Hostess Brands is Closed

[Drake]

Jobs were not exactly lost here. They were thrown away through greed. Labor unions demand the very blood of a company, denying them the ability to make a profit for themselves, and this means that they have no incentive to keep their doors open. It is just another example of one cutting off his own nose just to spite his face. It is going to be interesting to see what happens to all the funds and retirement pension money. I am sure that they thought the company would cave, not fold. They clearly put themselves out of work here.

Did you see the cuts? A solid 50% pay cut and drastically reduced pensions. Meanwhile, the CEO tripled his own salary.

For most, the cuts would have made the job not worth it.

[Syn7]

No doubt. This is a clear cut case of corporate greed, not union greed. Some unions have done what LCP said, but usually it's the other way around.

The top execs decided they can make more money selling off the assets than giving in to the union. Typical short term greed. The reasons for financial troubles were more related to corporate wages and spending habits than workers wages and benefits package. They took the money and ran, simple. They're loaded. They can do whatever they want, why would they care about anything? Making money with nothing is hard, making money with lots of money is inevitable. I wish these guys were as patriotic as they pretend to be when they are buying political representation.

[Scott R. Brown]

...every freaking school day. And she was a dietician by trade. I haven't had one in at least thirty years.

I haven't had one 40 years, but I have a strange yearning for one now that I can't have one anymore!

Did you see the cuts? A solid 50% pay cut and drastically reduced pensions. Meanwhile, the CEO tripled his own salary.

For most, the cuts would have made the job not worth it.

I think it was more like an 8% pay cut, but probably more for the pension. The Teamster's Union was allowed to look at the books and recommended the cuts be accepted. Triple pay for the CEO I haven't heard, it certainly looks bad politically and socially, but if he saves the company he may be worth it. And "triple" is too general a term, is it triple $20 million a year or triple $100,000 a year, the amount lacks context in order to make a reasonable determination of its appropriateness.

[mawali]

This is what happens when ALEC and Heritage Foundation template work together with corporations. The deceptive naming convention (Citizens United) has given power to corporations to run rampant with whatever they want.
a. No collective bargaining
b. get rid of social security or privatize it.
c. get rid of FEMA or privatize it
d. Companies do not have to pay pensions if they do not want, or, they can pay lowered benefits, etc
e. It is OK for CEO salary to triple but not to come to the negotiation table for employees.
f. Companies having, or moving towards only part time employees so they would not pay benefits, or if you look at work hours for companiues, many more are giving the total hours per week as anything below 40 hours!
This is only the beginning