[quote name='dohdough']It depends on the reason as to how they went into the red. I already told you I'm not interested in buying a bridge if you're telling me that it was labor costs. I don't buy their line about being "under capacity" either when investment capital firms tend to load companies like this with debt to pay themselves.
[/QUOTE]
Nope, it wasn't labor costs, even though nearly all of the 18,500 workers were Union workers.
http://articles.businessinsider.com..._bankruptcy-filings-employee-retirement-funds
It couldn't have been the near 2 BILLION DOLLAR obligations demanded by Union pension plans, could it?
[quote name='dohdough']
Several!=every union employee. If your acquaintances can't get a job making that much in any given field, that's a problem with the industry they're trying to get into as well as the overall job market; not what a few bakers are paid.
[/Quote]
This is more than a few bakers when nearly all of the workers at this company were Union employees. See above.
[quote name='dohdough']
And if you admit that the average worker has little(lolz) to no input on how a company functions, how the
is their union responsible in any way?
[/QUOTE]
Gee, maybe because the union had a clear path here to keep 18,500 people employed? Maybe because the union itself chose to ignore that hostess said they would close the company down? I'd say the union is directly responsible there.
[quote name='dohdough']
The larger individual investors have already taken their profits by the time something like this goes down. Corporate executives/officers/assholes are no longer concerned about profits when they're already cashing in their chips. Even if those
ers can't get another job, and they always do even if they sink a company, do you think they'll be in the same straits as the average worker? The only investors left are the smaller ones still affiliated with the groups that were left holding the bag.
[/Quote]
You really have no idea how this works. No one has made a profit here yet. The assets have not been sold off, and the first people who would make a profit are the capitol investors. Shareholders get any cut remaining after that. "assholes" as you put it, will likely get nothing.
[quote name='dohdough']
The assholes don't give a shit about a pink slip, so obviously why would they give a
about giving everyone else one? Their goal wasn't to turn Hostess into a profitable enterprise because if they were, they would've hired scabs like every other industry instead of closing up shop. And you have the nerve to call ME naive?
[/QUOTE]
Absolutely I do. This company has been in trouble for almost 10 years now. They came out of bankruptcy once, saw the problems on the horizon, then set an ultimatum with the union. The union stood their ground and lost.
[quote name='dohdough']
Really? Cause I see a lot of union blaming and corporate apologism.
Really? So this is the only time they were offered a pay cut and didn't take it? You might want to double check how much you think you know about the companies history. A time warp back to 2009 might help you with that hole in your memory.
[/QUOTE]
Apologism? What part of BOTH parties are responsible do you not understand? Management was and is a part of the problem here. The union however does not just get a free pass. The union had options. They chose to ignore those options. The company shut down.
[quote name='dohdough']
And if the company didn't load itself with debt over the course of several years, this wouldn't have been an issue at all. But thanks for filling us in on the "big" picture.[/QUOTE]
Again, read the article I posted above. The company saddled itself with 2 billion dollars worth of UNION PENSION liabilities.
Honest question. Why are you so outraged over this? Your dad a union worker? You have family that are union members? Did some big bad corporation wrong you in some way? Businesses live and die daily based on management decisions. Hostess was a shitty company that deserved everything that came to it. The unions are just as much to blame here as the management is.