DiscussMormonism.com

http://www.humanevents.com/2012/01/17/u ... r-twinkie/

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavli ... 18000_jobs

http://theunionlabelblog.com/2012/11/14 ... s-company/

http://michellemalkin.com/2012/11/16/di ... disappear/


The Takers now outnumber the Makers, just as Romney implied, and the parasites have become a bit too hungry for the tissues of their host. Both in government and in regions of the private sector economy, those sectors still under the boot of contemporary guild socialism, the law of the jungle rises again as the economy declines. As the economy continues to stagnate and shed private sector jobs, as a new and massive recession looms next year, and as inflation continues to debase the currency and curtail investment, the ravening greed and dog-eat-dog mind-set of Jurassic unionism will contribute to the general deterioration by ignoring economic reality, pricing their own members out of competitive markets, and destroying large numbers of scarce jobs outright, as has been done here, in the middle of a frighteningly fragile economic situation.

To all those union members who supported the destruction of their own jobs and the jobs of those among them who wanted to take the necessary concessions for the time being and continue to work, your wives and children have my condolences and sympathy - but not you, and you are accountable for the suffering and deprivations you, yourselves, have no brought upon their heads.

Three simple steps to retrain this kind of outcome in the future:

1. Outlaw all public sector unionism immediately.

2. Pass right to work laws in all remaining states where basic personal freedom of this kind is still not respected.

3. Dismantle the NLRB.

For those who don't want to follow the links, it looks like union workers at Hostess (the maker of Twinkies, Ding-Dongs etc.) are striking after being asked to take wage cuts, and the company can't endure a strike or continue with the current union deal:

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, which has about $2.5 billion in sales from a long list of iconic consumer brands of snack cakes and breads said it had suspended operations at all of its 33 plants around the United States as it moves to start liquidating assets.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ ... 5964.story

But this won't be the end of the Twinkie. Another company will buy the "Twinkie" rights and continue to make them. I suspect whichever company does this will be able to do it more efficiently, either because of a better deal with their union workers, or not having union workers.

Just to be clear, the reason for the strike is quite understandable:

Thousands of members of the Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers International Union went on strike last week after rejecting in September a contract offer that cut wages and benefits... the company stopped contributing to workers' pensions last year... Wedrick Hollingsworth, business agent for Local 372-B of the bakers union, said union members took wage and benefit concessions four years ago and are unwilling to accept further wage cuts and reductions in health and pension benefits sought by the company. "It's just too much for these employees to accept. We gave concessions four years ago."

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/201 ... s/1708127/

Good for them.

Eric wrote:Just to be clear, the reason for the strike is quite understandable:

Thousands of members of the Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers International Union went on strike last week after rejecting in September a contract offer that cut wages and benefits... the company stopped contributing to workers' pensions last year... Wedrick Hollingsworth, business agent for Local 372-B of the bakers union, said union members took wage and benefit concessions four years ago and are unwilling to accept further wage cuts and reductions in health and pension benefits sought by the company. "It's just too much for these employees to accept. We gave concessions four years ago."

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/201 ... s/1708127/

Good for them.

Yes, they committed employment suicide against the cold, unforgiving wall of economic reality, and took their fellow workers, wives and children, with them.

Bravo I say! Bravo!

That's how a market economy works. If workers don't like the pay and benefits at a company, they don't have to work there. Looks like that's what the employees have chosen.

Eric wrote:Just to be clear, the reason for the strike is quite understandable:

Thousands of members of the Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers International Union went on strike last week after rejecting in September a contract offer that cut wages and benefits... the company stopped contributing to workers' pensions last year... Wedrick Hollingsworth, business agent for Local 372-B of the bakers union, said union members took wage and benefit concessions four years ago and are unwilling to accept further wage cuts and reductions in health and pension benefits sought by the company. "It's just too much for these employees to accept. We gave concessions four years ago."

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/201 ... s/1708127/

Good for them.

for what it's worth, I would expect management to take similar measures regarding pay and benefit cuts if the company is in trouble.

This press release from the union does bring up some interesting points about the nature of the management of Hostess over the past few years.

http://www.bloomberg.com/article/2012-1 ... ckpDM.html

"The wholesale bread and cake baking business is unique. The most successful and profitable wholesale baking companies share common attributes, most notably being executive leadership with extensive background in the business and a skilled and dedicated workforce. Hostess Brands and its predecessor companies have had the latter for decades.

"Unfortunately however, for the past eight years management of the company has been in the hands of Wall Street investors, 'restructuring experts,' third-tier managers from other non-baking food companies and currently a 'liquidation specialist.' Six CEOs in eight years, none of whom with any bread and cake baking industry experience, was the prescription for failure.

Those are valid points. If the owners and management of Hostess are trying to position it for a sale instead of long-term growth and success, they obviously have a different set of goals than the workers (who want nothing more than long-term growth and success!)

I suspect the blame lies on both sides, but if workers and management are working towards different goals, it shouldn't be a surprise that they can't find agreement. It's too bad the workers can't buy the company and run it as employee owned.

In the end the company went down because demand went down. There is no reason to expect workers to just keep taking the hits without standing up for themselves. If demand were high, it could continue to afford paying out a livable wage with benefits. At some point both the employer and the employees have to renegotiate terms in order for both sides to be happy.

I don't know what the big deal is here. Every time a worker decides to negotiate for a better deal for his own hard work, suddenly we see that the Free-market, "liberty" and "freedom" are just things people like droopy pretend to care about. In the end, it is all about salvaging their well refuted Right Wing doctrines which attack the working class and worship the American corporate empire.

And I love the way Droopy pretends he suddenly gives a flying damn about the families of these employees. Obviously, the working conditions got so bad that they got together and felt it was worth striking over. So it was their cost-benefit analysis which Droopy really knows nothing about. So he is in no position to say these people are worse off now than they were the day before they went on strike. His entire world view is wrapped around assumptions and wishful thinking that are designed to support scenarios he needs to be true in order to maintain faith in the Right Wing talking points about unions.

Typical.

cinepro wrote:
Those are valid points. If the owners and management of Hostess are trying to position it for a sale instead of long-term growth and success, they obviously have a different set of goals than the workers (who want nothing more than long-term growth and success!)

I suspect the blame lies on both sides, but if workers and management are working towards different goals, it shouldn't be a surprise that they can't find agreement. It's too bad the workers can't buy the company and run it as employee owned.

Do you think this is a big business v. small business issue? it seems to me that, in small businesses, there is a common interest between employer and employee in long-term growth and success. But, at some point, we enter the realm of the mergers and acquisitions and leveraged buy out and golden parachutes, where the self interest of the employer and employee are likely to diverge and become in conflict.

Droopy wrote:
The Takers now outnumber the Makers.

Four questions:

1) Given what we see is happens in other countries (where we outsource to) and what was the case in the past (19th century), what is to stop us from ending up with a multitude of skilled laborers working for a dollar an hour with no benefits in a world governed only by market forces?

2) Why isn't it enough to seek to ensure that people who can find work actually must work? You claim that Obama made massive unemployment but then doesn't that mean that those people really can't find work and aren't lazy? If they really can't find work, shall we let their children starve?
In other words, does Tyrone not work because there is no work (thanks to economic woes beyond his control --supposedly at the feet of Obama) or is it that Tyrone is lazy? Are the 47% lazy or is there a lack of jobs? Can you have it both ways?

3) Was Einstein a maker? How about teachers, artists, poets and musicians? How about cops and soldiers? How about Jesus? Is it all about business and profit? Who can I reasonably admire in your Randian ideal?

4) Is poverty in the "hood" just going to work itself out if all welfare and social programs are terminated? Will people just walk out of the ghetto the next day and into good paying jobs once there is zero government help? Will Tyrone's children head on a path headed straight to college and prosperity on their own steam and on their own dime once their isn't a single penny spent on any government programs?

Brad Hudson wrote:Do you think this is a big business v. small business issue? it seems to me that, in small businesses, there is a common interest between employer and employee in long-term growth and success. But, at some point, we enter the realm of the mergers and acquisitions and leveraged buy out and golden parachutes, where the self interest of the employer and employee are likely to diverge and become in conflict.

I don't think it's big vs. small. And I don't think it's always management that lose direction. It's just as possible that a union will negotiate for deals that work against the health of the company, and for employees to act in ways that work against the health of the company.

Certainly, everyone has to take care of themselves, but they also have to keep the big picture in mind.