If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post)   Good news for all you laid off Hostess employees, the top executives bonuses totaling up to $1.8 million will most likely to be approved by a judge today   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 321
    More: Asinine, twinkies, white-breads, Ho Hos, liquidation, ding dongs, blueberries  
•       •       •

7006 clicks; posted to Main » on 29 Nov 2012 at 2:23 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



321 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-11-29 03:42:17 PM  

Fark_Guy_Rob: Let's try to put this in perspective....if you are a regular sort-of-joe (like myself) when you hear these salary/bonus numbers - you think 'WHAT!? ' So let's scale it down ...
If you were getting paid 10k in cash and 40k in bonuses - would you continue to work a ...


OK, so you're saying that competition leads to higher compensation. The question is, what are these executive turds doing that nobody else can? Or is it just a Good Ol' Boys network?
 
2012-11-29 03:42:22 PM  

Bullseyed: Dr Dreidel: and people wonder why the CEO class is reviled more and more every day

Because braindead morons like you have no idea how the world works?


Speaking of the world...

static.politifact.com.s3.amazonaws.com
 
2012-11-29 03:42:37 PM  
With no Twinkies to eat, instead lets  www.ptarmigannest.net

They're tender and well marbled.
 
2012-11-29 03:42:46 PM  
I think stubby failed English class
 
2012-11-29 03:43:02 PM  
Don't want to defend the execs much, BUT here's some of waht they were dealing with and why the company had trouble becoming profitable:
1. 80 (80!) different penesion and benefit plans for the various unions. Those are very expensive to administer.
2. Labor - per union rules only a certain employee could load the delivery trucks. Cakes had to be loaded on 1 truck and bread on another, even when going to the same location. Once at the location, another union guy had to move the goods from the delivery dock to shelves. there's 4 jobs w/benefits that could have been done by 2.
3. $52 million in worker's comp claims in 2010. Really? Injured by a ding Dong falling on your foot?
4. The market. How many of you farkers bought one of their products in the last few years? (Not counting that night your bro-in-law came over with a nug of some good shiat to smoke)
5. Yeah, some of the execs were probably wrong about strategy & execution. ("coach -how do you feel about the execution of your team?" Coach: "I'm for it")
 
2012-11-29 03:43:16 PM  
Top CEO salary was reduced to $1 + bonuses as of May 1, 2012 and was to remain at that level until the company came out of bankruptcy or until December 1, 2012, which ever came first.

So $1.8 million / 19 CEO's = mean income of just under $95,000 since May, which works out to a $163,00 annual salary.

Given the average baker was making between $45,000 and $50,000 during that same period, the top CEO's were paid within an approximate 3.5 to 1 ratio.

A 3.5 to 1 ratio is very good. Better than the much praised Ben & Jerry's salary ratio of 5 to 1 first announced in 1990. Of course, B & J later increased that to 7 to 1, and eventually eliminated all salary ratios guidelines in 2010.

While $1.8 million sounds like a large chunck of money, it is within a 3.5 to 1 ratio and is very reasonable.
 
2012-11-29 03:43:19 PM  

tricycleracer: Elroydb: Many of these execs only make $1 salary and rely on bonuses and stock options for payment.

Payment for driving a company into the ground?


I bet your highest level of employment is fry cook at McDonalds and you have a degree in theater from a state college.


How much money did the union leaders get for driving the company into bankruptcy?
 
2012-11-29 03:43:45 PM  

Bullseyed: raerae1980: That is BS. Borders Execs tried persuading the judge in our bankruptcy to approve their bonuses. Judge said no. What are the grounds for allowing these bonuses for Hostess execs to be approved?

Why would anyone in management stay on though the liquidation otherwise? All the managers would quit.


what are they gonna do ? It isn't like CIO, CEO and CFO jobs are in abundance. Even President and VP level folks aren't usually going to go from that position to the same or equivalent in other companies. They should be thankful they have a job that continues to pay them and their benefits. They can look for work while they close up shop, that is what all these folks are going to be doing anyway. You think these folks who know their job is gonna end won't be looking for work before the $$ runs out ?
 
2012-11-29 03:43:50 PM  

Magorn: whistleridge: The judge can only rule if it's legal or not, not how vile or wrong it may be.

Not entire, a BK judge has some powers that a regular Judge doesn't, and has some duties to ensure that creditor's rights are protected and that management feees of a company in re-organization or liquidation are "reasonable". Especially in the case of a liquidation, the goal is create the maximum distribution to the creditors after liquidation


That's a process defined by law, not repugnance. The judge in question may very well personally want to deny that CEO every penny, but be strictly bound by the terms of the contract. Yes, he/she can weigh and balance things, but they can't just say 'this is wrong, sorry, no money for you', which is what the headline is implying should actually be happening.

Or put another way: blame the board, blame greed, blame our diseased corporate culture, but don't blame the poor judge. They're just an overworked soul doing a thankless job for nowhere near the sorts of money being talked about here. That CEO probably makes more in a week than the judge will make in a year.
 
2012-11-29 03:43:59 PM  
And when Hostess outsources their yellowcake enrichment production to Iran you'll all be begging for the Ding-Dong bailout that never came. Way to go America!
 
2012-11-29 03:44:15 PM  

giftedmadness: I think stubby failed English class


that's unpossible
 
2012-11-29 03:45:02 PM  

Magorn: As if there WERE other jobs avaialble right then in a financial secotr in which investment banks were falling like dominoes, and as if anyone would (or should) hire someone with the stink of AIG's FAIL still lingering on them.


Intelligent people will always have/find jobs.

#inconvenienttruth
 
2012-11-29 03:46:27 PM  

fickenchucker: That's just stupid.

But place yourself in those striking employees' shoes. I cannot for the life of me figure out why they would strike and become jobless at the end. I would vote to keep working and look for another job with at least something coming in. Unemployment can't be as much as the reduced pay rate, can it?


It sounds like the average intelligence level for a union worker is starting to dawn on you.

Pressing a button on an assembly line shouldn't merit any pay, much less the $80-$100 an hour most union workers get.
 
2012-11-29 03:46:35 PM  

udhq: wmanning833: To all you hostess employees, you paid far more than this in annual union dues and look what it got you.

As one employee said recently, it will be hard to replace the jobs they had, but not to replace the jobs management had offered them to keep the company in business.

The employees/union had nothing to lose by rejecting the concessions. It will be MUCH easier for them to replace their jobs, then for these executives to find similar ones. Especially when the last thing on your resume is "Ran an internationally beloved brand into the ground."


This.
People act like the employees were being asked to take a very small pay and benefit cut. They weren't. Like one lady said, in 2005 she made 48k and then the employees agreed to take a pay cut that left her earning 34k last year. With this new pay cut that Hostess was proposing, in 5 years she would be making 25k. Plus there is also the matter of the pension money that Hostess borrowed from the employees and now claims that they can't pay back.

So all of you screaming that the Unions destroyed hostess, and the employees made their own beds by not taking the pay cut, would you have taken a pay cut that would have resulted in your yearly salary being 25k in 5 years, when your yearly salary was 48k 7 years ago, and you had already agreed to a pay cut that reduced your salary from 48k to 34k?
 
2012-11-29 03:46:41 PM  

Bullseyed: tricycleracer: Elroydb: Many of these execs only make $1 salary and rely on bonuses and stock options for payment.

Payment for driving a company into the ground?

I bet your highest level of employment is fry cook at McDonalds and you have a degree in theater from a state college.


How much money did the union leaders get for driving the company into bankruptcy?


The union's job is to advocate for its members. Management's job is to make sure the company keeps in business. I may as well ask what management gets for forcing people out of work.

// $1.8 mil divided 19 ways, apparently
// or I could ask why management signed such a shiatty deal in the first place - did they not know it was shiatty (in which case, they're hardly worth an extra ~$2mil), or not care (in which case, fark 'em twice)?
 
2012-11-29 03:47:09 PM  
So many arm chair CEOs... If you can do better, i hear they are for sale.
 
2012-11-29 03:48:29 PM  

ongbok: This.
People act like the employees were being asked to take a very small pay and benefit cut. They weren't. Like one lady said, in 2005 she made 48k and then the employees agreed to take a pay cut that left her earning 34k last year. With this new pay cut that Hostess was proposing, in 5 years she would be making 25k. Plus there is also the matter of the pension money that Hostess borrowed from the employees and now claims that they can't pay back.

So all of you screaming that the Unions destroyed hostess, and the employees made their own beds by not taking the pay cut, would you have taken a pay cut that would have resulted in your yearly salary being 25k in 5 years, when your yearly salary was 48k 7 years ago, and you had already agreed to a pay cut that reduced your salary from 48k to 34k?


The problem is, on Fark, if you aren't an engineer, you deserve minimum wage.
 
2012-11-29 03:48:32 PM  

Djkb: $1,800,000 divided by 16,000 employees = $112.50

Or, a little more than half a day's wages.

BIG FARKIN' DEAL!!!!!


If you're unemployed, an extra $112 at Christmas time is a BFD.
 
2012-11-29 03:48:41 PM  

Jacobin: Weaver95: And remember - this is ALL the union's fault!

Why? Because the executives quadrupled their pay 24 months ago took on too much bank debt and drove the company into the ground?

Thats not how it works. They were glorious job creators who earned those princely sums by taking risks and the bad unions killed the company

Try to keep up


I have not been following this issue that closely, but I am confused by your implications. Is there an indication that taking on debt was not linked to an unhealthy P and L, which could be linked to high costs?

Also, doing some basic math, if they had 18,000 employees, and let's just assume an average cost per employee of around $70K, then their payroll would have been at around $1.26 billion. That is a much more significant costs than executive salaries. If the unions were increasing (through benefits, or above market wages) costs by even 10%, then you are talking about 120 million a year. So, yeah, unions could have been a factor
 
2012-11-29 03:48:47 PM  

Djkb: $1,800,000 divided by 16,000 employees = $112.50

Or, a little more than half a day's wages.

BIG FARKIN' DEAL!!!!!


images.persephonemagazine.com
 
2012-11-29 03:49:14 PM  

Kit Fister: here's what I don't get. This is AMERICA. Why were these companies not raking in money hand over fist for selling processed sugars packaged with food-like synthetic chemical compounds designed to mimic the taste and texture of frosting, cream filling, and cake? WE'RE A NATION OF FAT PEOPLE!


The price flexibility of such products is zero. You cannot increase prices or no one will buy your product.

Unions demand that you keep paying workers long after they've quit or retired. This means each year even if you keep your workforce the same, your costs increase exponentially.

In a few years, you're making no profit. A few years after that and you're losing money and covering with debt. Right after that is bankruptcy.
 
2012-11-29 03:49:24 PM  
This whole Hostess thing sucks!!! I want my Butternut Autumn Wheat Bread back!!!
 
2012-11-29 03:50:55 PM  

tricycleracer: chrisco123: tricycleracer

We have junior traders on our desk, all of 22 years-old, who will be seriously pissed if they don't get a $400K bonus. $100K for an executive is a pittance.

Even if they bankrupt their clients with horrible stock picks?


How could you bankrupt someone with bad stock picks? Anyone who is investing 100% of their net worth in the stock market is a moron, not to mention that they'd have to have zero income and be relying solely on capital gains.
 
2012-11-29 03:52:29 PM  

JeffreyScott: A 3.5 to 1 ratio is very good. Better than the much praised Ben & Jerry's salary ratio of 5 to 1 first announced in 1990. Of course, B & J later increased that to 7 to 1, and eventually eliminated all salary ratios guidelines in 2010.

While $1.8 million sounds like a large chunck of money, it is within a 3.5 to 1 ratio and is very reasonable.


I disagree with the bold parts.
 
2012-11-29 03:54:38 PM  

Rev.K: Bullseyed: The employees shafted everyone.

Getting paid $100/hour to push a button on the assembly line.

Even at your ridiculously false $100/hour figure, that worker would still make one million dollars less than the CEO of the now bankrupt company will make next year.


18,000 current employees* $100/hour * 40 hours a week * 52 weeks a year = $3,744,000,000 per year
Annual revenue = $3,200,000,000

Easy to see why they were struggling.
 
2012-11-29 03:54:56 PM  
Ah, capitalism.

I love how we still suck its dick in the supposedly enlightened 21st century.

Can't talk about being out of work, or hating on corporations that treat workers like shiat.

Because it would be rude, or something.
 
2012-11-29 03:55:35 PM  
@TV's Vinnie: Hate to break it to you, but you're "rich" to that vast majority of the worlds population. Get in line for your loppin'.  http://www.globalrichlist.com/
 
2012-11-29 03:55:48 PM  

Bullseyed: tricycleracer: Elroydb: Many of these execs only make $1 salary and rely on bonuses and stock options for payment.

Payment for driving a company into the ground?

I bet your highest level of employment is fry cook at McDonalds and you have a degree in theater from a state college.


How much money did the union leaders get for driving the company into bankruptcy?


If union leaders had more influence on the well-being of the company than management, then you are beginning with the assumption of absolute incompetence at every level of management.

And I'm not even arguing the bonuses are out of line. I just think they should have to repay every cent they stole from the employee-paid pension fund first. They clearly knew they were headed for liquidation when they started "borrowing" from it in the first place.
 
2012-11-29 03:57:18 PM  

kindms: what are they gonna do ? It isn't like CIO, CEO and CFO jobs are in abundance.


All the evidence anyone needs to know you don't know what you're talking about.
 
2012-11-29 03:59:29 PM  

Dr Dreidel: // or I could ask why management signed such a shiatty deal in the first place - did they not know it was shiatty (in which case, they're hardly worth an extra ~$2mil), or not care (in which case, fark 'em twice)?


So what you're saying is you don't know how unions and laws governing unions work.
 
2012-11-29 03:59:30 PM  

tricycleracer: ongbok: This.
People act like the employees were being asked to take a very small pay and benefit cut. They weren't. Like one lady said, in 2005 she made 48k and then the employees agreed to take a pay cut that left her earning 34k last year. With this new pay cut that Hostess was proposing, in 5 years she would be making 25k. Plus there is also the matter of the pension money that Hostess borrowed from the employees and now claims that they can't pay back.

So all of you screaming that the Unions destroyed hostess, and the employees made their own beds by not taking the pay cut, would you have taken a pay cut that would have resulted in your yearly salary being 25k in 5 years, when your yearly salary was 48k 7 years ago, and you had already agreed to a pay cut that reduced your salary from 48k to 34k?

The problem is, on Fark, if you aren't an engineer, you deserve minimum wage.


And half of the people on Fark who are claiming to be engineers and who are shiatting on other people's professions, aren't engineers themselves. They are probably CSA's and data entry clerks who went to school for engineering but left after the first year because they couldn't hack it.

And I personally think that Bullseyed once held a nice union job and was fired, probably for gross incompetence or maybe some type of inappropriate behavior, and now holds a grudge against all unions, because he was dumb enough to believe that whatever you do you can't get fired from a union job, and thinks they were just out to get him. This is why he continually tells lies and complete exaggerations about unions any time a union is mentioned in a thread.
 
2012-11-29 04:00:04 PM  

whidbey: Ah, capitalism.

I love how we still suck its dick in the supposedly enlightened 21st century.

Can't talk about being out of work, or hating on corporations that treat workers like shiat.

Because it would be rude, or something.




Well, first of all, tell me, is there some society you know that doesn't run on greed? You think Russia doesn't run on greed? You think China doesn't run on greed? What is greed? Of course none of us are greedy. It's only the other fellow who's greedy. The world runs on individuals pursuing their separate interests. The great achievements of civilization have not come from government bureaus. Einstein didn't construct his theory under order from a bureaucrat. Henry Ford didn't revolutionize the automobile industry that way. In the only cases in which the masses have escaped from the kind of grinding poverty you're talking about, the only cases in recorded history are where they have had capitalism and largely free trade. If you want to know where the masses are worst off, it's exactly in the kinds of societies that depart from that. So that the record of history is absolutely crystal clear that there is no alternative way, so far discovered, of improving the lot of the ordinary people that can hold a candle to the productive activities that are unleashed by a free enterprise system.
-Friedman
 
2012-11-29 04:00:39 PM  

Weaver95: raerae1980: T What are the grounds for allowing these bonuses for Hostess execs to be approved?

because they're rich! plus, ya know, unions.


Politicians are wealthy
Judges are wealthy
Corporate executives are wealthy.
Shareholders are wealthy

The "morality" of the wealthy is to scratch each others backs FIRST, even if there is no direct gain in money or power at the time because their brains have become wired to be totally incapable of empathy to those outside their social circle.
 
2012-11-29 04:00:40 PM  

tricycleracer: Bullseyed: Dr Dreidel: and people wonder why the CEO class is reviled more and more every day

Because braindead morons like you have no idea how the world works?

Speaking of the world...

[static.politifact.com.s3.amazonaws.com image 300x268]


You know that chart is not only incorrect, but it was made by a group of undergrads who didn't even cite their sources, right? It's going to hurt your argument, not help it.

The real ratio is a more obscenely sedate 185:1 or so.
 
2012-11-29 04:01:22 PM  
Boy the Unions got the last laugh on this one!! 

www.friendlyflutes.co.uk
 
2012-11-29 04:02:30 PM  

Bullseyed: Dr Dreidel: // or I could ask why management signed such a shiatty deal in the first place - did they not know it was shiatty (in which case, they're hardly worth an extra ~$2mil), or not care (in which case, fark 'em twice)?

So what you're saying is you don't know how unions and laws governing unions work.


Enlighten me.
 
2012-11-29 04:06:07 PM  
vulture caps look at a company's annual net revenue and then use that figure to determine how much money can be borrowed where the annual interest payment on the new loan is equal to the annual net revenue.

Say, 10 million in revenue and a 10% interest rate ... the raiders would borrow 100 million, and then use the revenue to pay that note. they just got 100 million to pay themselves bonuses with. and the company has a 100 million bill that they can never repay (because their former total net revenue is only enough to pay the interest).
 
2012-11-29 04:07:26 PM  

hermitage_deux: vulture caps look at a company's annual net revenue and then use that figure to determine how much money can be borrowed where the annual interest payment on the new loan is equal to the annual net revenue.

Say, 10 million in revenue and a 10% interest rate ... the raiders would borrow 100 million, and then use the revenue to pay that note. they just got 100 million to pay themselves bonuses with. and the company has a 100 million bill that they can never repay (because their former total net revenue is only enough to pay the interest).


So what law was broken?
 
2012-11-29 04:08:08 PM  

whidbey: Ah, capitalism.

I love how we still suck its dick in the supposedly enlightened 21st century.

Can't talk about being out of work, or hating on corporations that treat workers like shiat.

Because it would be rude, or something.


Please enlighten us on how your Utopia would be structured. Would everyone get a unicorn? Would decisions be made only if 100% of the population agree? The world waits with bated breath.
 
2012-11-29 04:08:34 PM  

Joe Blowme: -Friedman


If there's anyone who needs to be the victim of his own farked up ideology, it's him.
 
2012-11-29 04:08:55 PM  

Click Click D'oh: Uh... the bonuses are to retain management members who will be involved in the liquidation process, and who would likely jump ship otherwise. Farkers do realize that qualified executives would flee Hostess without retention bonuses right? Well, that actually could explain a lot around Fark if the average Farker would stay with a dieing company instead of seeking alternative employment...


Yep. The creditors did not object to the bonuses.

Question is.....why isn't the union trying to buy the company?
 
2012-11-29 04:09:01 PM  

tricycleracer: Bullseyed: Dr Dreidel: and people wonder why the CEO class is reviled more and more every day

Because braindead morons like you have no idea how the world works?

Speaking of the world...

[static.politifact.com.s3.amazonaws.com image 300x268]


seems legit
 
2012-11-29 04:09:21 PM  

whidbey: Joe Blowme: -Friedman

If there's anyone who needs to be the victim of his own farked up ideology, it's him.


would you settle for him being a victim of mortality?
 
2012-11-29 04:10:06 PM  

Bullseyed: kindms: what are they gonna do ? It isn't like CIO, CEO and CFO jobs are in abundance.

All the evidence anyone needs to know you don't know what you're talking about.


really ? your telling me that there are an abundance of top level jobs at corporations equivalent to what these folks were doing that will just leap at the opportunity to hire executives from a company that was run in to the ground ? Who don't already have folks from within vying for those jobs, who have more time and experience in their related fields ? Because last time I checked there were a lot of really educated qualified people out there who can't find jobs.
 
2012-11-29 04:11:31 PM  

Bullseyed: Grand_Moff_Joseph: The Vulture Capitalists get their pound of flesh, the executives get their golden parachutes, and the employees get shafted big time.

That's the Bain Way!

The employees shafted everyone.

Getting paid $100/hour to push a button on the assembly line.


OOOH, a Fox Noise talking point.
 
2012-11-29 04:11:36 PM  

whidbey: Ah, capitalism.

I love how we still suck its dick in the supposedly enlightened 21st century.

Can't talk about being out of work, or hating on corporations that treat workers like shiat.

Because it would be rude, or something.


What other way works when there are limited resources?
 
2012-11-29 04:12:39 PM  

kindms: Bullseyed: kindms: what are they gonna do ? It isn't like CIO, CEO and CFO jobs are in abundance.

All the evidence anyone needs to know you don't know what you're talking about.

really ? your telling me that there are an abundance of top level jobs at corporations equivalent to what these folks were doing that will just leap at the opportunity to hire executives from a company that was run in to the ground ? Who don't already have folks from within vying for those jobs, who have more time and experience in their related fields ? Because last time I checked there were a lot of really educated qualified people out there who can't find jobs.


What are they really educated in? If it's not STEM or business, it's really not "qualified."
 
2012-11-29 04:13:45 PM  

JeffreyScott: While $1.8 million sounds like a large chunck of money, it is within a 3.5 to 1 ratio and is very reasonable.


It also incites calls for violence from internet basement dwellers.
 
2012-11-29 04:15:19 PM  

Weaver95: And remember - this is ALL the union's fault!


I know you were being your usual ignorant self, but it largely was.

Even the bakers union has said as much. The teamsters union enforced rules that caused an estimates 80 million a year in extra costs. Can't ship Twinkies with wonder bread, that would be too efficient. The company would be profitable if transportation costs matched industry average. This was the main crux of the bakers unions actual pr.

But we don't expect you to actually know anything.

Surely the 1.5 million in bonus is much larger than the 80 million a year in excess transportation costs directly caused by union contracts.
 
2012-11-29 04:15:55 PM  

Grand_Moff_Joseph: The Vulture Capitalists get their pound of flesh, the executives get their golden parachutes, and the employees get shafted big time.

That's the Bain Way!


You do know that the primary investors are democrats. Heh.
 
Displayed 50 of 321 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report