the power of public-employee unions.

LadyJazzer wrote: Like $4Billion/year tax-breaks for the oil companies that are making hundred-billion profits every year...

Just curious how they would break that down per state? Where they are incorporated like Delaware or Nevada? Maybe tax credits just aren't counted, because then those two states would be major receivers of federal aid, or possibly they break them down per state where the drilling and fuel refining goes on. Or for other corporations, where the capital improvements are invested.

You ponder on it... Since we're talking about government give-aways....

Go sell crazy someplace else, we're all stocked up here!

Anything to deflect the conversation from the vultures that killed the Hostess company by screwing the employees and stuffing their pockets....And Public-Employee unions which deserve the rights they bargain for.

Any idea how a company manages to keep top people to stay on the Titanic while it sinks beneath them? That's right, with money. The company is trying to hold onto its management when it gives them raises while the company enters and tries to emerge from bankruptcy. Those that have invested their own capital in the business know that the company stands no chance of emerging successfully from bankruptcy if there isn't talented and capable management at the helm. It's called supply and demand. The number of people willing to take/keep a CEO position within a failing company is a very small pool and anyone who does so risks being unemployable in the future when they attempt to save a failing company and are unsuccessful. That means it is going to cost someone an awful lot of money to attract/keep talented and capable people for those positions when a company enters bankruptcy.

But don't let logic and reason interfere with the nonsense about vulture capitalists and evil, greedy rich people. You can't start a revolution without fueling hatred and divisiveness first after all.

The company had in place something like 370 separate collective bargaining agreements with different locals of the same unions all across the country. There were over 80 health plans and 40 pension plans that had to be tended to as a result of those agreements. And you want to rail against the investors for insisting that the process be streamlined and made more efficient? Really?

Science Chic wrote: I see issues with both sides. Unions make unreasonable demands of companies, and I would guess they don't have a clear big picture of how those demands will impact the company. I'm sure the company pushes back with how it will hurt their productivity and profits but neither side gives and takes. CEO's often make way more than they should, but they also do take on more responsibility. I think both sides need to compromise more and give up pay and benefits until the economy improves.

Just my $0.02

That's why the judge, in this case, scolded the vulture-capital company and told them that they had tried to go straight to bankruptcy and skip the arbitration step...He ordered them into arbitration. Hopefully, they'll work out something that will keep the company--and their employees--going. And he was NOT happy with the CEO giving himself a 300% raise....

Science Chic wrote: I see issues with both sides. Unions make unreasonable demands of companies, and I would guess they don't have a clear big picture of how those demands will impact the company.

Really...Before negotiations even start the books are studied extensively by the Union, and most of the people doing the negotiating on the Union side are senior workers who lived their entire lives on the job. They know whats going on. And its been my experience that they are usually the only people at the table that know whats going on, not the company lawyers, hired guns with no experience with day to day operations.. They can't bullshit the workers like they can the media, and ultimately people like you who form opinions from what the company puts out for the media to print..

Why speculate when you got an expert here SC?

PrintSmith wrote: Any idea how a company manages to keep top people to stay on the Titanic while it sinks beneath them? That's right, with money. The company is trying to hold onto its management when it gives them raises while the company enters and tries to emerge from bankruptcy. Those that have invested their own capital in the business know that the company stands no chance of emerging successfully from bankruptcy if there isn't talented and capable management at the helm. It's called supply and demand. The number of people willing to take/keep a CEO position within a failing company is a very small pool and anyone who does so risks being unemployable in the future when they attempt to save a failing company and are unsuccessful. That means it is going to cost someone an awful lot of money to attract/keep talented and capable people for those positions when a company enters bankruptcy.

But don't let logic and reason interfere with the nonsense about vulture capitalists and evil, greedy rich people. You can't start a revolution without fueling hatred and divisiveness first after all.

The company had in place something like 370 separate collective bargaining agreements with different locals of the same unions all across the country. There were over 80 health plans and 40 pension plans that had to be tended to as a result of those agreements. And you want to rail against the investors for insisting that the process be streamlined and made more efficient? Really?

The "CEO" of Hostess is strictly a liquidation specialist with no expertise in managing a business other than sucking the equity from it.

I'll repeat for the reading-challenged.... They didn't "invest their own capital in the business", other than the initial low-ball investment of the vulture-capital company. The $130 million and the rest of the money they "invested" was debt-load that they borrowed against the company, which then became company debt-obligation... The vultures walk away from the debt; pocket the equity and the pension-funds, and leave the carcass--and the jobs--on the ground for the vultures, including the pension-obligation that gets passed to taxpayers. Their purpose and their plan was NEVER to "attract good people to run it, and salvage it." Their purpose was to bleed it, load it up with debt, sell off the pieces and pocket as much as their greedy plan would allow them to.

And you want to incessantly defend these vultures.....Really?

The workers at Hostess are not making "unreasonable" demands. Their wages would have dropped by over 50% in the last few years had they accepted the "offer", as well as their out of pocket health care expenses would have dramatically increased along with major cuts in their pension benefits. Most of the workers would actually qualify for food stamps if they took the management offer. And during this same time period, management has been given 300% raises in their compensation.

95% the recent big company bankruptcy's are just looting from the top. Deregulation over the years has made it possible and even fashionable amongst the .01%'rs.

Because of unlimited political contributions they got the game rigged, and they'll tell ya straight up- There just playin it. Playin by the rules they created.

Union contracts are CONTRACTS. Just like contracts to all a companies suppliers, just like the contracts with their consumers...They aren't just stiffing the little worker, they are stiffing everybody and its bad for America.. And nobody under any circumstances should get filthy rich from a bankruptcy.


Just like NOBODY should make a profit off someones healthcare, its sick