Unions kill the twinkie?

[Carol]

I just thought of something extremely important...

Now that the Twinkie is roasting in Hell, does that mean I have to give up my favourite nickname for the dear departed Twinfist?

Only if/when people forget the reference

 

[billc]

Thoughts on the blame game...

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2012/11/who-killed-the-twinkie.html?currentPage=all

 

[Sukerkin]

And I am still waiting for someone to explain to me where the money comes from ... :tap tap tap ... hello ... surely someone must know:.

 

[KenpoDave]

If you are a union boss, and your strategy results in 18,000 unemployed, no longer dues paying members, do you get to keep YOUR job?

Or take a pay cut?


Dave Hopper

 

[Xue Sheng]

Only if/when people forget the reference

Or change the name to Cloud Cake

 

[cdunn]

And I am still waiting for someone to explain to me where the money comes from ... :tap tap tap ... hello ... surely someone must know:.

$0.94 per biweekly paycheck from the union members.


Also; the Hostess "Deal" as explained by one of the bakers who voted the deal down:

In 2005 before concessions I made $48,000, last year I made $34,000. My pay changed dramatically but at least I was still contributing to my self-funded pension.

In July of 2011 we received a letter from the company. It said that the $3+ per hour that we as a Union contribute to the pension was going to be 'borrowed' by the company until they could be profitable again. Then they would pay it all back. The Union was notified of this the same time and method as the individual members. No contact from the company to the Union on a national level.

This money will never be paid back. The company filed for bankruptcy and the judge ruled that the $3+ per hour was a debt the company couldn't repay. The Union continued to work despite this theft of our self-funded pension contributions for over a year. I consider this money stolen. No other word in the English language describes what they have done to this money.

After securing our hourly cash from the bankruptcy judge they set out on getting approval to force a new contract on us. They had already refused to negotiate outside of court. They received approval from the judge to impose the contract then turned it over to the Union for a vote. You read that right, they got it approved by the judge before ever showing to the Union.

What was this last/best/final offer? You'd never know by watching the main stream media tell the story. So here you go...
1) 8% hourly pay cut in year 1 with additional cuts totaling 27% over 5 years. Currently, I make $16.12 an hour at TOP rate of pay in the bakery. I would drop to $11.26 in 5 years.
2) They get to keep our $3+ an hour forever.
3) Doubling of weekly insurance premium.
4) Lowering of overall quality of insurance plan.
5) TOTAL withdrawal from ALL pensions. If you don't have it now then you never will.

Remember how I said I made $48,000 in 2005 and $34,000 last year? I would make $25,000 in 5 years if I took their offer.
It will be hard to replace the job I had, but it will be easy to replace the job they were trying to give me.
That $3+ per hour they steal totaled $50 million last year that they never paid us. They sold $2.5 BILLION in product last year. If they can't make this profitable without stealing my money then good riddance.

Frankly, if my boss came to me and told me I was going to take a 50% pay cut over seven years, I'd quit too.

 

[Xue Sheng]

Frankly, if my boss came to me and told me I was going to take a 50% pay cut over seven years, I'd quit too.

Now add to that your boss had recently given himself an 80% raise..... and now have the same thing that happened at Hostess.

 

[Steve]

Hush, you guys. It's the union's fault! Don't let facts get in the way of a good rant!

 

[Xue Sheng]

Hush, you guys. It's the union's fault! Don't let facts get in the way of a good rant!

:duh: Sorry....GREAT HORNYTOADS!!! Ooh rackin' frackin' Unions

 

[shesulsa]

Oh, but it's a business. The whole purpose behind business is to turn a profit.

Right?

Let's all just conveniently forget about the fact that businesses provide a little thing called infrastructure. If a company is weak - AND THE ONLY REASON IT'S WEAK IS THAT THE CEOS AND EXECUTIVES ARE FILTHY EFFING RICH - this gives a great reason to war with unions because, Gawd forbid, we create and foster an economic system where we pay people enough to buy the products we make.

Did we forget about that? That if we don't have enough money to buy the products we make ... we have to buy products OTHER countries make. And when we can't sell US made products to other countries ... where does that put us domestically AND globally?

This is not republican nor democrat - this is abject greed and unchecked executive practices. So what do you do about this kind of thing?

So the choices, as things stand now,seem to be either to cow-tow and swallow crap-*** wages and keep getting butt-raped by the wealthy for the sake of less money, less or no insurance, less security OR shut down companies like this and lose what money you can get. This doesn't affect those who own and those who sell because they will sell ... or buy ... and start up again and then the next step begins.

Question is what will the next step be?

There are - apparently - countless people who WILL gladly take crap pay for crap jobs with no benefits. But for how long? And where exactly will THAT go? Will that last long without unions? Perhaps if those who will take crap pay for crap jobs are - by some people's accounts not native to the US would have protection of law and hide union in "minority" and "prejudice."

I think we're looking at a revolution. If we're not, then we're most assuredly in very, very serious trouble.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

I believe it was both:

http://www.businessinsider.com/how-workers-and-management-both-caused-the-fall-of-hostess-2012-11

However, what difference does it make? The jobs are gone now. The union did not 'win' if the employees are now unemployed. Blame it on management? OK. Blame it on the CEO? Fine. Now tell me how that pays for the employees' mortgages and car payments and how it buys groceries.

Everybody was to blame, everybody lost. All that matters to the employees is that they have no jobs.

 

[shesulsa]

I believe it was both:

http://www.businessinsider.com/how-workers-and-management-both-caused-the-fall-of-hostess-2012-11

However, what difference does it make? The jobs are gone now. The union did not 'win' if the employees are now unemployed. Blame it on management? OK. Blame it on the CEO? Fine. Now tell me how that pays for the employees' mortgages and car payments and how it buys groceries.

Everybody was to blame, everybody lost. All that matters to the employees is that they have no jobs.

And what kind of jobs will they have in the future?

 

[Sukerkin]

$0.94 per biweekly paycheck from the union members.

I think perhaps you mistook the direction of my question, CD . I obviously know how unions are funded - what I was saying is that with a membership of only 80k (and so an income for the union of about $1.9M), those Union leader salaries were awfully large ...

... so either the figures are wrong, they have been dipping into resources from times past or there is money coming in from elsewhere. I was curious to know which of those was the one.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

And what kind of jobs will they have in the future?

I don't know. But I know what kind of jobs they got when the company folded, which is none.

 

[cdunn]

I think perhaps you mistook the direction of my question, CD . I obviously know how unions are funded - what I was saying is that with a membership of only 80k (and so an income for the union of about $1.9M), those Union leader salaries were awfully large ...

... so either the figures are wrong, they have been dipping into resources from times past or there is money coming in from elsewhere. I was curious to know which of those was the one.

Union dues for the BCTWGM local #85, in California, are ~$17.50 per month. Assuming that's representative of the rest of the locals, those salaries are about 10% of the annual union dues. There's no real need to draw on other resources.

 

[shesulsa]

I think perhaps you mistook the direction of my question, CD . I obviously know how unions are funded - what I was saying is that with a membership of only 80k (and so an income for the union of about $1.9M), those Union leader salaries were awfully large ...

... so either the figures are wrong, they have been dipping into resources from times past or there is money coming in from elsewhere. I was curious to know which of those was the one.

Think the union's dirty, Suk? As in getting padded by a source other than the mob? Something's fishy in Denmark, I agree.

 

[Omar B]

Maybe we'll start getting those Mexican made Twinkies. I'm not a big devote of the originals but one off the things I love about Mexico is that it reminds me very much of Jamaica in how they manufacture and use natural ingredients. A Mexican twinkie made with real cake and icing made from sugar not HFCS is so much better. Just like Mexican sodas that use real cane sugar, not since Jamaica have I had such great food, soda, burgers (even Mexican/Jamaican Burger King is miles better than then original).

 

[Xue Sheng]

Closest thing I ahve seen to a Chinese Twinkie

And I don't like Twinkies but I like this...actually I have seen soimethign closer, but it was in China and still a WHOLE lot better than a Twinkie

And for those that really miss a Twinkie you still have the Cloud Cake

 

[shesulsa]

I don't know. But I know what kind of jobs they got when the company folded, which is none.

So ... shutting companies with corrupt big shots is not the answer? What is, then? Bending over even further? Pretty soon there'll be no more KY.

 

[Sukerkin]

Union dues for the BCTWGM local #85, in California, are ~$17.50 per month. Assuming that's representative of the rest of the locals, those salaries are about 10% of the annual union dues. There's no real need to draw on other resources.

I see :nods:.

I was going on what you said earlier, Chris:

$0.94 per biweekly paycheck from the union members.

I did take that to be very low (UNISON rates are about £130 per annum) but I shrugged and reckoned you guys would know so I didn't check it further and just multiplied up - real life is giving me a kicking at present so I'm not as sharp as usual {however sharp that is :lol:}.