Bushwhacker

Minneapolis, MN

#22 Mar 22, 2013
Bushwhacker wrote:
BCTGM members are well aware that as the company was preparing to file for bankruptcy earlier this year, the then CEO of Hostess was awarded a 300 percent raise (from approximately $750,000 to $2,550,000) and at least nine other top executives of the company received massive pay raises. One such executive received a pay increase from $500,000 to $900,000 and another received one taking his salary from $375,000 to $656,256.
Certainly, the company agreed to an out-sized pension debt, but the decision to pay executives more while scorning employee contracts during a bankruptcy reflects a lack of good managerial judgement.
good, now make the sure the companies are NON union and they can make a profit with out the left waiting for hand outs.
non-starter

Saint Paul, MN

#24 Mar 22, 2013
Hostess' union rules:
No truck could carry both bread and snacks even when going to the same location
Drivers were not permitted to load their own trucks
Workers who loaded bread were not allowed to also load snacks
Bringing products from back rooms to shelves required another set of union employees
Multi-Employer pension obligations made Hostess liable for other, previously bankrupted, retirement plan contributions from employees that never worked for Hostess at all
Prior Hostess' brands, manufacturing coming soon to a right to work state near you.

Funny, you quote think progress blogs without citing them like they are facts. Company efficiency rules? You must be the product of the Minneapolis public school system with logic and reasoning skills like that
Bushwhacker

Seattle, WA

#25 Mar 22, 2013
You keep quoting the rules, who usually makes rules ??? LMAOROFU~!

I see you're not addressing STOLEN PAY !!!

Sure, work without promised pay, RIGHT ??

Hostess Brands acknowledged for the first time in a news report Monday that the company diverted workers' pension money for other company uses.

The bankrupt baker told The Wall Street Journal that money taken out of workers' paychecks, intended for their retirement funds, was used for company operations instead.

STEALING WORKERS PAY ?????
PHD2

Minneapolis, MN

#26 Mar 22, 2013
cantmakeitup wrote:
<quoted text>
Twinkies and Ho Ho's don't make people fat. People make people fat.
Is it true every twinkie has a Ho Ho?
Bushwhacker

Seattle, WA

#27 Mar 22, 2013
Pretty EZ to see the right's increasing irrelevance to American workers concerns.
Bushwhacker

Seattle, WA

#28 Mar 22, 2013
Hostess workers had pay stolen and you wonder why they struck ????
Bushwhacker

Seattle, WA

#29 Mar 22, 2013
You pretend union rules were made by workers, rather than over a negotiating table ???
Bushwhacker

Seattle, WA

#30 Mar 22, 2013
You pretend 300% manager raises are fine, in a failing business ???
non-starter

Saint Paul, MN

#31 Mar 22, 2013
Bushwhacker wrote:
Pretty EZ to see the right's increasing irrelevance to American workers concerns.
Pretty easy to see the irrelevance of the unions to America.
Bushwhacker

Seattle, WA

#32 Mar 22, 2013
That overlooks the years of union givebacks and management bad faith. Example: Just before declaring bankruptcy for the second time in eight years Jan. 11, Hostess trebled the compensation of then-Chief Executive Brian Driscoll and raised other executives' pay up to twofold. At the same time, the company was demanding lower wages from workers and stiffing employee pension funds of $8 million a month in payment obligations.

Gee,$8 million a month in payment obligations....$8 million a month in payment obligations.....$8 million a month in payment obligations.....$8 million a month in payment obligations.....$8 million a month in payment obligations.....$8 million a month in payment obligations.....$8 million a month in payment obligations.....$8 million a month in payment obligations.....$8 million a month in payment obligations.....$8 million a month in payment obligations.
non-starter

Saint Paul, MN

#33 Mar 22, 2013
Bushwhacker wrote:
You pretend 300% manager raises are fine, in a failing business ???
You mean a 300% CEO raise that was later backed down? Hostess lost $341 million in 2011, CEO pay was $1.5 million of that. They probably should have paid more and gotten a better CEO. Maybe then they would still be in business. Your percentages in a vacuum are pretty poor arguments.

Next question?
non-starter

Saint Paul, MN

#34 Mar 22, 2013
Bushwhacker wrote:
That overlooks the years of union givebacks and management bad faith. Example: Just before declaring bankruptcy for the second time in eight years Jan. 11, Hostess trebled the compensation of then-Chief Executive Brian Driscoll and raised other executives' pay up to twofold. At the same time, the company was demanding lower wages from workers and stiffing employee pension funds of $8 million a month in payment obligations.
Gee,$8 million a month in payment obligations....$8 million a month in payment obligations.....$8 million a month in payment obligations.....$8 million a month in payment obligations.....$8 million a month in payment obligations.....$8 million a month in payment obligations.....$8 million a month in payment obligations.....$8 million a month in payment obligations.....$8 million a month in payment obligations.....$8 million a month in payment obligations.
So Hostess should fund its pension obligations fully while going bankrupt, but the USPS shouldn't have to. I call your twisted logic.

How much is going into those workers' pension funds now?
non-starter

Saint Paul, MN

#35 Mar 22, 2013
From an earlier quoted article "Multi-Employer pension obligations made Hostess liable for other, previously bankrupted, retirement plan contributions from employees that never worked for Hostess at all".
Bushwhacker

Seattle, WA

#36 Mar 22, 2013
Sure, ignore the multiple other managerial problems/raises, like money for worker's pensions NOT PAID....

We ALL see, who hates the American worker and who lost the election.
Bushwhacker

Seattle, WA

#37 Mar 22, 2013
{{{{{ Hosetess'}}}}

Sure, tell me what the SMURT contingent "thinks" !!! LMAOROFU~! Explain managerial raises, too.

We see who's STUPID !!!!

non-starter

Saint Paul, MN

#38 Mar 22, 2013
Bushwhacker wrote:
Sure, ignore the multiple other managerial problems/raises, like money for worker's pensions NOT PAID....
We ALL see, who hates the American worker and who lost the election.
So Hostess should fund its pension obligations fully while going bankrupt, but the USPS shouldn't have to. I call your twisted logic.

How much is going into those workers' pension funds now?
Bushwhacker

Seattle, WA

#39 Mar 22, 2013
Just so we get this straight: the workers did just what we're all told to do... make short-term sacrifices to save for a secure future. But who gets the secure future? The vulture capitalists who bought the company with the intention of treating it like a stolen car: something you break up and sell for parts.

For example, John Jordan, a union official and former Hostess employee, said workers at a Hostess factory in Biddeford, Maine, agreed to plow 28 cents of their 30-cents-an-hour wage increase in November 2010 into the pension plan.

Hostess was supposed to take the additional 28 cents an hour and contribute it to the workers' pension plan.

"This local was very aggressive about saving for the future," he said.

Employees in Biddeford began directing wages toward pensions in 1955, and the amount grew to $4.28 an hour per employee.

What sort of recourse to employees have? Well... none, apparently.

"It's what lawyers call betrayal without remedy," said James P. Baker, a partner at Baker & McKenzie LLP who specializes in employee benefits and isn't involved in the Hostess case. "It's sad, but that stuff does happen, unfortunately."
Bushwhacker

Seattle, WA

#40 Mar 22, 2013
You're pretend 300% manager raises are fine, in a failing business ???
non-starter

Saint Paul, MN

#41 Mar 22, 2013
Bushwhacker wrote:
You're pretend 300% manager raises are fine, in a failing business ???
You mean a 300% CEO raise that was later backed down? Hostess lost $341 million in 2011, CEO pay was $1.5 million of that. They probably should have paid more and gotten a better CEO. Maybe then they would still be in business. Your percentages in a vacuum are pretty poor arguments.

Next question?
Bridgework

Lincoln, NE

#42 Mar 22, 2013
Slew wants to pretend that a couple million in executive pay is why Hostess went out of business.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Minneapolis Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Helicopter: White House Lawn 1 hr Not so 11
Vikings Draft Jameis Winston 2 hr Alex Hernandez 2
New Minneapolis Sales Tax to Build 50 Million D... 2 hr Al She Bob 3
Pimples and white people 2 hr FOVR 23
Armenians in Twin Cities, around world recall '... 2 hr Al She Bob 3
Scott Pelley 2 hr FOVR 5
Muslims Throw Christians Overboard 2 hr Al She Bob 2
More from around the web

Minneapolis People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]