Twinkie maker Hostess to wind down ops, lay off 18,500 workers, put brands up for sale

POSTED BY: Geezer
UPDATED: Saturday, November 24, 2012 18:01
VIEWED: 12327
PAGE 7 of 9

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT PAGE

KWICKO

Tuesday, November 20, 2012 11:53 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:

Bite me.

Don't mean I don't still luv 'ya.

I have to admit, I LOL'd.

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

M52NICKERSON

Wednesday, November 21, 2012 1:34 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:

Thing is, the union going on strike isn't the same thing as the company's execs filing for bankruptcy and liquidation. The union going on strike is the workers saying that there are minimum conditions for work, conditions below which they will not voluntarily report for work.

Not the same thing but you know that them not showing up to work can force the execs to file bankruptcy and liquidate. If the company is not making anything to sell it will not survive.

Unions are like everything else, some are better than others. If a Union is unreasonable in there demands they can drive a company out of business.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
A warning to everyone, AURaptor is a known liar.
...and now a Fundie!
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=53359

GEEZER

Wednesday, November 21, 2012 2:56 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
You're big on claiming things that simply are not true.

Sort'a like this claim you quoted above?

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:

What was this last/best/final offer? You'd never know by watching the main stream media tell the story. So here you go...
1) 8% hourly pay cut in year 1 with additional cuts totaling 27% over 5 years. Currently, I make $16.12 an hour at TOP rate of pay in the bakery. I would drop to $11.26 in 5 years.
2) They get to keep our $3+ an hour forever.
3) Doubling of weekly insurance premium.
4) Lowering of overall quality of insurance plan.
5) TOTAL withdrawal from ALL pensions. If you don't have it now then you never will.

Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:

Interesting to compare to this, which shows the salaries going down 8% for a year and then starting to go up again.

Quote:

The new contract cuts salaries across the company by 8% in the first year of the five-year agreement. Salaries then bump up 3% in the next three years and 1% in the final year.

Hostess has also reduced its pension obligations and its contribution to the employees' health care plan. In exchange, the company offered concessions including a 25% equity stake for workers and the inclusion of two union representatives on an eight-member board of directors.

http://money.cnn.com/2012/11/14/news/companies/hostess-liquidation-thu
rsday/index.html

KWICKO

Wednesday, November 21, 2012 12:39 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
You're big on claiming things that simply are not true.

Sort'a like this claim you quoted above?

Did I make a claim that is untrue?

Or did I quote a source you have an issue with?

(There's a difference between the two, but in your rapidly deteriorating mental state, you seem not to be able to discern such differences.)

Quote:

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:

What was this last/best/final offer? You'd never know by watching the main stream media tell the story. So here you go...
1) 8% hourly pay cut in year 1 with additional cuts totaling 27% over 5 years. Currently, I make $16.12 an hour at TOP rate of pay in the bakery. I would drop to $11.26 in 5 years.
2) They get to keep our $3+ an hour forever.
3) Doubling of weekly insurance premium.
4) Lowering of overall quality of insurance plan.
5) TOTAL withdrawal from ALL pensions. If you don't have it now then you never will.

Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:

Interesting to compare to this, which shows the salaries going down 8% for a year and then starting to go up again.

Quote:

The new contract cuts salaries across the company by 8% in the first year of the five-year agreement. Salaries then bump up 3% in the next three years and 1% in the final year.

Hostess has also reduced its pension obligations and its contribution to the employees' health care plan. In exchange, the company offered concessions including a 25% equity stake for workers and the inclusion of two union representatives on an eight-member board of directors.

http://money.cnn.com/2012/11/14/news/companies/hostess-liquidation-thu
rsday/index.html

That's cute. I noticed how you managed to put your own quoted clips in quote tags, yet made the quotes I posted look like they were things that *I* said, when you know they aren't my claims, but allegations made in an article which I cited.

Further, you've yet to show where the article I posted is "untrue". You've only posted something else which differs from my source. Would it be valid for me to claim that you're citing untrue articles if I have a source that disagrees with yours?

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

AURAPTOR

Wednesday, November 21, 2012 12:59 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by m52nickerson:

If you can't cite your claims they are nothing but opinion a can be ignored, and may times should be. See Rappy facts matter to thinking people. If you produce the citation Kwickie can not longer avoid it without and is forced to deal with it or should be called out on it. Until you back up your claims your the one who gets called out. That is the way it goes.

Can and DO offer up cites, but not every single post. In the REAL world, many voice their opinions freely, in the course of having a mature conversation. Not every minute detail is cross examined and 'cited'. Hell, even when I DO offer up cites, the peanut gallery still mocks, dismisses and ignores my views, so I fail to see the point of trying to be taken seriously by the likes of you as a legitimate motivating factor.

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

AURAPTOR

Wednesday, November 21, 2012 1:03 PM

Quote:
... you cannot be required to be a member of a union or pay it any monies as a condition of employment unless the collective bargaining agreement between your employer and your union contains a provision REQUIRING all employees to either join the union or pay union fees .

Which often means, you're forced to join the union.

As I said...

And then there's the issue of having open votes, or card check, where the unions intimidate the employees by forcing them to openly vote up or down on measures, instead of a secret ballot.

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

M52NICKERSON

Wednesday, November 21, 2012 1:23 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Can and DO offer up cites, but not every single post. In the REAL world, many voice their opinions freely, in the course of having a mature conversation. Not every minute detail is cross examined and 'cited'. Hell, even when I DO offer up cites, the peanut gallery still mocks, dismisses and ignores my views, so I fail to see the point of trying to be taken seriously by the likes of you as a legitimate motivating factor.

Cite when asked, learn what a good citation is. Not very hard. I'm okay with you continuing to be dismissed when you fail to do these things.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
A warning to everyone, AURaptor is a known liar.
...and now a Fundie!
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=53359

M52NICKERSON

Wednesday, November 21, 2012 1:26 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Which often means, you're forced to join the union.

As I said...

And then there's the issue of having open votes, or card check, where the unions intimidate the employees by forcing them to openly vote up or down on measures, instead of a secret ballot.

KW's other post provided evidence that a person can't be forced to join a Union, just pay the dues. Now I don't understand why anyone would not join and get a say if they have to pay for it and get represented by one. Techniclly you and I were wrong and he was right. Deal with it.

Now I agree with you on the issue of secret ballots.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
A warning to everyone, AURaptor is a known liar.
...and now a Fundie!
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=53359

AURAPTOR

Wednesday, November 21, 2012 1:42 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by m52nickerson:

KW's other post provided evidence that a person can't be forced to join a Union, just pay the dues. Now I don't understand why anyone would not join and get a say if they have to pay for it and get represented by one. Techniclly you and I were wrong and he was right. Deal with it.

Now I agree with you on the issue of secret ballots.

Saying you're not FORCED to join, unless it's part of the labor agreement, still ends up as being exactly as I said, where anyone wishing to want to go work ends up having to join the union OR merely paying a portion of their pay check to the union.

I fail to see any tangible distinction, though you ( and more so Kwickie ) want to play semantics on this point. At the end of the day, anyone who goes to work for company X, is getting $ taken from them, forcibly, and or having to join the union, outright.

And I'm sorry, but merely having folks ask for citations, at a drop of a hat, isn't a valid excuse for me to bother going to the trouble of finding suitable sources for the approval of a message board. Some times it's warranted, but not always. Kwickie loves to merely toss out the 'cites' challenge, simply because he has nothing of substance to offer, ( he seldom does ) and is just being an a-hole , out of pure spite.

It's not a serious request, and he knows it.

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

M52NICKERSON

Wednesday, November 21, 2012 1:50 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Saying you're not FORCED to join, unless it's part of the labor agreement, still ends up as being exactly as I said, where anyone wishing to want to go work ends up having to join the union OR merely paying a portion of their pay check to the union.

I fail to see any tangible distinction, though you ( and more so Kwickie ) want to play semantics on this point. At the end of the day, anyone who goes to work for company X, is getting $ taken from them, forcibly, and or having to join the union, outright.

Holy shit moron... http://www.nrtw.org/a/a_1_p.htm

"Even if there is such a provision in the agreement, the most that can be required of you is to pay the union fees (generally called an "agency fee.") Most employees are not told by their employer and union that full union membership cannot lawfully be required. In Pattern Makers v. NLRB, 473 U.S. 95 (1985), the United States Supreme Court held that union members have the right to resign their union membership at any time."

There is not much difference, but there is a difference. Instead of you trying desperatly to show you are right about this small point just move on with your arguments.

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
And I'm sorry, but merely having folks ask for citations, at a drop of a hat, isn't a valid excuse for me to bother going to the trouble of finding suitable sources for the approval of a message board. Some times it's warranted, but not always. Kwickie loves to merely toss out the 'cites' challenge, simply because he has nothing of substance to offer, ( he seldom does ) and is just being an a-hole , out of pure spite.

More likely you can back up the vast majority of your claims. You want to be taken seriously you have to provide the citations when asked.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
A warning to everyone, AURaptor is a known liar.
...and now a Fundie!
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=53359

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT PAGE