The Twinkie is dead.

Fear not. They are still made in Canada. I'm also pretty sure someone will buy the intellectual property of them, and will make the available again in the USA.
 
the company wanted to slash wages and benefits. workers said no and walked out. not sure how this has much to do with unions.
 
Yeah! Stupid Unions! Those bakers shouldn't have benefits. If they want benefits they should be bankers! right? And what does a baker at Hostess need a pension for anyway? I am sure with the money a multi-million dollar outfit such as Hostess pays thier workers that they have plenty of money to plow into RRSP's, and health insurance, and thier kids education (so they don't end up baking Twinkies), and fighting off the housing crisis caused by the greedy hedge fu...wait a minute...
"The company is now controlled by a group of investment firms, including hedge funds Silver Point Capital and Monarch Alternative Capital."
...ahh eff it! Twinkies aren't good for you anyway!
 
kellen said:
the company wanted to slash wages and benefits. workers said no and walked out. not sure how this has much to do with unions.
Click to expand...
It would be interesting to see how many would have prefered a 8% wage cut to unemployment and a follow up after 6 months. Most of the workers have no chance of regaining pay even close to what they would hve been making after the pay cut. This should have been the stark reality explained to the workers by the union instead of assuring them the company was bluffing.
 
Scuba Steve said:
It would be interesting to see how many would have prefered a 8% wage cut to unemployment and a follow up after 6 months. Most of the workers have no chance of regaining pay even close to what they would hve been making after the pay cut. This should have been the stark reality explained to the workers by the union instead of assuring them the company was bluffing.
Click to expand...

less than 50% obviously
 
Why do I have a hard time believing the company was demanding "outrageous wage and benefit cuts and give up their pension" from their workers? As opposed to say, workers consisting of a group of cosetted babies living in their own little reality bubble.

Could be wrong of course, but it seems to me times are tough for everyone.
 
Hedge fund companies come in and look at what it will take to Re-structure all levels of Manangement, and streamline/cut all operations and distribution costs and in the end say "OK, we can turn this around and we will make $XX million in XX years or we can sell the name Twinkies, Ho-Ho's and Wonderbread for $XXX million and be off like a dirty shirt! Get me the the PR dept. on the phone! We will blame it on the bakers greed!"

I would be willing to bet that times were not to tough at Hostess. People are not making thier own bread now and if anything there is probably a few more lunches being packed with Wonderbread sandwiches and a Twinkie for a coffee time treat. That is if you are still allowed coffee breaks in your work place.
 
Twinkies brand will survive, just won't be union made. Unions are mafia dinosaurs... just like "benefits". Maybe they'll be flown in from north viet nam to save patriots from starvation. Don't work don't eat... That's the new reality for most labor. If you have a good job, don't forget there's thousands in line at the door who'd do it better than you can even imagine for a buck less or more.
 
eljay said:
Twinkies brand will survive, just won't be union made. Unions are mafia dinosaurs... just like "benefits". Maybe they'll be flown in from north viet nam to save patriots from starvation. Don't work don't eat... That's the new reality for most labor. If you have a good job, don't forget there's thousands in line at the door who'd do it better than you can even imagine for a buck less or more.
Click to expand...

Yes.. The ruling class has less of a need of a middle class nowadays, so they don't have to give a living wage to quite so many. That means that fewer will get to eat, retire, be able to afford decent level of health care or educate their children. The new reality is that labor elsewhere is cheaper and we will not take measures to keep the jobs here. We will accept that it's because we're lazy as we work harder and longer hours, that we shouldn't expect a living wage as it's better to work and starve than not work and starve and that we just aren't productive enough as our productivity increases with each passing year.
 
Equilibrium and banning run on sentences will solve most of the problems.

But seriously, if working and not working result in the same outcome, why would you work? [rhetorical]

Your labor and the fruits thereof belong to no one but yourself. You distribute them at your own price. That creates a philosophical catastrophe for companies, governments, and unions; nearly everyone but yourself. Think about it.

FiReSTaRT said:
Yes.. The ruling class has less of a need of a middle class nowadays, so they don't have to give a living wage to quite so many. That means that fewer will get to eat, retire, be able to afford decent level of health care or educate their children. The new reality is that labor elsewhere is cheaper and we will not take measures to keep the jobs here. We will accept that it's because we're lazy as we work harder and longer hours, that we shouldn't expect a living wage as it's better to work and starve than not work and starve and that we just aren't productive enough as our productivity increases with each passing year.
Click to expand...
 
FiReSTaRT said:
Yeah.. How dare they expect to make a living wage on an honest job?! :shock:
Click to expand...

That's funny.

I know some people in unions that work hard and earn the money they take home. I also know some other people in unions that seem hell bent on doing as little work as possible and milking as much money as possible out of the parent company.
I don't assume that simply being in a union makes them selfish and lazy. Perhaps you could adopt the idea simply being in a union doesn't mean they're making an "honest" living.
 
FiReSTaRT said:
Yes.. The ruling class has less of a need of a middle class nowadays, so they don't have to give a living wage to quite so many. That means that fewer will get to eat, retire, be able to afford decent level of health care or educate their children. The new reality is that labor elsewhere is cheaper and we will not take measures to keep the jobs here. We will accept that it's because we're lazy as we work harder and longer hours, that we shouldn't expect a living wage as it's better to work and starve than not work and starve and that we just aren't productive enough as our productivity increases with each passing year.
Click to expand...

So they were starving now. What do you figure they're benefits were too, free vasectomy?
 
caboose483 said:
That's funny.

I know some people in unions that work hard and earn the money they take home. I also know some other people in unions that seem hell bent on doing as little work as possible and milking as much money as possible out of the parent company.
I don't assume that simply being in a union makes them selfish and lazy. Perhaps you could adopt the idea simply being in a union doesn't mean they're making an "honest" living.
Click to expand...

A lot more honest than the people running the company. It's the investment banker types that are actively working on reducing the middle class to a pale shadow of itself over the last couple of decades. We were just stupid enough to allow it. Of course, commercial media will have us turning on each other instead of looking into their affairs.

fastar1 said:
So they were starving now. What do you figure they're benefits were too, free vasectomy?
Click to expand...

Classical example of that. Quick to attack a unionized employee for making a living wage or for getting a free root canal but perfectly happy with the fact that there are families that make more in a year than 2,000,000 average Canadians. They must be working EXTRA hard for that money and those lazy bums who wanna work 40 hours a week, own a home and retire without eating cat food should be shot to death!
 
hostess stopped making pension contributions last august.
Then they asked (demanded) 8% pay cut, 17% cut to benifits, and a stop to the pension altogether.

when you boss is software owned by a banker, you're just a number. A black number or a red number. Union or not hotstess was going to close.
Forum Sponsor
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom