@sadbrownsfan said:

Yes giving a few people an 80% raise or in one case a 300% raise if this article is correct http://www.sacbee.com/2012/11/13/4983174/hostess-continues-pattern-of-misinformation.html#storylink=cpy doesn't equal the amount that would be saved by having about 18,000 employees taking an 8% pay cut. But how can these same people turn and blame the same unions that last time they where in bankruptcy agreed to about $110mill in concessions to give more concessions? The unions and outdated rules do play a part in the companies collapse, but you can not just point the finger at one side and say its their fault.

Exactly correct. The unions hurt Hostess as did management. You can't just blame one side for everything that went wrong

@westside-steve said:

Look, I said it pisses people off. I understand that. Like I said when Congress vote themselves a raise or the bum next door is getting welfare and refusing to work.

But if you break down the numbers and compare executive pay to the entire operating cost of a company you will see it's meaningless.

Let's say you had that 80 percent in cash. How long do you think you could run the company with that money? Another day? Another week?

WSS

Yes giving a few people an 80% raise or in one case a 300% raise if this article is correct http://www.sacbee.com/2012/11/13/4983174/hostess-continues-pattern-of-misinformation.html#storylink=cpy doesn't equal the amount that would be saved by having about 18,000 employees taking an 8% pay cut. But how can these same people turn and blame the same unions that last time they where in bankruptcy agreed to about $110mill in concessions to give more concessions? The unions and outdated rules do play a part in the companies collapse, but you can not just point the finger at one side and say its their fault.

There is no harm in restructuring or renegotiating.

Although it appears the union did make cuts only to see management renig on marketing and production promises such as technology, equipment and transportation.

@sadbrownsfan said:

So you are ok with the executives getting up to 80% pay rise when the company was about 6 months to returning to bankruptcy and then asking union employees to take a 8% pay cut?

Look, I said it pisses people off. I understand that. Like I said when Congress vote themselves a raise or the bum next door is getting welfare and refusing to work.

But if you break down the numbers and compare executive pay to the entire operating cost of a company you will see it's meaningless.

Let's say you had that 80 percent in cash. How long do you think you could run the company with that money? Another day? Another week?

WSS

@westside-steve said:

It's still the unions. you can take every penny from every corporate executives and put it back into the company and it really wouldn't change things. It's just an easy thing to get riled up over like congressional pay.

Or welfare, it's not that big a portion of the budget.

WSS

So you are ok with the executives getting up to 80% pay rise when the company was about 6 months to returning to bankruptcy and then asking union employees to take a 8% pay cut?

Or welfare, it's not that big a portion of the budget.

WSS

how convenient for a business hell bent on blaming their failures on the bakers union.

@browns149 said:

so they are striking against Little Debbie too?

McKee Bakery (Little Debbie) is headquartered in Collegedale, Tn, about 15 miles from where I live. They are non-union.

McKee was the largest snack cake baker in the country. Hostess had a little more in sales but that included the sale of Wonder Bread. McKee is nothing but snack cakes and granola bars.

The local article is McKee is ramping up production.

http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/2012/nov/17/mckee-ramps-up-amid-hostess-fall/

@westside-steve said:

Why? As far There were other unions involved but they settled, only the Baker's held out.

Seems to me that Little Debbie cakes are located in the South, possibly a right to work state. And the company probably is a dinosaur, even though I don't know if that makes them expendable.

I mean those people could actually use the jobs, right?

WSS

The reason I was asking, why haven't other companies gone under due to this strike? And I looked it up and Little Debbie is located in Tenn. And it is a privately owned company.

@browns149 said:

so they are striking against Little Debbie too?

Why? As far There were other unions involved but they settled, only the Baker's held out.

Seems to me that Little Debbie cakes are located in the South, possibly a right to work state. And the company probably is a dinosaur, even though I don't know if that makes them expendable.

I mean those people could actually use the jobs, right?

WSS

@westside-steve said:

not any more. The company is out of business.

WSS

so they are striking against Little Debbie too?

WSS

@browns149 said:

Are the bakers only striking against hostess?

not any more. The company is out of business.

WSS

Look at Goodyear. Management sucked, overreached, unions changed into fair and decent treatment of employees,

to blackmail, entitlement and permanet job security no matter what and self-perpetuating excesses.

You can't keep or make good management with a union, and you can't avoid a union with good management..

Go look at Richard Trumke sp? - AFL-CIO, to see where too many major unions have gone off the deep end.

And, Hostess chocolate cupcakes should be forever. Just not eaten very often.

But they are great with coffee once in a long while.

I didn't think a Twinkie could be outdated?

@the-cysko-kid said:

Well the Chinese make terrible pastries cheaper so there's that.

Yep. They might even put ethylene glycol in it to kill us off.