Unions Shut Down Hostess

\\OFF-TOPIC// conversations about everything that has nothing to do with Conquer Club.

Moderators: Global Moderators, Discussions Team

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

Re: Unions Shut Down Hostess

Postby Phatscotty on Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:17 pm

Evil Semp wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:
Evil Semp wrote:Here is the article posted earlier about the pay increases for management. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/1 ... 47043.html


btw, this link has been "corrected" At first I was just going to point out that these management pay raises were "claims" from the union, but it doesn't matter anymore anyways...


Yes it does matter. It could explain part of the reason why the employees would accept the pay cuts.

Phatscotty wrote:
An earlier version of as well as an earlier headline of this post incorrectly stated that Greg Rayburn received a 300 percent raise as CEO of Hostess as the company approached bankruptcy. Rayburn wasn't CEO of Hostess until after the company filed for bankruptcy. The post also incorrectly stated that he was paid a salary of up to $2,550,000 per year. His salary when he joined the company was $100,000 per month, according to a company spokesman.


The name given was wrong but that doesn't change the fact about the pay increases or at least the attempt at the pay increases.

Hostess’ creditors accused the company in April of manipulating executive salaries with the aim of getting around bankruptcy compensation rules, the Wall Street Journal reported at the time. In response, Rayburn announced he would cut his pay and that of other executives to $1 until Dec. 31 or whenever Hostess came out of bankruptcy.


Phatscotty wrote:I bet this won't matter though. The incorrect information has been corrected, but the opinions of posters that have been strongly shaped based solely on the size of the pay raises and salaries for the CEO and management will probably stay the same...


Actually it does matter. It show me that he might have taken one for the team but we don't know about his whole pay and compensation package.

Here is an article explaining the CEO changes at Hostess. http://blogs.wsj.com/deals/2012/03/09/h ... as-sought/


ty again for the link. I am eating them up like candy!

However, it does show he certainly did his part, basically taking a 99.9% pay cut on his standard salary. If that isn't good enough, then I'm not sure if anything would have been good enough. He not only took one for the team, he sacrificed so that there was still a "team" at all. He's probably pretty pissed now that after what he gave up to keep the company going and keep the workers working, and they just walked out on the company. I'm more pissed at the employees now too.

Let me read your link
User avatar
Major Phatscotty
SoC Training Adviser
 
Posts: 1726
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:50 pm
Medals: 86
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (4) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (4) Freestyle Achievement (2) Polymorphic Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (3)
Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (3) Teammate Achievement (3) Random Map Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (3) Beta Map Achievement (1) Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (5)
General Achievement (2) Clan Achievement (10) Training Achievement (6) Tournament Contribution (11) General Contribution (2)

Re: Unions Shut Down Hostess

Postby Phatscotty on Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:24 pm

Wasn't the salary wrong as well? It used to say 2.5 mil, but it was really only 1.2

yeah, I don't get the point of your second link either. The title is "Hostess CEO Out a Month After Lucrative Payday Was Sought"

Okay, so a guy tried to negotiate a good salary for himself? It's not like he even got it, it was simply "sought". And 1.5 million doesn't really sound that lucrative to me. Actually sounds kind of low.....

Anyways, what is the point of that article? All I get from it is more lusting against "the rich" and that the a new CEO was named, but we already knew that
User avatar
Major Phatscotty
SoC Training Adviser
 
Posts: 1726
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:50 pm
Medals: 86
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (4) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (4) Freestyle Achievement (2) Polymorphic Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (3)
Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (3) Teammate Achievement (3) Random Map Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (3) Beta Map Achievement (1) Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (5)
General Achievement (2) Clan Achievement (10) Training Achievement (6) Tournament Contribution (11) General Contribution (2)

Re: Unions Shut Down Hostess

Postby AAFitz on Mon Nov 19, 2012 8:05 am

Phatscotty wrote:
Evil Semp wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:#1 good point
#2 I know that earning a wage is better than being unemployed. I also know that what people say they can and can't afford is highly subjective and usually based on lifestyle and comfort levels. (excluding minimum wage/no skill jobs)

Also, if management level employees are going to have to get the same benefit packages or salary as their employees under them, then they are going to have the shittiest management in the world. Nobody will want to do that job when they can do less/stress less/work fewer hours.put in less effort for the same pay, and the company probably would have never got off the ground in the first place.


I think in this case the "shittiest management in the world" is quite appropriate. Ultimately I think any company going out of business is mismanagement. From picking the wrong product to sell, marketing or hiring the wrong employees. All these are management decisions.

In my opinion I think it was mismanagement that caused this company to go under. I don't think their product is inferior product. I can't really tell the difference from a Little Debbie "Twinkie" or a Hostess Twinkie. Marketing the product is what I think the problem was. You don't see Hostess products in Dollar General or Family Dollar stores just to name some of the stores that sell like products.


Obviously the management had problems, I'm just trying to understand the workers situation (not feelings based). However, the shitty economy seems to be getting a pass here (cept for Patches posts that cover almost everything), as we are seeing post Obama election (all of a sudden first time unemployment applicants jumps to over 400,000!) and then there is globalization.

One thing I do know, is that if the workers said "yes" they would still have their jobs. Not getting into how shitty it is that the decision is placed on their laps, or that the decision is shitty no matter what, but I don't see a reversal in any of the reasons why wages continue to drop or America becoming less competitive in general.

And how much does the new costs coming with Obamacare factor into this? Rising taxes? The coming fiscal cliff Obama gets to drive us over? How much was the cost of regulations to Hostess?

Uncertainty is the worst peace time environment for business operation.


Honestly, I'm surprised you're not just blaming the damn liberals and progressives for blocking schools from serving the crap they made in schools.

In any case, its just speculative to assume the workers knew the company would go under if they went on strike and since they were seeing their management give themselves raises, perhaps they had no reason to make such an assumption. Certainly better management, could have managed the situation better, but hey, that is capitalism. The workers were negotiating, and took some risks, and they didn't pan out as expected. Its the same exact thing you usually defend, but you're a classist when it comes to workers, and you think they should just be the diligent slaves you consider them, and give up their rights to improve their lives.

I have to essentially negotiate my salary with every estimate I give. Its incredibly tough. I have to weigh getting the job vs working for too little, and I have absolutely learned that very often, it is worse to be working for too little, than scrambling to find a better opportunity to work for more money. If every worker ever just stayed content in their position, and their salary rate, there would never be any progress whatsoever. The reality in this situation, was that Hostess was clearly doomed to failure, for a variety of reasons, and now the workers are free to move on to more enterprising jobs elsewhere if they are diligent or lucky enough to do so. And, working for less money, very much would probably not have been in their best interest for the large majority, so as I say again, your views that they should have just done it, is on a very basic level, a communist one, not a capitalist one, Pinkoscotty.
john9blue wrote:"honestly i think martin might be better off dead"

sekretar: "i go to russia and then, without comp, i hoppe, i forgot this shit who kill my nerves long time!"
User avatar
Captain AAFitz
 
Posts: 7216
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2006 9:47 am
Location: On top of the World 2.1
Medals: 84
Monthly Leader Bronze (1) Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (4) Triples Achievement (4) Quadruples Achievement (3)
Terminator Achievement (2) Assassin Achievement (3) Manual Troops Achievement (4) Freestyle Achievement (4) Polymorphic Achievement (2)
Nuclear Spoils Achievement (3) Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (4) Teammate Achievement (3)
Random Map Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (8) General Achievement (2)
Clan Achievement (8) Tournament Contribution (8) General Contribution (2)

Re: Unions Shut Down Hostess

Postby AAFitz on Mon Nov 19, 2012 8:15 am

Phatscotty wrote:#2 I know that earning a wage is better than being unemployed.


You know it, but you obviously have not factored in opportunity cost, so saying that earning a wage is always better than being employed, is arguably the stupidest statement you've ever made.

Ask anyone running a business if its more of a risk to lose a job, or work for too little. Getting work is easy, its getting enough to survive that's the trick, and if you work for too little, you wont be working for long anyways. And obviously its not a simple equation, because certainly taking a pay cut is sometimes the better of too options, but its the fact that it is a complicated equation, and why your statement isn't worth of a 6th grade business class.
john9blue wrote:"honestly i think martin might be better off dead"

sekretar: "i go to russia and then, without comp, i hoppe, i forgot this shit who kill my nerves long time!"
User avatar
Captain AAFitz
 
Posts: 7216
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2006 9:47 am
Location: On top of the World 2.1
Medals: 84
Monthly Leader Bronze (1) Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (4) Triples Achievement (4) Quadruples Achievement (3)
Terminator Achievement (2) Assassin Achievement (3) Manual Troops Achievement (4) Freestyle Achievement (4) Polymorphic Achievement (2)
Nuclear Spoils Achievement (3) Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (4) Teammate Achievement (3)
Random Map Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (8) General Achievement (2)
Clan Achievement (8) Tournament Contribution (8) General Contribution (2)

Re: Unions Shut Down Hostess

Postby AAFitz on Mon Nov 19, 2012 8:21 am

Phatscotty wrote:Wasn't the salary wrong as well? It used to say 2.5 mil, but it was really only 1.2

yeah, I don't get the point of your second link either. The title is "Hostess CEO Out a Month After Lucrative Payday Was Sought"

Okay, so a guy tried to negotiate a good salary for himself? It's not like he even got it, it was simply "sought". And 1.5 million doesn't really sound that lucrative to me. Actually sounds kind of low.....

Anyways, what is the point of that article? All I get from it is more lusting against "the rich" and that the a new CEO was named, but we already knew that


And now you think 1.5 Million doesn't sound that lucrative for a CEO that obviously led a company into failure. Let me guess...you work for the government, don't you? :lol: :lol: :lol:
john9blue wrote:"honestly i think martin might be better off dead"

sekretar: "i go to russia and then, without comp, i hoppe, i forgot this shit who kill my nerves long time!"
User avatar
Captain AAFitz
 
Posts: 7216
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2006 9:47 am
Location: On top of the World 2.1
Medals: 84
Monthly Leader Bronze (1) Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (4) Triples Achievement (4) Quadruples Achievement (3)
Terminator Achievement (2) Assassin Achievement (3) Manual Troops Achievement (4) Freestyle Achievement (4) Polymorphic Achievement (2)
Nuclear Spoils Achievement (3) Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (4) Teammate Achievement (3)
Random Map Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (8) General Achievement (2)
Clan Achievement (8) Tournament Contribution (8) General Contribution (2)

Re: Unions Shut Down Hostess

Postby Evil Semp on Mon Nov 19, 2012 6:04 pm

Phatscotty wrote:Wasn't the salary wrong as well? It used to say 2.5 mil, but it was really only 1.2

yeah, I don't get the point of your second link either. The title is "Hostess CEO Out a Month After Lucrative Payday Was Sought"

Okay, so a guy tried to negotiate a good salary for himself? It's not like he even got it, it was simply "sought". And 1.5 million doesn't really sound that lucrative to me. Actually sounds kind of low.....

Anyways, what is the point of that article? All I get from it is more lusting against "the rich" and that the a new CEO was named, but we already knew that


That article was showing that it wasn't the current CEO who was seeking the pay raise.
Image
User avatar
Sergeant Evil Semp
Multi Hunter
Multi Hunter
 
Posts: 7038
Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2006 8:50 pm
Medals: 76
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (3)
Assassin Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (2) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (3)
Trench Warfare Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (3)
Ratings Achievement (2) Tournament Achievement (21) General Achievement (6) Clan Achievement (1) General Contribution (11)

Re: Unions Shut Down Hostess

Postby Phatscotty on Mon Nov 19, 2012 6:10 pm

AAFitz wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:Wasn't the salary wrong as well? It used to say 2.5 mil, but it was really only 1.2

yeah, I don't get the point of your second link either. The title is "Hostess CEO Out a Month After Lucrative Payday Was Sought"

Okay, so a guy tried to negotiate a good salary for himself? It's not like he even got it, it was simply "sought". And 1.5 million doesn't really sound that lucrative to me. Actually sounds kind of low.....

Anyways, what is the point of that article? All I get from it is more lusting against "the rich" and that the a new CEO was named, but we already knew that


And now you think 1.5 Million doesn't sound that lucrative for a CEO that obviously led a company into failure. Let me guess...you work for the government, don't you? :lol: :lol: :lol:


Saying what is and isn't lucrative is obviously your job.


excuseeeee
me
User avatar
Major Phatscotty
SoC Training Adviser
 
Posts: 1726
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:50 pm
Medals: 86
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (4) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (4) Freestyle Achievement (2) Polymorphic Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (3)
Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (3) Teammate Achievement (3) Random Map Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (3) Beta Map Achievement (1) Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (5)
General Achievement (2) Clan Achievement (10) Training Achievement (6) Tournament Contribution (11) General Contribution (2)

Re: Unions Shut Down Hostess

Postby Phatscotty on Mon Nov 19, 2012 6:17 pm

GreecePwns wrote:
Of course, this conversation wouldn't be happening if the workers were the management.


User avatar
Major Phatscotty
SoC Training Adviser
 
Posts: 1726
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:50 pm
Medals: 86
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (4) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (4) Freestyle Achievement (2) Polymorphic Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (3)
Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (3) Teammate Achievement (3) Random Map Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (3) Beta Map Achievement (1) Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (5)
General Achievement (2) Clan Achievement (10) Training Achievement (6) Tournament Contribution (11) General Contribution (2)

Re: Unions Shut Down Hostess

Postby Iliad on Mon Nov 19, 2012 8:22 pm

Phatscotty wrote:
Evil Semp wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:
Evil Semp wrote:Here is the article posted earlier about the pay increases for management. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/1 ... 47043.html


btw, this link has been "corrected" At first I was just going to point out that these management pay raises were "claims" from the union, but it doesn't matter anymore anyways...


Yes it does matter. It could explain part of the reason why the employees would accept the pay cuts.

Phatscotty wrote:
An earlier version of as well as an earlier headline of this post incorrectly stated that Greg Rayburn received a 300 percent raise as CEO of Hostess as the company approached bankruptcy. Rayburn wasn't CEO of Hostess until after the company filed for bankruptcy. The post also incorrectly stated that he was paid a salary of up to $2,550,000 per year. His salary when he joined the company was $100,000 per month, according to a company spokesman.


The name given was wrong but that doesn't change the fact about the pay increases or at least the attempt at the pay increases.

Hostess’ creditors accused the company in April of manipulating executive salaries with the aim of getting around bankruptcy compensation rules, the Wall Street Journal reported at the time. In response, Rayburn announced he would cut his pay and that of other executives to $1 until Dec. 31 or whenever Hostess came out of bankruptcy.


Phatscotty wrote:I bet this won't matter though. The incorrect information has been corrected, but the opinions of posters that have been strongly shaped based solely on the size of the pay raises and salaries for the CEO and management will probably stay the same...


Actually it does matter. It show me that he might have taken one for the team but we don't know about his whole pay and compensation package.

Here is an article explaining the CEO changes at Hostess. http://blogs.wsj.com/deals/2012/03/09/h ... as-sought/


ty again for the link. I am eating them up like candy!

However, it does show he certainly did his part, basically taking a 99.9% pay cut on his standard salary. If that isn't good enough, then I'm not sure if anything would have been good enough. He not only took one for the team, he sacrificed so that there was still a "team" at all. He's probably pretty pissed now that after what he gave up to keep the company going and keep the workers working, and they just walked out on the company. I'm more pissed at the employees now too.

Let me read your link


Why are you pissed off at the employees? Why is this an emotional event at all?

Isn't this your fabled free market at work? A company can't operate unless it pays its employees below market rate wages.
Clearly it's inefficient relative to its competitors if it can't maintain a profit and pay its employees the market rate for their wages, so by going bankrupt it's opening up market space for its more efficient competitors. Its employees, as rational self-interested individuals, as all are in an economist framework, have no interest in sacrificing their own wages to perpetuate inefficiency. If a company can't pay its employees the average market rate wages and maintain a profit, then i don't see why it should be in business.

Why is it, when tax hikes are proposed, even by 1 or 2% the lovely business owners can threaten to flee and relocate and this is celebrated as the 'market' in action, but apparently employees are supposed to accept a 5% pay cut just after concessions two years ago. Like their jobs are some kind of gift bestowed on them and their rational self-interest is not at stake.

You make for a shitty economist if you can't even adhere to your own ideology and just blindly shit on the poorer side in an argument.
User avatar
Private 1st Class Iliad
 
Posts: 10439
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 12:48 am
Medals: 1
Standard Achievement (1)

Re: Unions Shut Down Hostess

Postby HapSmo19 on Mon Nov 19, 2012 10:22 pm

Is there some sort of law preventing the union from buying Hostess and paying all these twinkie-rollers a quarter-mil/yr. now or would my suspicicions of that suddenly being the last fucking place on earth these people would want to work be correct?
Sounds like a large union. I'd like to see 'em put their money where their mouth('s) is(are).
User avatar
Lieutenant HapSmo19
 
Posts: 119
Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 4:30 pm
Location: Willamette Valley
Medals: 8
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (1)
Cross-Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (1)

Re: Unions Shut Down Hostess

Postby HapSmo19 on Mon Nov 19, 2012 10:37 pm

And another thing,...

I had the same thought as NS's OP when I first heard about this.
If I walked out of my job and said "I'll be back when you give me a $5/hr. raise, I'd most likely be fired and unemployment would consider it a "quit/no benefits". How the f*ck do these people get a dime of taxpayer money for quitting their job(sorry, no time to read pages 2-9)?
User avatar
Lieutenant HapSmo19
 
Posts: 119
Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 4:30 pm
Location: Willamette Valley
Medals: 8
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (1)
Cross-Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (1)

Re: Unions Shut Down Hostess

Postby aad0906 on Mon Nov 19, 2012 11:20 pm

HapSmo19 wrote:And another thing,...

I had the same thought as NS's OP when I first heard about this.
If I walked out of my job and said "I'll be back when you give me a $5/hr. raise, I'd most likely be fired and unemployment would consider it a "quit/no benefits". How the f*ck do these people get a dime of taxpayer money for quitting their job(sorry, no time to read pages 2-9)?



They didn't. 2 years ago management (after having rejected takeover bids) asked them to accept a wage cut and a pension cut to help save the company $110 million. The employees said yes. Then management gave themselves an 80% raise and the CEO a $1.25 million bonus (he eventually resigned). But the company continues to be in trouble due to falling sales and lack of innovation couple with sky high interest on Private Equity injected SECURED loans. This time the employees said no to yet another wage & pension cut.

Would you walk out of your job if you boss said you have to work for $5 less per hour?
Image
User avatar
Captain aad0906
SoC Training Adviser
 
Posts: 360
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 8:15 pm
Location: New Jersey, USA
Medals: 79
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (4) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (1) Polymorphic Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2)
Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (3) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (11) General Achievement (4) Clan Achievement (15)
Training Achievement (3) Tournament Contribution (3)

Re: Unions Shut Down Hostess

Postby Phatscotty on Tue Nov 20, 2012 6:16 am

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/report- ... n-avoided/

Hostess & Union Agree to Mediation, Company Shutdown Temporarily Avoided
User avatar
Major Phatscotty
SoC Training Adviser
 
Posts: 1726
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:50 pm
Medals: 86
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (4) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (4) Freestyle Achievement (2) Polymorphic Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (3)
Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (3) Teammate Achievement (3) Random Map Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (3) Beta Map Achievement (1) Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (5)
General Achievement (2) Clan Achievement (10) Training Achievement (6) Tournament Contribution (11) General Contribution (2)

Re: Unions Shut Down Hostess

Postby Phatscotty on Tue Nov 20, 2012 6:21 am

AAFitz wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:
Evil Semp wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:#1 good point
#2 I know that earning a wage is better than being unemployed. I also know that what people say they can and can't afford is highly subjective and usually based on lifestyle and comfort levels. (excluding minimum wage/no skill jobs)

Also, if management level employees are going to have to get the same benefit packages or salary as their employees under them, then they are going to have the shittiest management in the world. Nobody will want to do that job when they can do less/stress less/work fewer hours.put in less effort for the same pay, and the company probably would have never got off the ground in the first place.


I think in this case the "shittiest management in the world" is quite appropriate. Ultimately I think any company going out of business is mismanagement. From picking the wrong product to sell, marketing or hiring the wrong employees. All these are management decisions.

In my opinion I think it was mismanagement that caused this company to go under. I don't think their product is inferior product. I can't really tell the difference from a Little Debbie "Twinkie" or a Hostess Twinkie. Marketing the product is what I think the problem was. You don't see Hostess products in Dollar General or Family Dollar stores just to name some of the stores that sell like products.


Obviously the management had problems, I'm just trying to understand the workers situation (not feelings based). However, the shitty economy seems to be getting a pass here (cept for Patches posts that cover almost everything), as we are seeing post Obama election (all of a sudden first time unemployment applicants jumps to over 400,000!) and then there is globalization.

One thing I do know, is that if the workers said "yes" they would still have their jobs. Not getting into how shitty it is that the decision is placed on their laps, or that the decision is shitty no matter what, but I don't see a reversal in any of the reasons why wages continue to drop or America becoming less competitive in general.

And how much does the new costs coming with Obamacare factor into this? Rising taxes? The coming fiscal cliff Obama gets to drive us over? How much was the cost of regulations to Hostess?

Uncertainty is the worst peace time environment for business operation.


Honestly, I'm surprised you're not just blaming the damn liberals and progressives for blocking schools from serving the crap they made in schools.

In any case, its just speculative to assume the workers knew the company would go under if they went on strike and since they were seeing their management give themselves raises, perhaps they had no reason to make such an assumption. Certainly better management, could have managed the situation better, but hey, that is capitalism. The workers were negotiating, and took some risks, and they didn't pan out as expected. Its the same exact thing you usually defend, but you're a classist when it comes to workers, and you think they should just be the diligent slaves you consider them, and give up their rights to improve their lives.

I have to essentially negotiate my salary with every estimate I give. Its incredibly tough. I have to weigh getting the job vs working for too little, and I have absolutely learned that very often, it is worse to be working for too little, than scrambling to find a better opportunity to work for more money. If every worker ever just stayed content in their position, and their salary rate, there would never be any progress whatsoever. The reality in this situation, was that Hostess was clearly doomed to failure, for a variety of reasons, and now the workers are free to move on to more enterprising jobs elsewhere if they are diligent or lucky enough to do so. And, working for less money, very much would probably not have been in their best interest for the large majority, so as I say again, your views that they should have just done it, is on a very basic level,a communist one, not a capitalist one, Pinkoscotty.


I don't think they should have just done it. I said I would have probably just done it.....and immediately started looking for another, better job, and waited until I found on before I quit the previous one

Good post, not much to say about it, except for the employees have always been free to move on to more enterprising jobs elsewhere. They did not need to go on strike and stop operation of the company in order to do that or excersize their Freedom to do that.
User avatar
Major Phatscotty
SoC Training Adviser
 
Posts: 1726
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:50 pm
Medals: 86
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (4) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (4) Freestyle Achievement (2) Polymorphic Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (3)
Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (3) Teammate Achievement (3) Random Map Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (3) Beta Map Achievement (1) Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (5)
General Achievement (2) Clan Achievement (10) Training Achievement (6) Tournament Contribution (11) General Contribution (2)

Re: Unions Shut Down Hostess

Postby Dukasaur on Tue Nov 20, 2012 12:24 pm

Phatscotty wrote:http://www.theblaze.com/stories/report-hostess-union-reach-a-deal-shut-down-avoided/

Hostess & Union Agree to Mediation, Company Shutdown Temporarily Avoided

So the thieving pricks on the Management Board will get to keep their stolen millions, while the workers will eventually accept some concession not quite as blatant as the one they rejected. Sad.
User avatar
Lieutenant Dukasaur
Head Socialite
Head Socialite
 
Posts: 9453
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 4:49 pm
Location: Beautiful Niagara
Medals: 125
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (3)
Assassin Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (2) Polymorphic Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2)
Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (3)
Cross-Map Achievement (4) Beta Map Achievement (2) Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (18)
General Achievement (13) Clan Achievement (5) Training Achievement (2) Challenge Achievement (2) Tournament Contribution (31)

PreviousNext

Return to Whose Forum is It Anyway?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Gillipig, Lord Arioch, TeeGee and 3 guests

Login