In response to:

Labor Unions Kill the Twinkie and 18,000 Jobs

drrod Wrote: Nov 16, 2012 6:00 PM
Katie is wrong on this one. The employees were making $45,000 in 2005, which decreased to $35,000 after the first trip through bankruptcy, and with the new proposal (after the second bankrupcty) would be $25,000 with higher out of pocket expenses for insurance and retirement. This is hardly a living wage for a family of four. We need to get our facts straight before sounding off with the same old talking points. I think that through bankruptcy, assets will be sold off and a new company will pick up the pieces. Bain would have done the same thing. This company had a lot more problems than just their employees. We need to take a few moments to consider all the facts before going off half-cocked.
Joseph64 Wrote: Nov 16, 2012 6:12 PM
The idea of a living wage is unworkable. A businesses customers are only willing to pay so much for a product. If the cost of producing that product goes up too quickly then the customers will stop buying and the company will go under and then nobody will have a job. Better to have a job making less than you would like than no job at all.
drrod Wrote: Nov 16, 2012 8:39 PM
Joseph, would you work for $10.00 per hour? This is what these employees would make after the second bankruptcy. There is a point of diminishing returns. Remember these employees were making $45,000 in 2005. I get your point about customers stop buying at a certain price point. It would be better to have a job, I agree, but these workers find that they can get more on unemployment while they look for another job. I wish this were not the case but it is. I blame management for ruining the company. I mean two bankruptcies within 7 years. It can't be all about wages paid to the employees. Other companies making similar products are able to make a profit with the same union workers. Just saying.
Blind Avocado Wrote: Nov 17, 2012 2:23 AM
I think you're right. I'm sure there was a huge failure in management. In the autopsy I'm sure they will find that management did not want to modernize the company and streamline operations to make it more efficient, and tried to make up for it by lowering employee pay. It also could be that the union would not allow modernization because it would eliminate jobs. There is probably plenty of blame to go around.
HongKongCharlie4 Wrote: Nov 17, 2012 7:46 AM
I might not work for $10.00 per hour but there are a hell of a lot of laid off people out there would jump all over this offer. This is the US and you are free to shop around for the best price for your labor. Running most of the machines involved in baking products is not rocket science. It's an entry level occupation, been there done that. What makes you think you are entitled to a living wage? What is a living wage? Maybe a new car, cell phone, large screen LED or Plasma TV and 3 weeks vacation?

When you are just saying other companies are making similar products and making a profit, can you back it up with facts, figures? Links please.

HKC
Joseph64 Wrote: Nov 17, 2012 8:36 AM
I've been working for $10-$11 an hour for almost 30 years.

Labor Unions have officially killed off the Twinkie. The company that makes the yummy treat announced today they will start to downsize operations (a.k.a. fire people) as a result of a long battle with union workers.

Hostess Brands Inc., the bankrupt maker of Twinkies and Wonder Bread, said it had sought court permission to go out of business after failing to get wage and benefit cuts from thousands of its striking bakery workers.

Hostess said a national strike by members of the Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers International Union that began last...

Related Tags: Labor Unions twinkie Hostess
Wednesday, June 19 | 03:42 AM ET
Wednesday, June 19 | 03:42 AM ET
Wednesday, June 19 | 03:42 AM ET
Wednesday, June 19 | 03:42 AM ET