Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Hostess gone

Oh schit!..Like a prom dress on prom night..I'm off to the store to buy Ho Ho's!

And thats entirely your right to do so...Management makes the decisions on how or even if they want to run a business.

Yer a fuggin Union Shill that just doesn't get it!

Oh Yeah, here is the Blame aimed at Romney!

[b]Union: 'Bain-style' killing of Twinkie[/b]

This time it�s being used against Hostess Brands, the Twinkies and Wonder Bread maker that announced Friday it was closing. AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka drew the comparison in a public statement Friday.

�What�s happening with Hostess Brands is a microcosm of what�s wrong with America, as Bain-style Wall Street vultures make themselves rich by making America poor,� Trumka said in a public statement. �Crony capitalism and consistently poor management drove Hostess into the ground, but its workers are paying the price.�
(Also on POLITICO: Twinkie-maker Hostess to close)
Earlier Friday, Hostess Brands announced that it would be closing, which the company said was precipitated by a workers� strike.
Trumka�s comparing Hostess to Bain comes after an election in which former GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney was criticized for co-founding Bain Capital.
The union leader took the workers� the side, saying Hostess� leaders and policies were �wrecking America.�
(Also on POLITICO: Petition wants Obama to save Twinkies)
�These workers, who consistently make great products Americans love and have offered multiple concessions, want their company to succeed,� Trumka said in the statement. �They have bravely taken a stand against the corporate race-to-the-bottom. And now they and their communities are suffering the tragedy of a needless layoff. This is wrong. It has to stop. It�s wrecking America.�
The closure of Hostess, based in Irving, Texas, means the company will lay off its 18,500 employees. In 2009, Hostess came out of bankruptcy thanks in part to private equity firm Ripplewood Holdings, which made a $130 million investment, CNBC reported Friday. Hostess filed again for bankruptcy in January, and its debt was later purchased by investment firms, including two hedge funds: Silver Point Capital and Monarch Alternative Capital, according to a CNN Money report.
Last week, thousands of Hostess union member employees went on strike because of cut wages and benefits, The Associated Press reported Friday.
Hostess has said the company was unprofitable, in part due to union workers� demands. (The workers who went on strike were members of the Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers International Union.)

So now Hostess has no company, no employees, no working environment, and no contract. Somehow you're defending this?

The CEO of Hostess said at least a full month ago that if they didn't reach an agreement they were going to shut the plants down and sell off the trademarks and other assets. I remember reading it maybe 4-6 weeks ago over on ARFCOM.

Now all the sudden when they interview the employees they say they didn't see it coming.

Shows you how stupid people are. Regardless of what had or hadn't been previously announced, if you walk out on a job you gotta know it can happen.

Can't the federal government save the Twinkies, like they saved General Motors?

It's not at all unusual that the rank-and-file employees didn't see it coming � but you can bet your sweet bippy that their esteemed leaders did � and being drunk with power, thought that their persistent bellicosity could blast it into oblivion before it came to pass.

Reality can be so brutally nasty � especially when you stuff the shell of your flak jacket with belly-button lint and expect it to stop .30-06 FMJs at muzzle range.

They thought their Ding-Dongs were too big to fail. They were wrong.

Petition to WH to bailout twinkee maker

My elders taught me to be wary of those who speak of people and organizations in absolute terms - like "always".

So, dave, how do nations die?

Just for the sake of discussion, let's say that you are correct in that statement. What, then, do the unions assume?

They had a choice (the union). taking an 8% pay cut, or taking a 100% pay cut. I guess their greedy nature got the best of them, and they grabbed for the bigger number..........

Yep, you can reject contracts just like you can reject any other job offer. If you don't like what you are offered or are able to negotiate then go down the road. You weren't able to come to an agreement so their is no suitable offer of work. But ya'll don't do that. Instead unions threaten and hold the company hostage under the treat of strike, strong arming to get what you feel you are "owed." Then you often violently assault people who are willing to cross the picket line. Sounds like legalized racketeering to me.

Most unions have the "you didn't build it mentality" when it comes to the ownership of the company, with the addition of "or else we'll shut you down." It's an offshot of the entitlement mentality, plain as day.

Unions usually are not concerned with the fair treatment of employees as they negotiate for wages that are much higher than is commensurate for the work their members actually perform. Look at how much an auto factory worker earns. They don't deserve that, but if they don't get it they will shut that company down in a heartbeat.

In addition unions work for things that have nothing to do with their purpose you stated. Look at teachers' unions and how they are involved with students' curriculm.

Ultimately, unions create an "us against them" culture. It is the company that is always screwing over their members, so instead of trying to become the very best employee possible and letting that take you somewhere union members engage in this "us against them culture." This culture essentially removes the insentive to be a great employee.

Is there any rwonder why there are very few union employees who actually work upin the company and better themselves over time? Nope. Unions would rather they stay at the bottom in order to maintain their power base.

Out of everything you wrote at least got this one thing right.

I know a guy that has been a faithful employee, do anything kind of guy for a company that just laid off him and several other long term employees. You know why???

Because he worked for them for so long, did such a great job that he earned the raises they offered but now that he was topped out at a whopping $16/hr they fired him and hired a bunch of young pimple faced kids at $9/hr. When I see and hear of how those altruistic bosses treat good, dedicated employees I can't help but think unions ARE necessary. If he'd have been in a union those fat [bleep] couldn't have done that to him.

No....at least they shouldn't.It didn't save GM either,which still owes taxpayers about $30 bill of the orginal $51 bill it took to "bail it".The taxpayers will take a hit with GM,too.

Governments role in the economy is to get the hell out of the way,let commpanies that cannot survive,fail.When they bail things out,they only delay the inevitable,and screw things up in the process.

at the end of the day, none of this matters. someone else will buy the name, and someone else will manufacture and sell the most profitable products of the former hostess line. as in the past, the unions will attempt to control this new workforce. the question is, will the new workers allow themselves to be unionized after the recent collapse of hostess? my guess would be YES. so, it goes on.........

I am going to miss having my Devil Dogs and Funny Bones when I visit the east coast next time.