No more Twinkies!!!!!

what is funny is that everyone is focused on the union aspect of this....which is certainly part of it but there are other reports that the company had entered chapt 11 for a number of reasons. Their path out of it was by lowering operating costs but, as cited on the news (so take it for what its worth...and it wasnt on fox :whistle:) part of why they decided to close down was in part due to the overall financial picture they were staring at come Jan 1. The report stated that "new taxes, fees and penalties that will take effect on Jan 1 for Obamacare, the tax code changes, the pension costs and the striking union all played a part in the decision to close". Look around, it sucks that Hostess is gone and I'm sure that someone will buy the brand(s) but there are TONS of companies that are looking at ways to adjust their payroll and business models due to the pending changes to the tax code (both Obama and other) coming in the new year.

Perhaps the smaller union could have worked something out and saved 18500 jobs, perhaps even with a deal this was going to happen anyway with the way they were running the company. Who knows, 20/20 hindsight is a wonderful thing. I think we'll see more changes in corporate structure coming but I fear that we see more unions. There are places for them but there are plenty of places that they don't work and simply increase operational costs, thus driving up overall costs. Time will tell, in the mean time enjoy your twinkies :beerchug:
 
Both sides of the table are at fault for sure, but only one side volunteered to go under. I hold no good will towards that management team at all, they are just as stupid as the union, keep up with an eye for eye and everyone will be blind, broke and hungry.
 
Quoting a job and collecting unemployment (tax money we borrow from future generations), = is taking more taxes from me now and our kids later when they have to pay back the borrowing with interest = taking food from them.

ill never understand people like you, you see the problem but fail to see the other side of the coin.

What you said is the equivalent of me saying, if its taking food from their mouths they should have gotten a better job to feed themselves.

It goes both ways, yes it over extends the tax system, so do jobs that pay horribly, these people would be paying little to no taxes, and still living on welfare. The only one coming out ahead is the company thats playing the victim by closing it's doors.
 
Unfortunately they all lose in this instance. Including us. Stupidity on full display. Explain how either the company or the workers are better off now? And how its our obligation to pay for the union workers after they quit a job?
 
I agree, but from the outside looking in armed purely with what we see on the internet & news, it seems the union could have compromised a little to at least maintain some income until they could develop a proper exit strategy for their employees, perhaps making it through the holidays instead of putting 18500 folks on UE the week before Thanksgiving. Less of something is still a pile more than nothing.

Oh well, its done and hopefully someone does a postmortem on it all so other companies can learn from it all. Maybe someone will buy the brands, plants, etc and bring everyone back that was there before...likely without the same management teams (both Hostess & union).
 
(Rainbow7 should have an opinion about this :laugh:)

Indeed he does: LOL, unionised idiots! That is my opinion. I have seen similar stupidity from union officials before, it always being the case that the officials themselves aren't the ones who're going to lose their jobs when things blow up on them.

Also, it is rumoured that the Democrats are purchasing every last Twinkie in America and keeping them in storage (let's face it, they last forever) until the next election, at which time they will offer Twinkies For Votes.
 
.....

62256_495566587142654_1016934344_n.png
 
Back
Top