Posted on 11/22/2012 4:15:23 AM PST by tobyhill
After several years of costly concessions, the Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco and Grain Millers Union (BCTGM) authorized a walk-out earlier this month after Hostess received bankruptcy court approval to implement a wage cut that was not included in its contract.
With operations stalled, the company that makes Twinkies and other famous U.S. brands said last week that liquidating its business was the best way to preserve its dwindling cash. It won court approval on Wednesday to start winding down in a process expected to claim 15,000 jobs immediately and over 3,000 more after about four months.
Interviews with more than a dozen workers showed there was little sign of regret from employees who voted for the strike. They said they would rather lose their jobs than put up with lower wages and poorer benefits.
"They're just taking from us," said Kenneth Johnson, 46, of Missouri. He said he earned roughly $35,000 with overtime last year, down from about $45,000 five years ago.
"I really can't afford to not be working, but this is not worth it. I'd rather go work somewhere else or draw unemployment," said Johnson, a worker at Hostess for 23 years.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
Well, since the unions run the government, that ain't gonna happen.
Yeah, baby. That is what I was making before the crash and I lost that good job. Be a MAKER. And try and live in this world.
Your mindset and attitude is the EXACT same as all the rest of the takers. Yeah, you got yours, didn't you? And now you're "safe". ESAD.
Your lefty pals are doing everything in their power to demonize snack foods, so less is being sold, which cuts into your overtime. Yet, you praise your lefty overlords.
FUKJ.
"I really can't afford to not be working, but this is not worth it. I'd rather go work somewhere else or draw unemployment," said Johnson, a worker at Hostess for 23 years.
Guess what, KJ? You can't afford to live on unemployment either. But I'm sure you have a healthy retirement after 23 years at a union shop, so you don't care.
The Teansters IIRC made commission. That’s why they always made good money.
I found it rather ironic that Twinkies went extinct the same week 2 states legalized Pot. :<)
Too bad for you.
Yes it is. Isn’t it. Good goddamn thing you are an anonymous POS. But then, hey, you voted for obamaaaa.
Because now that CAers can finally get high legally they may not be able to buy Twinkies to feed their munchies?? Yes, That seems so ironically unfair.
Didn't CA outlaw junk food and fast food restaurants anyway?
If you are going to enable a high (intoxicated) population then you have to protect them from bad life choices like unhealthy food.
Let me guess, after taxes each single legal joint(pot cigarette) cost $10. I guess the (illegal) drug dealers wont be out of business after all.
But then, hey, you voted for obamaaaa.
Nope. I voted for the other liberal. You just had to have your lover Romney as the candidate and this is what you get. Tried to warn you slobbering Romney fans but nobody listened. Santorum should have been the candidate but you liberals didn’t want a conservative. You reap what you sow. Next time maybe you will use your brain and not your other anatomy to pick a candidate.
Media bias.
I don’t see that this is just a union labor price problem. Why don’t we blame the management and investors who saddled the company with tons of debt?
If the business closes down all who lost a job are entitled to unemployment compensation, the matter of exactly why the business closed will not matter. What you refer to only affects someone who quits a job as an individual leaving employment at an ongoing business.
Executives commonly take stock in lieu of some compensation. When the company liquidates, it devalues their stock to make it worthless.
I read your comment as a complaint that the executives do not suffer for the workers’ refusal to work, just as much as the workers suffer.
I disagree. When the union workers forced the company under, they lost any right they had to complain about management.
Again, I was not referring to the union workers. It seems many Freepers do not understand that only 5,000 of the 18,000 workers were unionized and striking. What about the remaining 13,000? Those are the ones I was talking about.
I had not seen the differentiation, FRiend. For the 13K who were not unionized, I believe they should have the right to recoup some of their losses from the union.
Have a good day, FRiend.
You too Mortman!
It frustrated me to see ALL the employees lumped into the greedy 1/3 of them. It was a few that took down them all.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.