SEARCH WORKS NOW
Hostess Plans to Liquidate After Mediation Fails
11/20/2012 4:46:44 PM PST · by jimbo123 · 70 replies
Wall Street Journal ^ | 11/20/12 | JULIE JARGON And RACHEL FEINTZEIG
Hostess Brands Inc. said Tuesday night that mediation talks with its bakers union failed and the company will proceed with plans to close down and sell its assets.
Who do the bakers think they are, a bunch of public school teachers - the Mexicans can bake these cupcakes and ship them over the border.
18,500 American jobs headed to Mexico. Another big “win,win” for the union Neanderthals.
Union busters at work - ‘tis a beautiful thing.
is the union retarded or what?
In all but four states, strikers are ineligible for unemployment compensation. Does the liquidation of the business "end" the strike or lock it in for perpetuity? If the former, was that the quid pro quo offered to the locals, that they'd have a few years of bennies from Obama while the national played out its strategy?
Meditation? I just don’t think sitting there cross-legged and humming is going to bring those people to an agreement.
This is the failing of both the media and their liberal aspirations. They think "over" only means over for the people that run the business and that now they can take over and make rainbows, chewy bears and unicorns fall from the sky.
Did they really expect the unions to give an inch?
Let them eat food stamps and unemployment checks... hell, they’ll be doing better than most of us...
Prayers for all of the folks caught up in this disaster who wanted to keep their jobs.
So the union would rather that it’s members be out of jobs completely than have jobs with a paycut? Especially in this economy?
We are at political and cultural war with these people and we have to use every tactic in the book to expose them. Please, no more Mr. Nice Guy, kick them in the teeth instead! Figuratively speaking of course...
What’s needed is to give the workers the option of de-certifying the union by secret ballot, and just going back to work.
A WSJ editorial today claimed that human resources costs for the bakers are not out-of-wack at Hostess, and not the big operartions cost factor sapping Hostess revenue as much as the work rules of the Teamsters Union (requires anyone BUT NOT the driver be part of loading a truck and some products cannot be assigned to the same trucks - increasing how many employees and how many truck routes it takes to get Hostess products distributed). And the Teamsters accepted their agreement with Hostess, but that agreement did not much change those work rules (Hostess couldn’t get ‘em changed), leaving only the bakers compensation on the table.
It was also said that most of Hostess Teamsters Union drivers were not altogether worried about a Hostess total failure - that union seniority would get them bumped (over existing or new drivers) into Teamsters driver jobs in other companies with Teamsters contracts, while such prospects were not as likely for the bakers.
I am not saying the WSJ oped has the whole story, but that it does present the whole story with information not given much play when “blaming the bakers union” was the only story. I think the real issues are more complex than that.
I guess the Twinkie dies as a result of, YET ANOTHER, demand for employer-paid PET HEALTH INSURANCE. Unions Suck.