All Forums > General Discussion > Non-Sports > Farewell, Old Friends
11/16/2012 12:58 PM
11/16/2012 1:09 PM

"We deeply regret the necessity of today's decision, but we do not have the financial resources to weather an extended nationwide strike," Gregory F. Rayburn, Hostess' chief executive, said in a statement.

Hostess' advisers will soon begin to shut down the company's 33 bakeries and 565 distribution centers. The vast majority of its 18,500 employees will be laid off, according to the company.

11/16/2012 1:10 PM
Good job, Obama supporters!!!!!

Now 18k of you have no jobs and will suck the government teat.
11/16/2012 1:18 PM
UNIONIZED AMERIKA= GREATEST MANUFACTURING POWER THE WORLD HAS EVAH SEEN

UNION-BUSTING AMERIKA=  JOBS OUTSOURCED TO THIRD WORLD

GIVE ME BACK ALL UNIONS+ 80% TOP TAX RATES!
11/16/2012 1:21 PM
Anton- those jobs are never coming back. It's a structural issue, not a policy issue.

But Hostess' problem was not the union, it was an inability to produce products that people still want to buy.
11/16/2012 1:28 PM
That simplifies it too much.   Cost > sales.    The unions demanding more was just the final nail.

I only heard it as background noise but it seems some Boeing employees in SC got into a little hot water over talking unionization during work hours.   Which, if they had a ******* brain, they'd know the only reason Boeing moved from WA to SC was to get away from union costs.   It would be fitting for Boeing to say "**** this", close the SC plant and move their **** to Puerto Rico. 
11/16/2012 1:31 PM
Quit crying. Any reason for your country to be less fat is good.
11/16/2012 1:34 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 11/16/2012 1:28:00 PM (view original):
That simplifies it too much.   Cost > sales.    The unions demanding more was just the final nail.

I only heard it as background noise but it seems some Boeing employees in SC got into a little hot water over talking unionization during work hours.   Which, if they had a ******* brain, they'd know the only reason Boeing moved from WA to SC was to get away from union costs.   It would be fitting for Boeing to say "**** this", close the SC plant and move their **** to Puerto Rico. 
"That simplifies it too much," coupled with blaming the unions.


Oh, the irony.
11/16/2012 1:34 PM
Twinkies aren't the problem.   There was a recent study that said Americans get 5% of their calories from alcohol and 6% from soda.    That's insane. 
11/16/2012 1:44 PM
That's a beer and a soda.  That's still less calories than a frapachino.  Ten percent of your daily calories is only 250 calories.

But back to the Twinkee saga, some company will buy the "Twinkee Factory" and continue to make them.     Most of those 18,000 jobs will reappear and mostly likely will be at a lower wage.   The inefficient company will be replaced by an efficient company.   Isn't that how it is suppose to work?
11/16/2012 1:48 PM
I watched the CEO of Hostess discuss this on CNBC this morning.  It was actually the bakers union that sank the rest of the company.  The other 70% of the company and unions involved all came to an agreement with the CEO.  Management themselves were going to take the same paycut they offered employees.  Even the Teamsters were supportive of the terms of the deal and were working right up until the end.  So basically it sounds like some idiot union leaders of the bakers union thought they'd be hard guys and call the CEO's bluff.  Only problem was it wasn't a bluff and now 18,000 workers are out of a job.

They were being asked to take an 8% paycut the first year, with 4% being given back in the second year and 2% being given back the following two years.  That might sound tough to take but being union members I'm guessing their salary was better than anything else they are likely to find for quite awhile.  I'm guessing there are some bakers out there right now pretty shocked their leadership was so wrong.  Easy for union leadership to play hardball, they still have jobs this morning. 
11/16/2012 1:52 PM
Posted by Trentonjoe on 11/16/2012 1:44:00 PM (view original):
That's a beer and a soda.  That's still less calories than a frapachino.  Ten percent of your daily calories is only 250 calories.

But back to the Twinkee saga, some company will buy the "Twinkee Factory" and continue to make them.     Most of those 18,000 jobs will reappear and mostly likely will be at a lower wage.   The inefficient company will be replaced by an efficient company.   Isn't that how it is suppose to work?
This is highly unlikely.  They are selling the "formulas" to their popular products to the highest bidders.  Other companies will produce those products in their own factories with their own workers.  The majority of those 18,000 workers, unfortunately, are out of luck.
11/16/2012 2:07 PM
Yes, it is highly unlikely.   Hostess wasn't able to make a worthwhile profit under their current conditions, in part due to lack of demand, so there's no reason to think the buyer of the "Twinkie factory" will need 18k workers to resume making Twinkies.
11/16/2012 2:09 PM
And I don't know anyone who drinks a frapachino.   10% of your daily caloric intake from "worthless" drink is huge.   I also doubt the "average" American only consumes 2500 calories a day.   That's a supersized Big Mac Meal.
11/16/2012 2:15 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 11/16/2012 2:07:00 PM (view original):
Yes, it is highly unlikely.   Hostess wasn't able to make a worthwhile profit under their current conditions, in part due to lack of demand, so there's no reason to think the buyer of the "Twinkie factory" will need 18k workers to resume making Twinkies.
The biggest problem with this is that those 18K go on the government dole, and are immediately de-incentivized to go out and actually WORK.  Which makes them even more likely to vote Democratic in future elections to keep the gravy train going.

If they really really want to work, they should look for jobs at Keebler, Little Debby, and various other sugar purveyors that are still in business.
of 3
All Forums > General Discussion > Non-Sports > Farewell, Old Friends

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.