blame unions was simply a bonus.

 

[Matt1970]

Hostess planned on closing plants long before the union complained, but the unions make a convenient scapegoat when companies are being raided. The equity firms that owned Hostess didn't want to save it, they simply wanted to sell the assets and be done with the company. The fact they could blame unions was simply a bonus.

Hostess denies it and the fact that they didn't close till after the strikes makes me believe Hostess. Even if the Union was right, those are three factories we talking about with a total of 627 jobs. 18,000 are now out of work. I still see nothing but Union fail.

 

[OILFIELDTRASH]

Get over it guys. This is the new USA. The twinkies will be made in Mexico and we'll be on the hook for 18,000 more unemployed workers govt assistance. Yay for cheap twinkies!

 

[PricklyPete]

Get over it guys. This is the new USA. The twinkies will be made in Mexico and we'll be on the hook for 18,000 more unemployed workers govt assistance. Yay for cheap twinkies!

So you are saying they might be made with real sugar? Sounds like a win!

 

[CitizenKain]

Hostess denies it and the fact that they didn't close till after the strikes makes me believe Hostess. Even if the Union was right, those are three factories we talking about with a total of 627 jobs. 18,000 are now out of work. I still see nothing but Union fail.

Of course you'd believe Hostess, thankfully reality has very little to do with what lies Hostess is trying to spread. Maybe instead you should blame the countless useless CEOs and all the other C*O's that ruined the company with their incompetence. But I guess that isn't what talk radio told you to believe.

 

[spidey07]

You can't blame the evil executives when was unions that forced the company to be unprofitable.

This is all the fault of unions like it has been done 1000s of times before. They are a parasite bleeding the host dry.

 

[TechBoyJK]

You can't blame the evil executives when was unions that forced the company to be unprofitable.

This is all the fault of unions like it has been done 1000s of times before. They are a parasite bleeding the host dry.

The entire union concept is an unnecessary layer/middle man. Laws are in place now to protect workers and modern business practices allow for fair employee to employer relations. I've worked for many companies and have never had an issue negotiating pay or anything that made me think I needed to be part of a union. I actually prefer the freedom.

 

[Matt1970]

Of course you'd believe Hostess, thankfully reality has very little to do with what lies Hostess is trying to spread. Maybe instead you should blame the countless useless CEOs and all the other C*O's that ruined the company with their incompetence. But I guess that isn't what talk radio told you to believe.

Do you even have one shred of evidence of this?

 

[spidey07]

The entire union concept is an unnecessary layer/middle man. Laws are in place now to protect workers and modern business practices allow for fair employee to employer relations. I've worked for many companies and have never had an issue negotiating pay or anything that made me think I needed to be part of a union. I actually prefer the freedom.

You evil capitalist dog you! You must be burned!

 

[PottedMeat]

http://gma.yahoo.com/bankrupt-hostess-execs-bonuses-094718695--abc-news-topstories.html

why do they need these people to stay on if all you're doing is liquidating at the highest price?

 

[Londo_Jowo]

http://gma.yahoo.com/bankrupt-hostess-execs-bonuses-094718695--abc-news-topstories.html

why do they need these people to stay on if all you're doing is liquidating at the highest price?

This bonus works out to be $94k per executive, not a very good bonus to get people to stay on with a sinking ship and not moving on to another position with another company.

These execs will supervise the 3,200 employees for the wind down phase that will last a year and ensure properties are protected/maintained for future sale.

From the link you posted.

Hostess said last week it will retain about 3,200 employees "to assist with the initial phase of the wind-down," which is expected to last about a year.

 

[Engineer]

So they suck money away from their creditors to give bonuses to executives? Nice. Glad to see where their priorities are.

 

[spidey07]

This is all standard procedure. Nothing unusual about it. Need to convince top talent to stick around. Blame the unions. They're what caused all this.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Hostess planned on closing plants long before the union complained, but the unions make a convenient scapegoat when companies are being raided. The equity firms that owned Hostess didn't want to save it, they simply wanted to sell the assets and be done with the company. The fact they could blame unions was simply a bonus.

What a line of bullshit . I was a big union man till I understood were those union dues go . Directly to Criminals is were it goes . So explain what happened with the hormel union . Men make less now than they did in 1970 . YOU lie and so do they.

 

[BoberFett]

Sounds like this company was a failure from top to bottom, and you can't blame any one factor.

 

[Engineer]

Sounds like this company was a failure from top to bottom, and you can't blame any one factor.

I agree but it looks like only one side is taking the big hit while the other is being rewarded. I agree with the video.....this is what's wrong with corporate America.

 

[shortylickens]

I just saw the news about the bonuses. Normally I take the Republican attitude that you should be able to keep what you work for, but in the case of execs getting bonuses from a dying company, I am fucking pissed.
Xmas is coming and a ton of middle and lower class people are gonna be out of work. What kind of bullshit is that?

 

[wirednuts]

i dont think ill buy hostess anymore, unless some respectable mexican company buys it.

 

[Greenman]

I just saw the news about the bonuses. Normally I take the Republican attitude that you should be able to keep what you work for, but in the case of execs getting bonuses from a dying company, I am fucking pissed.
Xmas is coming and a ton of middle and lower class people are gonna be out of work. What kind of bullshit is that?

The reality is that had they given the money to fired employees, it would amount to around $110 each. That's not going to make any real difference.

 

[dmcowen674]

So they suck money away from their creditors to give bonuses to executives?

Nice. Glad to see where their priorities are.

Every Republican in here high fiveing their buddies.

 

[Matt1970]

While the bonuses might not be the greatest idea, we are talking about $1.8 Million. I know that is a lot of money to you or me divided amongst the 18,000 it is $100 each.

 

[shortylickens]

The reality is that had they given the money to fired employees, it would amount to around $110 each. That's not going to make any real difference.

I wasnt actually thinking of it like that, but good point.

 

[Greenman]

Every Republican in here high fiveing their buddies.

We only do that at the victory dinners after shutting down an orphanage or evicting a family of disabled Negros.

 

[Engineer]

While the bonuses might not be the greatest idea, we are talking about $1.8 Million. I know that is a lot of money to you or me divided amongst the 18,000 it is $100 each.

Who said anything about the employees (even if the company now doesn't have enough money to cover it's obligations (nogotiated long ago) on pensions). I'm talking about creditors who are being screwed out of their payments (legally though bankruptcy). Why do the bonuses outweigh the creditors?

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Who said anything about the employees (even if the company now doesn't have enough money to cover it's obligations (nogotiated long ago) on pensions). I'm talking about creditors who are being screwed out of their payments (legally though bankruptcy). Why do the bonuses outweigh the creditors?

That's a good question to ask the bankruptcy judge that approved the bonuses. Maybe between properties owned and proprietary recipes the judge felt it was best to retain the execs to protect both until the plants are finished with the wind down phase and sales of both.