the power of public-employee unions.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/ ... as-sowell#


....................."Many people think of labor unions as organizations to benefit workers, and think of employers who are opposed to unions as just people who don’t want to pay their employees more money. But some employers have made it a point to pay their employees more than the union wages, just to keep them from joining a union.

Why would they do that, if it is just a question of not wanting to pay union wages? The Twinkies bankruptcy is a classic example of costs created by labor unions that are not confined to paychecks."......................

My grandad's company was that way. It would always pay more than the union shops to keep unions out of his community.

One way unions kept wages higher. But now the union shops have closed down and his company is now run by the 4th generation and is an exporter.

The average worker for Hostess gave up about 28% in wage concessions in 2005, ($48,000 to $34,000) and would have given up 40% more in concessions (down to $25,000) and see out of pocket health care expenses rise under the current management demands. The worker would then lose their house, be on food stamps, and make less than they would in unemployment benefits. At least under unemployment, they could search or retrain for a new job full time.

Kind of makes it a no brainer does it not.

And guess what, management received raises.

Public employees have it pretty good since they don't have to worry about their employers going bankrupt. And the people giving them wage hikes want their votes, so don't expect tough negotiations from the city.

Blazer Bob wrote: www.nationalreview.com/articles/333695/u...goose-thomas-sowell#


....................."Many people think of labor unions as organizations to benefit workers, and think of employers who are opposed to unions as just people who don’t want to pay their employees more money. But some employers have made it a point to pay their employees more than the union wages, just to keep them from joining a union.

Of course!

"duh huh, my name is Blazing Idiot Bob and I just discovered something, duh huh"


Labor Unions rise the tide, lifting all boats, not just the yachts!

Delta Airlines was never union but paid a little more to keep them out, so if the other Unions weren't there, they'd be makin $10/hour and payin for their own insurance....but just as soon as Delta told their employees to work 8.5 hours instead of 8, and screwed with a few other work rules...They voted a union in..Its not just wages, its the work rules stupid.

Now let this thread die, if my wife catches me here she'll file for divorce.

Blazer Bob wrote: The Twinkies bankruptcy is a classic example of costs created by labor unions that are not confined to paychecks."......................

No, actually, the Twinkies bankruptcy is a classic case of vulture-capitalist company coming in, demanding wage and benefits concessions from the employes (in 2004) on the promise that they would restructure. After restructuring, they basically blew it all on salary increases for execs, not paying their required share of the pension funds, and loading the company up with debt, and then looking for a way to go bankrupt again, pocket the pension money and dump the obligation on the US Government (Read: TAXPAYERS) by having it taken over by the U.S. Pension Guarantee Trust Fund.

God, I love how FauxNews ignores the truth and to fabricate union blame when it was p*ss-poor management and business decisions that put them where they are. But, hey, for the :Koolaid: drinkers this is just standard business-as-usual.

Fox News placed the blame for the planned liquidation of Hostess Brands squarely on a labor dispute with one of the company's unions. In fact, Hostess' unions had previously made significant concessions when the company went through a failed bankruptcy, and Hostess had many problems beyond labor costs, including an inability to adjust to changes in consumer tastes, which contributed to its bankruptcy.

Hostess Blames Union For Bankruptcy After Tripling CEO’s Pay

But while headlines have been quick to blame unions for the downfall of the company there’s actually more to the story: While the company was filing for bankruptcy, for the second time, earlier this year, it actually tripled its CEO’s pay, and increased other executives’ compensation by as much as 80 percent.

At the time, creditors warned that the decision signaled an attempt to “sidestep” bankruptcy rules, potentially as a means for trying to keep the executive at a failing company. The Confectionery, Tobacco Workers & Grain Millers International Union pointed this out in their written reaction to the news that the business is closing:

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.

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/1 ... -downfall/

Matt Taibbi: Hostess' 'Incompetent' Management Killed The Company

Hostess announced Friday that the company planned to liquidate and lay off all of its 18,500 workers, citing an ongoing strike that the company claimed was crippling its operations. On Monday, a bankruptcy judge ordered that Hostess enter into mediation with the Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers International Union, the group representing the striking workers, saying that he had “serious questions as to the logic behind this strike.”

The Teamsters, the other union representing Hostess workers, agreed to major pay and pension cuts in September in an aim to save the company and their jobs, even though they had already taken a hit during the company's first bankruptcy.

Taibbi argued that Hostess’ workers are being forced to take the blame for the poor decisions of the private equity firm that bought the company after its first bankruptcy. The firm, Ripplewood, loaded Hostess with debt, according to The New York Times.

“It’s part of this overall mythology that we have to blame the workers for wanting benefits and wanting a living wage,” he said

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/2 ... f=business

Ripplewood? Sounds more like Bain...I'll bet if you look under the sheets you'll find an RMoney connection somewhere....

Yeah, standard "Unions=bad / Vulture-Capitalists=good" drivel for the Randroids.

Thanks LJ- You beat me too it

LadyJazzer wrote:

Blazer Bob wrote: The Twinkies bankruptcy is a classic example of costs created by labor unions that are not confined to paychecks."......................

No, actually, the Twinkies bankruptcy is a classic case of vulture-capitalist company coming in, demanding wage and benefits concessions from the employes (in 2004) on the promise that they would restructure. After restructuring, they basically blew it all on salary increases for execs, not paying their required share of the pension funds, and loading the company up with debt, and then looking for a way to go bankrupt again, pocket the pension money and dump the obligation on the US Government (Read: TAXPAYERS) by having it taken over by the U.S. Pension Guarantee Trust Fund.

God, I love how FauxNews ignores the truth and to fabricate union blame when it was p*ss-poor management and business decisions that put them where they are. But, hey, for the :Koolaid: drinkers this is just standard business-as-usual.

Fox News placed the blame for the planned liquidation of Hostess Brands squarely on a labor dispute with one of the company's unions. In fact, Hostess' unions had previously made significant concessions when the company went through a failed bankruptcy, and Hostess had many problems beyond labor costs, including an inability to adjust to changes in consumer tastes, which contributed to its bankruptcy.

Hostess Blames Union For Bankruptcy After Tripling CEO’s Pay

But while headlines have been quick to blame unions for the downfall of the company there’s actually more to the story: While the company was filing for bankruptcy, for the second time, earlier this year, it actually tripled its CEO’s pay, and increased other executives’ compensation by as much as 80 percent.

At the time, creditors warned that the decision signaled an attempt to “sidestep” bankruptcy rules, potentially as a means for trying to keep the executive at a failing company. The Confectionery, Tobacco Workers & Grain Millers International Union pointed this out in their written reaction to the news that the business is closing:

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.

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/1 ... -downfall/

Matt Taibbi: Hostess' 'Incompetent' Management Killed The Company

Hostess announced Friday that the company planned to liquidate and lay off all of its 18,500 workers, citing an ongoing strike that the company claimed was crippling its operations. On Monday, a bankruptcy judge ordered that Hostess enter into mediation with the Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers International Union, the group representing the striking workers, saying that he had “serious questions as to the logic behind this strike.”

The Teamsters, the other union representing Hostess workers, agreed to major pay and pension cuts in September in an aim to save the company and their jobs, even though they had already taken a hit during the company's first bankruptcy.

Taibbi argued that Hostess’ workers are being forced to take the blame for the poor decisions of the private equity firm that bought the company after its first bankruptcy. The firm, Ripplewood, loaded Hostess with debt, according to The New York Times.

“It’s part of this overall mythology that we have to blame the workers for wanting benefits and wanting a living wage,” he said

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/2 ... f=business

Ripplewood? Sounds more like Bain...I'll bet if you look under the sheets you'll find an RMoney connection somewhere....

Yeah, standard "Unions=bad / Vulture-Capitalists=good" drivel for the Randroids.

So why doesn't Obama do something about this?

An off-topic post was split out and moved here: <!-- l --><a class="postlink-local" href=" www.285bound.com/285forum/viewtopic.php?f=29&t=24622 " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">viewtopic.php?f=29&t=24622<!-- l -->

FredHayek wrote:

LadyJazzer wrote:

Blazer Bob wrote: The Twinkies bankruptcy is a classic example of costs created by labor unions that are not confined to paychecks."......................

No, actually, the Twinkies bankruptcy is a classic case of vulture-capitalist company coming in, demanding wage and benefits concessions from the employes (in 2004) on the promise that they would restructure. After restructuring, they basically blew it all on salary increases for execs, not paying their required share of the pension funds, and loading the company up with debt, and then looking for a way to go bankrupt again, pocket the pension money and dump the obligation on the US Government (Read: TAXPAYERS) by having it taken over by the U.S. Pension Guarantee Trust Fund.

God, I love how FauxNews ignores the truth and to fabricate union blame when it was p*ss-poor management and business decisions that put them where they are. But, hey, for the :Koolaid: drinkers this is just standard business-as-usual.

Fox News placed the blame for the planned liquidation of Hostess Brands squarely on a labor dispute with one of the company's unions. In fact, Hostess' unions had previously made significant concessions when the company went through a failed bankruptcy, and Hostess had many problems beyond labor costs, including an inability to adjust to changes in consumer tastes, which contributed to its bankruptcy.

Hostess Blames Union For Bankruptcy After Tripling CEO’s Pay

But while headlines have been quick to blame unions for the downfall of the company there’s actually more to the story: While the company was filing for bankruptcy, for the second time, earlier this year, it actually tripled its CEO’s pay, and increased other executives’ compensation by as much as 80 percent.

At the time, creditors warned that the decision signaled an attempt to “sidestep” bankruptcy rules, potentially as a means for trying to keep the executive at a failing company. The Confectionery, Tobacco Workers & Grain Millers International Union pointed this out in their written reaction to the news that the business is closing:

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.

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/1 ... -downfall/

Matt Taibbi: Hostess' 'Incompetent' Management Killed The Company

Hostess announced Friday that the company planned to liquidate and lay off all of its 18,500 workers, citing an ongoing strike that the company claimed was crippling its operations. On Monday, a bankruptcy judge ordered that Hostess enter into mediation with the Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers International Union, the group representing the striking workers, saying that he had “serious questions as to the logic behind this strike.”

The Teamsters, the other union representing Hostess workers, agreed to major pay and pension cuts in September in an aim to save the company and their jobs, even though they had already taken a hit during the company's first bankruptcy.

Taibbi argued that Hostess’ workers are being forced to take the blame for the poor decisions of the private equity firm that bought the company after its first bankruptcy. The firm, Ripplewood, loaded Hostess with debt, according to The New York Times.

“It’s part of this overall mythology that we have to blame the workers for wanting benefits and wanting a living wage,” he said

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/2 ... f=business

Ripplewood? Sounds more like Bain...I'll bet if you look under the sheets you'll find an RMoney connection somewhere....

Yeah, standard "Unions=bad / Vulture-Capitalists=good" drivel for the Randroids.

So why doesn't Obama do something about this?

Gee, Fred, who was president in 2004? You want to blame him for the San Francisco Earthquake of 1906 while you're at it? Why didn't Bush do something about it? Oh, sorry... rofllol

You DID read the part about the courts refusing to allow Hostess to declare bankruptcy immediately because they were more interested in trying to dump their contractual obligations to pocket the pension funds and screw the unions than trying to bargain in good faith? I guess even the courts were pretty disgusted by the naked greed the executives were showing. So, the courts ordered them into arbitration, since the company deliberately skipped that step.

I didn't realize it was the President's responsibility to get involved directly in a labor dispute caused by management malfeasance and greed. Who knew?!?! But hey, you keep trying...