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.

(Yahoo)   Twinkies will return, unions won't. Ho Ho you bunch of Ding Dongs   (gma.yahoo.com) divider line 132
    More: Followup, ho ho, twinkies, flight attendants, unions, Sno Balls, Wall Street Journal  
•       •       •

3091 clicks; posted to Business » on 26 Apr 2013 at 3:26 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-04-26 11:17:11 AM
Shocked. Shocked, I am, to hear this. Next you'll be telling me that the workers' pensions that were dipped into prior to bankruptcy will not be repaid.

This is me being shocked. Shocked I tell you. It's terribly shocking.
 
2013-04-26 11:46:39 AM

xxmedium: Shocked. Shocked, I am, to hear this. Next you'll be telling me that the workers' pensions that were dipped into prior to bankruptcy will not be repaid.

This is me being shocked. Shocked I tell you. It's terribly shocking.


  Kind of like how states used worker pensions as a stock market gambling fund that went teets up in 2008, now turn around and blame "greedy" state union workers for the deficits.
 
2013-04-26 02:14:33 PM
I'm also shocked that it's the unions that take the blame when management doesn't develop any new brands after consumers tastes change.

Case in point:

i.huffpost.com
 
2013-04-26 02:19:10 PM
So, Hostess snacks will actually taste good now?
 
2013-04-26 02:21:06 PM
So, you can simply break up a union by putting your company through bankruptcy, and just buy up your remains and restart the company.... it is like a Scott Walker wet dream.
 
2013-04-26 02:50:18 PM

dletter: So, you can simply break up a union by putting your company through bankruptcy


Lol, oh is that all?
 
2013-04-26 03:13:49 PM

dletter: So, you can simply break up a union by putting your company through bankruptcy, and just buy up your remains and restart the company.... it is like a Scott Walker wet dream.


They aren't the same owners.  Most all of Hostess was sold off to separate companies.
 
2013-04-26 03:17:56 PM

Lsherm: dletter: So, you can simply break up a union by putting your company through bankruptcy, and just buy up your remains and restart the company.... it is like a Scott Walker wet dream.

They aren't the same owners.  Most all of Hostess was sold off to separate companies.


I know that isn't the case here.   I am just saying... that sounds like it would work though to "break" a union.   Not claiming that bankruptcy is fun or easy, but, if you think it is worth breaking a union....
 
2013-04-26 03:32:37 PM

dletter: but, if you think it is worth breaking a union....


And having a firesale of your assets.
 
2013-04-26 03:32:47 PM

Lsherm: dletter: So, you can simply break up a union by putting your company through bankruptcy, and just buy up your remains and restart the company.... it is like a Scott Walker wet dream.

They aren't the same owners.  Most all of Hostess was sold off to separate companies.


The fact still remains that Hostess was able to liquidate the company without honoring the contract with the union.
 
2013-04-26 03:38:11 PM
So the union won the battle but lost the war. It's a shame that the workers paid the dues to the leadership who couldn't come up with a better plan than to strike. Which led to their jobs being gone for good most likely.
 
2013-04-26 03:38:14 PM
FTFA: Hostess filed for Chapter 11 in January 2012. In November 2012, the company announced it would be shutting its doors for good. By that time, it had lost about $1.1 billion, largely due to bankruptcy filings.

Huh! I though losses caused bankruptcy filings, not the other way around.
 
2013-04-26 03:45:19 PM

skinink: So the union won the battle but lost the war. It's a shame that the workers paid the dues to the leadership who couldn't come up with a better plan than to strike. Which led to their jobs being gone for good most likely.


For 3 years they came up with concession after concession, to the point where the average worker was making 60% of his salary and let the company borrow against pension payments. This isn't a strike problem.
 
2013-04-26 03:48:22 PM

machodonkeywrestler: Lsherm: dletter: So, you can simply break up a union by putting your company through bankruptcy, and just buy up your remains and restart the company.... it is like a Scott Walker wet dream.

They aren't the same owners.  Most all of Hostess was sold off to separate companies.

The fact still remains that Hostess was able to liquidate the company without honoring the contract with the union.


Which is fine. How can a bankrupt organization honor its commitments? That's what bankruptcy means.

Should the new owners not reopen the factories and hire workers?
 
2013-04-26 03:49:06 PM

skinink: So the union won the battle but lost the war. It's a shame that the workers paid the dues to the leadership who couldn't come up with a better plan than to strike. Which led to their jobs being gone for good most likely.


So, you would not strike if asked to take a pay cut, a benefits cut, and health care increase ... twice. Hostess is the classic venture capitalist fraud. They were a company with mature product, good labor relations and a large cash reserve. Then they were bought by two VC firms, looted, bankrupt, and the workers were screwed.

But hey keep blaming the unions I'm sure you will think of something clever when it is your turn in the barrel.
 
2013-04-26 03:54:44 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: machodonkeywrestler: Lsherm: dletter: So, you can simply break up a union by putting your company through bankruptcy, and just buy up your remains and restart the company.... it is like a Scott Walker wet dream.

They aren't the same owners.  Most all of Hostess was sold off to separate companies.

The fact still remains that Hostess was able to liquidate the company without honoring the contract with the union.

Which is fine. How can a bankrupt organization honor its commitments? That's what bankruptcy means.

Should the new owners not reopen the factories and hire workers?


They should have used some of that slimy corporationy money they keep in their corporation buildings.
 
2013-04-26 03:55:45 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: Which is fine. How can a bankrupt organization honor its commitments? That's what bankruptcy means.


Tell that to the student loans people.
 
2013-04-26 03:55:47 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: machodonkeywrestler: Lsherm: dletter: So, you can simply break up a union by putting your company through bankruptcy, and just buy up your remains and restart the company.... it is like a Scott Walker wet dream.

They aren't the same owners.  Most all of Hostess was sold off to separate companies.

The fact still remains that Hostess was able to liquidate the company without honoring the contract with the union.

Which is fine. How can a bankrupt organization honor its commitments? That's what bankruptcy means.

Should the new owners not reopen the factories and hire workers?


For starters, no compensation to management. Also, you are confused about the meaning of the word bankruptcy. All it means when someone files bankruptcy, is that assets and liquidity of the company are less than the debt. They should  be required to justify ANY expenditures over the past 3 years or have assets of the investment firm seized.

PBR can do whatever the hell they want. They bought the brand, not the company.
 
2013-04-26 04:07:26 PM

dletter: Lsherm: dletter: So, you can simply break up a union by putting your company through bankruptcy, and just buy up your remains and restart the company.... it is like a Scott Walker wet dream.

They aren't the same owners.  Most all of Hostess was sold off to separate companies.

I know that isn't the case here.   I am just saying... that sounds like it would work though to "break" a union.   Not claiming that bankruptcy is fun or easy, but, if you think it is worth breaking a union....


You really have to fark up to be allowed to declare bankruptcy.   I'm not sure fighting with a union would be worth it.  The investors who ran Hostess into the ground took a bath.
 
2013-04-26 04:14:21 PM
If you are juiced in with the liquidators, and establish who gets what before the bankruptcy you can really make bank.  it's all about who you know.  Now, let's take the executives and board memebers of hostess and connect the dots with the new owners of it's various  assets and you might see a pattern.
 
2013-04-26 04:20:45 PM
While less visibly destructive than sending in the National Guard or Pinkerton thugs, this is no less damaging to the lives of the former employees.
 
2013-04-26 04:21:33 PM

mutterfark: While less visibly destructive than sending in the National Guard or Pinkerton thugs, this is no less damaging to the lives of the former employees.


What about the new employees?
 
2013-04-26 04:23:19 PM

dletter: So, you can simply break up a union by putting your company through bankruptcy, and just buy up your remains and restart the company.... it is like a Scott Walker wet dream.


Yeah, there's potentially unlimited wealth to be gained by crashing your business into a mountain and then letting vultures pick over its carcass.
 
2013-04-26 04:28:26 PM
It makes me happy that the admins greenlight headlines with zingers in them.
 
2013-04-26 04:30:28 PM
So, Hostess snacks will actually taste good now?
Yes, they will taste sweeter, drizzled with the tears of the overworked, underpaid minimum wage slaves making them....
 
2013-04-26 04:30:34 PM
"We're trying to find the most qualified people in these local markets to come work for the company," Daren Metropoulos told the Journal.

That code speak for "not a lazy ass union thugs".
 
2013-04-26 04:32:35 PM

xxmedium: Shocked. Shocked, I am, to hear this. Next you'll be telling me that the workers' pensions that were dipped into prior to bankruptcy will not be repaid.


Their pensions were turned into CEO Golden Parachutes months ago.

This is what happens when you let rich people handle your retirement nest egg, suckers!
 
2013-04-26 04:33:21 PM

Skywolf the Scribbler: It makes me happy that the admins greenlight headlines with zingers in them.


You, sir, have redeemed this thread.
 
2013-04-26 04:36:26 PM

Because People in power are Stupid: I'm also shocked that it's the unions that take the blame when management doesn't develop any new brands after consumers tastes change.


I dunno. Sometimes it's a good thing when a classic food item makes a comeback. I was at a local supermarket and saw that they're making Apple Newtons again. I almost had an orgasm right there in the cookie aisle.

farm9.staticflickr.com

And yes, there ARE as good as I remember them. Oh, Legal Crack from my 1990's. Never leave me again!
 
2013-04-26 04:53:03 PM

skinink: So the union won the battle but lost the war. It's a shame that the workers paid the dues to the leadership who couldn't come up with a better plan than to strike. Which led to their jobs being gone for good most likely.


Yes, and no.  You hear "union" and you think good wages, fat pension and health care, overtime, etc.  That's the case for the Teamsters, who didn't strike.  The union who did strike, the bakers union, was asked to cut compensation from around $12/hour to around $9.  And it's a shiatty, low-skill, high annoyance job.  Most of the union members could do better ushering movie theaters or pushing out McBurgers in many places.  Strategically it may have made sense to strike even if they thought the jobs would go away, since the union members wouldn't be any worse off finding a new job than if they had stayed in the old one at the new rates.

It'll be interesting to see the price at which the new owners will be able to staff their bakeries.  I'm sure the facilities will be non-union, at least at first, but they may end up with compensation costs comparable (on a per-Twinkie basis) to those which preceded the bankruptcy.  If so, any labor savings will have to come out of the work-rule changes that accompanied the Teamsters' ouster.
 
2013-04-26 04:55:14 PM
I will laugh when the new group they hire unionizes.
 
2013-04-26 04:58:50 PM

TV's Vinnie: Because People in power are Stupid: I'm also shocked that it's the unions that take the blame when management doesn't develop any new brands after consumers tastes change.

I dunno. Sometimes it's a good thing when a classic food item makes a comeback. I was at a local supermarket and saw that they're making Apple Newtons again. I almost had an orgasm right there in the cookie aisle.

[farm9.staticflickr.com image 511x241]

And yes, there ARE as good as I remember them. Oh, Legal Crack from my 1990's. Never leave me again!


Why did they EVER stop making those?!?! And they're back? OMG!!!

/To the Needlessly Complicated-mobile!
 
2013-04-26 05:06:30 PM

Manfred J. Hattan: skinink: So the union won the battle but lost the war. It's a shame that the workers paid the dues to the leadership who couldn't come up with a better plan than to strike. Which led to their jobs being gone for good most likely.

Yes, and no.  You hear "union" and you think good wages, fat pension and health care, overtime, etc.  That's the case for the Teamsters, who didn't strike.  The union who did strike, the bakers union, was asked to cut compensation from around $12/hour to around $9.  And it's a shiatty, low-skill, high annoyance job.  Most of the union members could do better ushering movie theaters or pushing out McBurgers in many places.  Strategically it may have made sense to strike even if they thought the jobs would go away, since the union members wouldn't be any worse off finding a new job than if they had stayed in the old one at the new rates.

It'll be interesting to see the price at which the new owners will be able to staff their bakeries.  I'm sure the facilities will be non-union, at least at first, but they may end up with compensation costs comparable (on a per-Twinkie basis) to those which preceded the bankruptcy.  If so, any labor savings will have to come out of the work-rule changes that accompanied the Teamsters' ouster.


The big issue, IIRC, was that 12 to 9 cut was the second cut that the company had asked for in a short period of time.  The union didn't just want to hand over more concessions and see them squandered.   If you think the company is run by morons who are going to crash it, better to force a sale of assets and get something for the pension fund than to let the company keep digging the debt crater deeper and deeper (when the company has more debt and thus more creditors, so everyone involves gets less from the sell off of the company).  A lot of the bakery workers might have gotten better jobs and hopefully they got a bit of what Hostess owed them as well.

/odds are the unions got the short end of the stick
 
2013-04-26 05:07:09 PM

tallguywithglasseson: Lol, oh is that all?


There are harder ways. More entertaining tho

img849.imageshack.us


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Standoff
 
2013-04-26 05:09:29 PM
It is planning to re-open four bakeries over the next two and a half months, in Columbus, Ga.; Emporia, Kan.; Schiller Park, Ill.; and Indianapolis. It is also contemplating a fifth in Los Angeles.

I don't know about those other places, but the plant in Schiller Park will probably be staffed with just about all Mexicans with questionable immigration status. This way they can pay them all a shiatty wage and abuse the hell out of them and they most likely won't vote to Unionize.
 
2013-04-26 05:27:23 PM

dletter: So, you can simply break up a union by putting your company through bankruptcy, and just buy up your remains and restart the company.... it is like a Scott Walker wet dream.


Oh fark you you ignoramus.

State workers paid ZERO for the insurance and retirement. They now pay 11% and 5% respectively.

This minor adjustment allowed the State to balance a $3 BILLION deficit brought on by 8 years of Dem budgetary shell games.

The state workers can still belong to AFSCME but it turns out they choose not to because the union can do little for them by bargin for wages and  that's how it should be: our State employees had more 'rights' - except the 'right' NOT to join the union than - Fed employees - something I'm sure you're against; meaning that the Fed workers should have at least equal if not more 'rights' than state workers.

And tell me this: WHY should the rest of the state's citizens pay MORE so state employees can pay less?

State employees make more money and have better benefits than the general public - there is something wrong with that.
 
2013-04-26 05:27:45 PM
I don't understand why we can have Islamofascists benefitting from food stamps who want to blow up sporting events and yet we don't have jilted union workers burning down factories.
 
2013-04-26 05:30:28 PM

Slaves2Darkness: skinink: So the union won the battle but lost the war. It's a shame that the workers paid the dues to the leadership who couldn't come up with a better plan than to strike. Which led to their jobs being gone for good most likely.

So, you would not strike if asked to take a pay cut, a benefits cut, and health care increase ... twice. Hostess is the classic venture capitalist fraud. They were a company with mature product, good labor relations and a large cash reserve. Then they were bought by two VC firms, looted, bankrupt, and the workers were screwed.

But hey keep blaming the unions I'm sure you will think of something clever when it is your turn in the barrel.


It was better for those union people to strike and lose their jobs than accept cuts?
So.....NOT having  job in a recession is better than actually keeping the job you have?

Wow.
And you vote too don't you?
How's that 'Hopey/Changey' stuff working out for ya?
 
2013-04-26 05:38:06 PM

The_Gallant_Gallstone: Debeo Summa Credo: Which is fine. How can a bankrupt organization honor its commitments? That's what bankruptcy means.

Tell that to the student loans people.


Yeah, that's a different issue. You can make a case for student loan debt to not be dischargeable in bankruptcy, but it still seems pretty unfair I agree.
 
2013-04-26 05:38:56 PM

MugzyBrown: mutterfark: While less visibly destructive than sending in the National Guard or Pinkerton thugs, this is no less damaging to the lives of the former employees.

What about the new employees?


Easy. They'll be underpaid and overworked.  Management will reap the benefits.  This is how capitalism works. But you knew that.
 
2013-04-26 05:39:09 PM

douchebag/hater: It was better for those union people to strike and lose their jobs than accept cuts?
So.....NOT having job in a recession is better than actually keeping the job you have?


If cuts mean you can make more working nights at McDonald's, and it keeps an inept management's mitts of more of your pension, then what reason is there to stay? It's not like there's job security even if you do stay.  Better to go out on your terms than to wait and see if the next round of cuts involves your job.
 
2013-04-26 05:41:32 PM

Sergeant Grumbles: I don't understand why we can have Islamofascists benefitting from food stamps who want to blow up sporting events and yet we don't have jilted union workers burning down factories.


I assume it's because union workers are lazy.
 
2013-04-26 05:43:03 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: I assume it's because union workers are lazy.


Okay, I laughed.
 
2013-04-26 05:43:09 PM

FarkedOver: MugzyBrown: mutterfark: While less visibly destructive than sending in the National Guard or Pinkerton thugs, this is no less damaging to the lives of the former employees.

What about the new employees?

Easy. They'll be underpaid and overworked.  Management will reap the benefits.  This is how capitalism works. But you knew that.


People earning what they are worth!?! Oh, heaven forfend!
 
2013-04-26 05:44:12 PM
Fark desperatly needs a STUPID button.
 
2013-04-26 05:49:17 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: FarkedOver: MugzyBrown: mutterfark: While less visibly destructive than sending in the National Guard or Pinkerton thugs, this is no less damaging to the lives of the former employees.

What about the new employees?

Easy. They'll be underpaid and overworked.  Management will reap the benefits.  This is how capitalism works. But you knew that.

People earning what they are worth!?! Oh, heaven forfend!


Yes... CEOs raking in millions while the workers who create all the wealth are getting paid peanuts. That is just and that is fair! Long live the capitalists!
 
2013-04-26 05:50:07 PM

BlackArt: Fark desperatly needs a STUPID button.


It's the little red circle with the line through it.
 
2013-04-26 05:52:38 PM

The Stealth Hippopotamus: There are harder ways. More entertaining tho

[Link][img849.imageshack.us image 640x457]


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Standoff


Huh?

Overnite Transportation (now a subsidiary of United Parcel Service).

UPS is a union shop. Teamsters, specifically. Ask me how I know.
 
2013-04-26 05:53:54 PM

FarkedOver: Yes... CEOs raking in millions while the workers who create all the wealth are getting paid peanuts. That is just and that is fair! Long live the capitalists!


It's this weird-ass blend of Ayn Rand capitalism and libertarianism. If it's technically legal (or you don't get caught) and you make money, it's morally right.
 
2013-04-26 05:55:40 PM

Sergeant Grumbles: FarkedOver: Yes... CEOs raking in millions while the workers who create all the wealth are getting paid peanuts. That is just and that is fair! Long live the capitalists!

It's this weird-ass blend of Ayn Rand capitalism and libertarianism. If it's technically legal (or you don't get caught) and you make money, it's morally right.


Well whenever anyone fetishizes accumulation on such a large scale they are always wrong and they are literally taking food out of people's mouths.

It's always legal to be capitalists, after all they right the rules.
 
Displayed 50 of 132 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report