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 2 of 9
Quote:
Hostess is in bankruptcy for the second time in recent years. Workers took concessions just a few years ago and this year the company has stopped making its contractually obligated contributions to their pensions. Meanwhile the company's CEO got a 300 percent raise, from $750,000 to $2,250,000, while other top executives got raises of hundreds of thousands of dollars apiece.
Yup, clearly this is all the workers' fault.
In an age of people seeking healthy alternatives, Hostess kept on with fried pies (did nobody think to even try BAKING their pies?!), Ho-Hos, and Twinkies, figuring that they could just keep slashing workers' wages and benefits in the face of a shrinking market for a shoddy product, and nobody would care.
I haven't had a Twinkie in decades, so it's not like I'm really going to miss them.
Meanwhile, plants will be sold to other companies, workers will be hired on to make new products, or the brand's best-sellers will be sold off and made under the same name by a new manufacturer.
But be sure to blame Obama and the unions, no matter what.
"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."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Also, while we're at it:Quote:
Did Congress Kill the Twinkie? The Tariff Behind the Hostess Demise
It’s the end of a lunchbox era as baked icons such as Twinkies, Hostess CupCakes, and Wonder bread face extinction amid a contentious labor dispute, which ended Friday in the declared liquidation of Hostess Brands Inc., the Texas-based confectioner.
So far, Big Labor has gotten the brunt of criticism for the demise of Hostess, since the Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers ,and Grain Millers union refused, despite warnings from fellow union heads, to return from strike at some 20 facilities nationwide. That forced CEO Gregory Rayburn to declare, after two rounds of bankruptcy proceedings, that “it’s over.”
Yet as the political recriminations echo amid news of 18,500 lost jobs in an already sluggish economy, some economists suggest that Americans shift their blame from Big Labor to the role Congress might have played in writing the Twinkies’ obituary.
And that, economists say, may come down to one sweet little word: sugar.
Since 1934, Congress has supported tariffs that benefit primarily a few handful of powerful Florida families while forcing US confectioners to pay nearly twice the global market price for sugar.
One telling event: When Hostess had to cut costs to stay in business, it picked unions, not the sugar lobby, to fight.
“These large sugar growers ... are a notoriously powerful lobbying interest in Washington,” writes Chris Edwards of the Cato Institute in a 2007 report. “Federal supply restrictions have given them monopoly power, and they protect that power by becoming important supporters of presidents, governors, and many members of Congress.”
Such power has been good for business in the important swing state of Florida, but it has punished manufacturers who rely on sugar in other parts of the United States, the Commerce Department said in a 2006 report on the impact of sugar prices.
Sugar trade tariffs are “a classic case of protectionism, pure and simple, and that has ripple effects through other sectors of the economy, and, for all I know, the Hostess decision is one of them,” says William Galston, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution in Washington.Far more at http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/2012/1116/Did-Congress-kill-the-Twin
kie-The-tariff-tale-behind-the-Hostess-demise.-video?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+feeds%2Fwam+%28Christian+Science+Monitor+%7C+Business%29
So I guess it's JUST possible to look beyond the "It's the union's fault!" knee-jerk reaction to find the facts of the story...
Or not.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
So all of this was the fault of the unions, right? That what you believe?
Socialist and unashamed.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
But it's all the fault of the workers. None of those CEOs did anything wrong, and I'm sure they earned every penny of their multimillion-dollar paychecks with their hard work!
[/sarcasm]
"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."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by CaveTroll:
But think of the poor, poor stoners!!!Quote:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
There's been much baking industry consolidation going on for decades. Hostess brands are too powerful to ever disappear entirely. I grew up on Devil Dogs, Twinkies, Yodels, and Snowballs. Back in Jr. HS thru HS those items sold for 5-10 cents, and often my friends and I didn't have the money.
Those rat bastards at Hostess took over Drake's Cakes. I'll never forgive them for what they did to Funny Bones!
My God, what did they do to Funny Bones? I'll admit not eating them in a long time but I wasn't aware they had something done to them. Please elaborate.....mmmmmm peanut butter filling!
Another Drake's gift to humanity from my yoot was Yankee Doodles. It was always a difficult choice....the 2 iced creme-filled chocolate cup cakes from Hostess, or the 3 crumbly non-iced creme-filled chocolate cup cakes from Drakes. And kids today think they have problems!
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Niki - 18,500 workers lose their job because the UNION thugs chose to strike, and it's somehow Bush's fault?
Crassic. 
" 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. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Thousands of workers lost their jobs because the executives decided, as usual, that looting the company to line their pockets was more important than trying to make a competitive product.
But I didn't see where anyone blamed Bush.
"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."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
What kind of idiotic group-think morons would take an 100% pay cut rather than an 8%, which would end up being only a 4% pay cut, in a year or so ?
Oh, UNION workers, that's who!
" 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. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Yeah, well, Mike, we knew the facts wouldn't penetrate that pea-sized brain. I don't know where he got the "Bush" thing tho'...who blamed Bush? C'mon, raise you hand(s), Rap says you blamed Bush so stand up and take your punishment like men!
The timeline pretty much says it all, but ultra-righties like Rap will never get past their lords' and masters' propaganda. It's too bad. I guess he's worked through his five stages of grief and, surprise, came back just the same. Sad.
Let's see...the workers were supposed to keep taking pay cuts (which the CEOs kept getting raises), give up their old-age safety nets (which the company contracted with them to provide their share of), until they're not making enough to survive, right? It never occurs to these people that, if the product is viable, someone will buy it up and employ them again--no doubt at more homorable conditions than they've been getting from the vulture capitalists!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
There were several different unions at Hostess. All but the bakers union agreed to new contracts. So that union not only put themselves out of work, they also dragged down thousands of their co-workers with them. And they all made great money and had great benefits. But their union leaders knew better of course. They knew so much in fact that they outsmarted management and led their flock right to the unemployment line. I'm sure the union bosses who live high on the hog with union dues will have a great Christmas. The 18,500 and their families...not so much.
I wouldn't be surprised if Hostess goes through the bankruptcy process only to emerge in a creditor structured form which would allow them to hire non-union workers to fill all those jobs. Even at 2/3 to 3/4 pay and benefits, the lines of people waiting for those jobs would be miles long.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME