|
Post by Merlot Joe on Nov 20, 2012 19:24:38 GMT -6
Unions do not control what management pays or the benefits they get. This union was a much at fault as management for putting hostess out of business.
|
|
|
Post by Tex on Nov 20, 2012 19:29:26 GMT -6
If the market can't sustain your rate of pay, the unions look to me like another layer of costs between the parties making a deal. I can't blame anyone for doing their best to protect their wages and benefits, but the market has to be there for it. JMHO.
|
|
|
Post by New Mama on Nov 28, 2012 14:42:20 GMT -6
After seeing this thread I looked up this story and read about a dozen articles relating to this. No doubt a series of bad management decisions have been made by Hostess management including agreeing to profit draining union demands. The company has had 6 CEO’s in the past 8 years. Not a good sign for any company.
The fact that the CEO raised his and management salaries at a time of pending bankruptcy appears to be some sort of trick. Soon after they raised those salaries they cut the top earners to $1 a year in some sort of show. I don’t understand the legal or financial strategy of it but maybe one of your great minds knows the reason for that move.
One thing seems clear. The unions decided to strike knowing full well that it would likely shut down the company. The unions blame management for the companies failure. Why don’t the employee’s make a bid for the company if they think it’s all managements fault? Let them deal with their own labor demands. I’ve highlighted a few below. Wonder if they can make a profit under these labor rules?
I say the Baker's union jobs will go the same road as the Garment Union.....overseas.
|
|
|
Post by New Mama on Nov 30, 2012 13:30:34 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by Merlot Joe on Nov 30, 2012 13:54:32 GMT -6
I have said it before and will say it again. The American Workers have priced themselves right out of a job.
|
|
|
Post by ♥ COVID-19♥ on Nov 30, 2012 14:37:21 GMT -6
So, in other words, they should be underpaid and undervalued as if they were illegal aliens.
Tell me again how much the management is making and what their bonuses are?
|
|
|
Post by New Mama on Nov 30, 2012 16:05:50 GMT -6
So, in other words, they should be underpaid and undervalued as if they were illegal aliens. Tell me again how much the management is making and what their bonuses are? You may not have noticed that the company was forced to have two different trucks and drivers for the same story delivery because the union didn't want the same driver and truck to have wonder bread and twinkies on the same truck. Did you read some of the other profit killing requirements of the Union? No where did I infer that the workers shouldn't get fair pay but they don't deserve the same pay as say an electrical engineer or computer hack such as yourself. Unskilled should be paid as such. Sorry but I don't think a truck driver is a highly skilled position. Yes, of course you missed that just as you missed the quick drop in salaries to $1 per year right after they increased their salaries by 60 to 80%. Here, try this again...
|
|
|
Post by Chicago Jake on Nov 30, 2012 19:03:43 GMT -6
Mexico isn't exactly "overseas," but it's close enough to the spirit of Anita's prediction.
How long until we see US workers sneaking across the border to get jobs in Mexico? Curiouser and curiouser.
(and even more curiouser, my spell-check didn't bat an eye at the word "curiouser"!)
|
|
|
Post by Tex on Nov 30, 2012 22:26:13 GMT -6
I'm not saying there aren't umpteen other problems for American workers in general and Hostess workers in particular, but it seems that if you want to be paid more, you should be as productive as possible and forgo the feather bedding. Sometimes the atmosphere gets too poisoned to even get that far, but productivity is the key to getting paid more. Southwest Airlines is a good example of a company that pays more than most of its competitors but also gets more productivity from its employees. JMHO
|
|
|
Post by Ardbeg... innit on Dec 3, 2012 6:24:23 GMT -6
The only reason that the workers wanted to "feather their beds" was because they volunteered a wage cut at their last contract. After they volunteered cuts in their paychecks, management gave themselves big pay increases. I guess the workers figured that if the company was doing so well that management could afford to reward themselves (by grand larceny from the workers pension fund to boot), they should get their paycuts back.. seems logical to me.
Long gone are the days where if a company is in trouble, upper management volunteer to work for $1/year. If the workers saw that, I bet that Hostess would still be in business.
BTW- Hostess was walking dead anyway. Any company that hasnt updated its product line in 60 years is doomed to failure, regardless how productive they are or how cheap the slaves on the production line are paid.
|
|
|
Post by Tex on Dec 3, 2012 8:48:01 GMT -6
The only reason that the workers wanted to "feather their beds" was because they volunteered a wage cut at their last contract. After they volunteered cuts in their paychecks, management gave themselves big pay increases. I guess the workers figured that if the company was doing so well that management could afford to reward themselves (by grand larceny from the workers pension fund to boot), they should get their paycuts back.. seems logical to me. Long gone are the days where if a company is in trouble, upper management volunteer to work for $1/year. If the workers saw that, I bet that Hostess would still be in business. BTW- Hostess was walking dead anyway. Any company that hasnt updated its product line in 60 years is doomed to failure, regardless how productive they are or how cheap the slaves on the production line are paid. Who in his right mind would develop new products within an entity with these labor rules?
|
|
|
Post by ♥ COVID-19♥ on Dec 3, 2012 8:53:05 GMT -6
Someone who wants to keep his business viable.
|
|
|
Post by Ardbeg... innit on Dec 3, 2012 12:08:55 GMT -6
I think that is the first time that I have ever heard the argument that Unions cause management to inhibit product development. I guess that is why German automakers are so far behind the rest of the world.
PLEASE show me the study that prove THAT statement.
|
|
|
Post by New Mama on Dec 3, 2012 12:16:44 GMT -6
As usual the devil is in the details.
It is important that Hostess hire the best to handle the liquidation so their is some money on the table for the pension fund for the employees. Rayburn who was hired to do this in July after the bankruptcy filing in January is expert in this field.
In the end I do blame past management. They should not have agreed to many of the union demands of the past as its impact on the bottom line devastated the company. The board of directors continued to try a solve the problem by ch-ch-changing management and the CEO 6 times in 8 years increasing the CEO's and top management's pay each time thinking they were buying the companies saviors. Stupid.
In the end, it is highly likely that the new owners will not be a union shop and 18,000 workers will be looking for work. We can only hope that the current team saves some of the workers pension.
|
|
|
Post by Ardbeg... innit on Dec 3, 2012 12:44:35 GMT -6
As usual the devil is in the details. It is important that Hostess hire the best to handle the liquidation so their is some money on the table for the pension fund for the employees. Rayburn who was hired to do this in July after the bankruptcy filing in January is expert in this field. In the end I do blame past management. They should not have agreed to many of the union demands of the past as its impact on the bottom line devastated the company. Including the Unions self-imposed pay cuts that allowed management to raise their own wages??The board of directors continued to try a solve the problem by ch-ch-changing management and the CEO 6 times in 8 years increasing the CEO's and top management's pay each time thinking they were buying the companies saviors. Stupid. In the end, it is highly likely that the new owners will not be a union shop and 18,000 workers will be looking for work. We can only hope that the current team saves some of the workers pension.
|
|
|
Post by New Mama on Dec 3, 2012 13:52:10 GMT -6
NO Gordon. The 2004 bankruptcy included a pay cut for everyone including management. That did happen. The wild 60-80% increase in management pay late last year was done right before the second bankruptcy filing in January 2012. That increase was jettisoned to $1 when they hired Rayburn in March. I still don’t know what the strategy of the huge management increases were.
The new deal offered the union this September was rejected and the union went on strike. That deal included not only an 8% pay reductions but a 25% stake in the company and other measures to give the unions more say in the running of the company. That wasn’t enough for the union so management shut the doors and is going about an expedited liquidation.
It’s simple. The union made their choice to not work and not to invest in the company so the stockholders are trying to pay off their creditors quickly. Where is Romney when you need him?
|
|
|
Post by Ardbeg... innit on Dec 3, 2012 14:49:40 GMT -6
... and tell me Anita, did management return the monies that were taken from the workers pension fund? or could it be that striking was the only way THAT larceny could be resolved?
|
|
|
Post by Ardbeg... innit on Dec 3, 2012 14:53:47 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by New Mama on Dec 3, 2012 15:26:29 GMT -6
... and tell me Anita, did management return the monies that were taken from the workers pension fund? or could it be that striking was the only way THAT larceny could be resolved? They did not take money from the pension fund they stopped paying into it after filing bankruptcy. Check your facts. modified to add that the debt by Hostess to the Unions are pre2012 bankruptcy loans from the Unions. The company didn't steal it. The Union loaned it.
|
|
|
Post by Ardbeg... innit on Dec 4, 2012 6:27:36 GMT -6
The Union loaned it and the company didnt pay it back... talked to my friend Guido and he says thats worth a couple broken knees minimum... its not a loan, its stealing on a grand larceny scale.
If your company "borrowed" your retirement founds and didnt pay them back, you would probably feel the same way, you were robbed.
|
|
|
Post by New Mama on Dec 4, 2012 8:55:53 GMT -6
The Union loaned it and the company didnt pay it back... talked to my friend Guido and he says thats worth a couple broken knees minimum... its not a loan, its stealing on a grand larceny scale. If your company "borrowed" your retirement founds and didnt pay them back, you would probably feel the same way, you were robbed. In an effort to earn money pension funds typically loan money for many things. I have sold mortgages to pension funds going back 40 years. Pension funds invest the contributions made by the workers. The fact that the pension fund loan money to Hostess is a risk no different if they invested it in a shopping center or office building. They take a risk when loaning money on any investment. It's not theft. What you don't seem to get is that the goal of the current management team is trying to liquidate as soon as possible to pay Hostess's creditors including the pension fund. The current estimated intellectual value of Hostess is valued by some at over $130billion. Hostess may die but Twinkies, Ho Ho's and Wonder bread will live on. It is very probable that the union will be paid back in full upon a quick liquidation.
|
|
|
Post by Ardbeg... innit on Dec 4, 2012 9:49:40 GMT -6
I would say doubtful
|
|
|
Post by ♥ COVID-19♥ on Dec 4, 2012 11:26:48 GMT -6
They will be the last one to see any money, if they ever do.
|
|
|
Post by New Mama on Dec 4, 2012 12:27:00 GMT -6
They will be the last one to see any money, if they ever do. What makes you so sure? A bankruptcy judge will determine which creditors get paid and how much. The Bakery & Confectionery Union & Industry International Pension Fund is listed as its largest creditor and you think a judge will stiff them? We shall see.
|
|
Ron
Dis-Member
Posts: 240
|
Post by Ron on Dec 11, 2012 9:28:17 GMT -6
Hostess Workers’ Pension Money Diverted for Other Uses: Report
Hostess Brands acknowledged for the first time in a news report Monday that the company diverted workers’ pension money for other company uses. The bankrupt baker told The Wall Street Journal that money taken out of workers’ paychecks, intended for their retirement funds, was used for company operations instead. Hostess, which was under different management at the time the diversions began in August 2011, said it does not know how much money it took. “It’s not a good situation to have,” Hostess CEO Gregory Rayburn told the WSJ. “Whatever the circumstances were, whatever those decisions were, I wasn’t there,” Rayburn added. As the founder and owner of Kobi Partners, a restructuring advisory firm, Rayburn was appointed acting CEO in March 2012. Hostess Brands, which filed for bankruptcy for a second time in January, started liquidating its operations in November after the bakers’ union refused to take another pay cut and went on strike. The liquidation will leave about 18,000 workers without jobs. In November, a judge approved Hostess’ plan to pay $1.8 million in bonuses to 19 executives, according to CNBC. Rayburn declined to take a bonus but also avoided a company-wide pay cut that he imposed.
|
|