Jump to content



Photo
- - - - -

Hostess files for bankruptcy again.


  • Please log in to reply
143 replies to this topic

#121 camoor

camoor

    Jams on foot fires

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 19 November 2012 - 09:07 PM

No, I'm angry that they "stuck it to the man", cost 18,500 jobs, and then had the balls to complain and act like they had no choice/it wasn't their fault. Very large difference.


But why are you angry at the working folks?

Management is suing for their bonuses and they'll probably get them.

The working folks and are now poor and unemployed, and the pension system that they paid into has been borrowed, except in this case it will never be returned. Back in grade school we had another name for borrowing without returning - stealing.

So the worker has been pick-pocketed, pilloried in the press, and kicked to the curb. And that still doesn't slake your anger? For the sake of argument let's say they were short-sighted, my god man, how badly do these folks have to get screwed before you show an ounce of compassion?

#122 dohdough

dohdough

    Sum Dum Guy

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 19 November 2012 - 09:07 PM

I'll try and perhaps break through the flame wars with this:

http://www.chicagotr...0,2355592.story

In a nutshell, Hostess and the union are going into mediation starting tomorrow.

To be more accurate, the bankruptcy judge basically said that the company couldn't begin liquidation because the executives gave themselves huge payoffs in it.

#123 SynGamer

SynGamer

    Welcome to Night Vale

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 19 November 2012 - 09:09 PM

Horray? But will this actually solve the problems that plagued the company in the first place? From terrible management, executives not funding pensions yet taking money from it, unions demanding more pay etc. etc?


We'll have to see. I believe the union has two board members, right? Surely there will be quite a few voting sessions regarding compensation on both ends. A company that brings in $2.5 billion annually surely must want to continue...

g92sOMa.png4lNop7I.pngEwYfNFu.pngauyL8J9.pngszbgEtP.pngSoNL9s6.png


#124 Crunchewy

Crunchewy

Posted 19 November 2012 - 09:16 PM

Hostess snacks were really not very good. Tastycake is way better, as far as packaged snack cakes and such go.

#125 SynGamer

SynGamer

    Welcome to Night Vale

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 19 November 2012 - 09:17 PM

But why are you angry at the working folks?

Management is suing for their bonuses and they'll probably get them.

The working folks and are now poor and unemployed, and the pension system that they paid into has been borrowed, except in this case it will never be returned. Back in grade school we had another name for borrowing without returning - stealing.

So the worker has been pick-pocketed, pilloried in the press, and kicked to the curb. And that still doesn't slake your anger? For the sake of argument let's say they were short-sighted, my god man, how badly do these folks have to get screwed before you show an ounce of compassion?

I guess I need to break it down a bit further. Yes, management has been terrible in this case, but not all the blame can be put on them. A LOT of companies have been negotiating to reduce wages and benefits after the economy collapsed in 2008. Hostess is no different. Management ran the company so poorly that when the union said they would strike, the company flatout replied that they would have to close if the union proceeds with said strike. So when it was first announced Hostess was closing up shop, the union only had themselves to look at. There's no way around it. Last I check Hostess was asking for an 8% wage cut, BUT would be giving that back over the next 5 years. All the wage bickering aside, all 18,500 employees would have still had jobs and would have started getting their pages back over the course of the next 5 years.

If they don't want to work for a struggling company, they can leave. But the fact still remains they were making well above minimum wage and would be making a short-term, temporary concession...the only compassion I have is for the people who had no choice regarding the strike and who showed up one day to work only to be greeted by picket lines.

g92sOMa.png4lNop7I.pngEwYfNFu.pngauyL8J9.pngszbgEtP.pngSoNL9s6.png


#126 camoor

camoor

    Jams on foot fires

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 19 November 2012 - 09:33 PM

Last I check Hostess was asking for an 8% wage cut, BUT would be giving that back over the next 5 years.


Just like they gave back the pension money right?

I can see you like your working man to be poor AND stupid.

#127 camoor

camoor

    Jams on foot fires

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 19 November 2012 - 09:36 PM

To be more accurate, the bankruptcy judge basically said that the company couldn't begin liquidation because the executives gave themselves huge payoffs in it.


Good for that judge, someone should buy him a box of devil dogs.

#128 soulvengeance

soulvengeance

    Beating dead horses

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 19 November 2012 - 10:14 PM

Hostess snacks were really not very good. Tastycake is way better, as far as packaged snack cakes and such go.


This is also true.
mytradelist:
http://www.cheapassg...864#post2614864

Calls this what you may, but I would say that Blacks actually benefited from the slavery. Comparing the current lives of many African Americans to Africans, one can see that the former live in much better conditions with greater freedoms and opportunities.


#129 mykevermin

mykevermin

    Queen of Scotland

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 20 November 2012 - 02:13 AM

To be more accurate, the bankruptcy judge basically said that the company couldn't begin liquidation because the executives gave themselves huge payoffs in it.


right. it's a court-enforced mediation, not a sudden change of heart for any involved party.
Posted Image

#130 camoor

camoor

    Jams on foot fires

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 20 November 2012 - 06:52 PM

Hostess snacks were really not very good. Tastycake is way better, as far as packaged snack cakes and such go.


True. Maybe it was inevitable, maybe Americans are just getting tired of so much sugary junk.

#131 Thekrakrabbit

Thekrakrabbit

    Is Making A Comeback!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 20 November 2012 - 08:53 PM

True. Maybe it was inevitable, maybe Americans are just getting tired of so much sugary junk.


Have you taken a walk outside in the last 20 years? I don't think that is the case...

Check out @RealKrakrabbit - Twitter Page Full of News, Tidbits, etc., etc.

 

Also looking to make trades/sells to anyone who is interested. Check out my tradelist! :grouphug:


#132 detectiveconan16

detectiveconan16

    Look at that deal. It's so great!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 22 November 2012 - 11:56 AM

http://www.reuters.c...E8AL06U20121122
Hostess workers say they'd rather lose their jobs rather than take another paycut. Keep in mind that they've already had paycuts, and for some who worked already a quarter of a century, they earn about $35K. If you tried raising a family with that much money, you already know that's kinda tough, especially with so many expenses. You really can't expect them to go down to $23K can you? That's the poverty line.

Batsugunner.png


#133 mykevermin

mykevermin

    Queen of Scotland

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 22 November 2012 - 12:08 PM

http://www.reuters.c...E8AL06U20121122You really can't expect them to go down to $23K can you?


Sadly, there are many here in this thread who express nothing but utter disdain for the working poor. Halve that to $11/k per year (~$5.50 per hour) or quarter it to $5500 per year (~$2.75 per hour) and their arguments won't change. They don't care about the numbers in the end - unless they get too high, of course (which $34K appears to be "too high" for at least one poster here).

So pay them a third of the minimum wage, eliminate the safety net of the welfare state (for the working poor, mind - billions to war profiteers and industry is a-okay), and then express outrage if they dare complain.

We're living in a re-run of Dickens' "Oliver." You want *mooooooooooore*?

They hate the idea that someone who puts in 40 a week can afford a decent livelihood for themselves and their family because it might take away from their $1/box shit snacks. Externalities? They have no idea what that means. Only instant gratification and shameless hedonism.

We live in an era that has nothing but contempt for the working class. They would love for all factories to be run like Foxconn. Go whole hog and bring back the truck system.
Posted Image

#134 detectiveconan16

detectiveconan16

    Look at that deal. It's so great!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 22 November 2012 - 12:36 PM

What's even more hilarious is the crap that because people deserve below minimum wages, they are still the "soon-to-haves."

Batsugunner.png


#135 dohdough

dohdough

    Sum Dum Guy

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 22 November 2012 - 09:49 PM

Sadly, there are many here in this thread who express nothing but utter disdain for the working poor. Halve that to $11/k per year (~$5.50 per hour) or quarter it to $5500 per year (~$2.75 per hour) and their arguments won't change. They don't care about the numbers in the end - unless they get too high, of course (which $34K appears to be "too high" for at least one poster here).

So pay them a third of the minimum wage, eliminate the safety net of the welfare state (for the working poor, mind - billions to war profiteers and industry is a-okay), and then express outrage if they dare complain.

We're living in a re-run of Dickens' "Oliver." You want *mooooooooooore*?

They hate the idea that someone who puts in 40 a week can afford a decent livelihood for themselves and their family because it might take away from their $1/box shit snacks. Externalities? They have no idea what that means. Only instant gratification and shameless hedonism.

We live in an era that has nothing but contempt for the working class. They would love for all factories to be run like Foxconn. Go whole hog and bring back the truck system.



#136 Clak

Clak

    Made of star stuff.

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 23 November 2012 - 01:20 AM

I was actually thinking of that while reading this the other day, although I was thinking of the Tennessee Ernie Ford version...;P

#137 mykevermin

mykevermin

    Queen of Scotland

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 30 November 2012 - 01:07 PM

http://www.latimes.c...0,1027676.story

Hostess Brands Inc., in the midst of winding down its business, won approval Thursday from a federal bankruptcy judge to give as much as $1.75 million in bonuses to its executives.

The money is intended as an incentive for 19 top-level managers to remain with the Twinkies and Ding Dongs maker to oversee its liquidation.

The payouts will be granted only if managers "achieve a set of specific tasks and goals within a specified time frame that are designed to speed and lower the cost of the wind-down," Hostess spokesman Lance Ignon said.


The same management that ruined the company gets nearly $2 million in bonuses.

Keep pointing fingers at the unions folks. That pain in the back of your head? It's called cognitive dissonance.
Posted Image

#138 BigPopov

BigPopov

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 30 November 2012 - 02:20 PM

To be fair, any company that goes out of business and sold off has to be dismantled and you pay the people doing it. That has nothing to do with what happened before the company goes bankrupt.

Though it sucks that the current guys are the ones who are doing it. Maybe hire a third party firm to handle it? Guess it depends on what that would've cost.

#139 irideabike

irideabike

Posted 30 November 2012 - 02:31 PM

Good for them for milking the last bit of cash out of it that they could, do bad the company couldn't have continued on (and then none of the bonuses would have been needed).

There are no shortcuts. No do-overs. What happened, happened. Trust me. I know. All of this matters.

Madden 13 SB Champ in the CAG gentleman's league.


#140 detectiveconan16

detectiveconan16

    Look at that deal. It's so great!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 30 November 2012 - 02:47 PM

The current guys that are doing this did it because that's what venture capital firms do. A company is sold to those firms, and it's their prerogative to gut the profit out of it for their own purposes. Never mind the stakeholders.

Batsugunner.png


#141 mykevermin

mykevermin

    Queen of Scotland

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 30 November 2012 - 03:46 PM

you pay the people doing it


nobody's arguing that, though. this isn't pay, it's a bonus.

something about the financial culture of the wealthy is amazing. when we bailed out the banks, bonuses were paid out in the millions (if not tens/hundreds of millions) because the bonuses were "contractual obligations."

...never mind the absurdity of contractually obligated bonuses...

yet, historically, employee pensions are cut, blow up, killed off, eliminated entirely...and suddenly contractual obligations are no longer important.

"class warfare" indeed.
Posted Image

#142 RedvsBlue

RedvsBlue

    Rocket Science Level

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 11 December 2012 - 03:55 PM

http://www.politicus...bankruptcy.html

The main baker pension fund alone is missing $22.1 million. Because the money didn’t come directly from employees, it may not technically be illegal (theft), even though the employees agreed to have a certain part of their wages turned into pension funds by the employer. See, it’s not just the employer contribution, but also employee wages earmarked for the pension fund. Wages.

. . .

Even as Hostess blamed the unions, creditors accused Hostess of manipulating executive salaries in an attempt to get around bankruptcy laws, with then-chief executive Brian Driscoll’s salary going to $2.55 million from around $750,000 while “other executives’ salaries were increased by from 35% to 80%.”


How is this type of behavior tolerated or defended?

#143 mykevermin

mykevermin

    Queen of Scotland

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 11 December 2012 - 04:03 PM

Because we're a nation of plutocrat bootlickers and billionaire apologists.
Posted Image

#144 RedvsBlue

RedvsBlue

    Rocket Science Level

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 11 December 2012 - 04:38 PM

Because we're a nation of plutocrat bootlickers and billionaire apologists.


Indeed...

HSBC to Pay $1.92 Billion to Settle Charges of Money Laundering

Wanna blatantly get away with committing crimes? Do it through a corporation!