What on Earth is everybody going to do if the court ordered working out period actually leads to a settlement, and the Twinkies continue to roll?
What an irony that would be after all of this!!
Than k God for Zingers!
Sell the brand name and make them in Mexico. Or, with their shelf life they could be shipped by slow boat from China.
Hostess got Baned- bought by some Mitt Romney-type, saddled with debt, CEOs given unreasonable raises DURING the bankrupcy, company sold for parts (while blaming the Union the whole way).
Nothing new here and nothing the public doesn’t see through.
Although the the pay increases and bonuses received by Hostess executives is insignificant (and legal) as a part of gross income it does seem immoral to give themselves those monies or for the board of directors to vote them those monies while asking the troops to take a pay cut and reduction in benefits. I don’t know if a change in work rules would have kept Hostess a viable company, but if those changes could have kept the company viable and the union officers rejected those changes then they didn’t do their members and favors.
@grickstake a pay cut, heavens no. this is the kind of thing bain did (only worse) and here’s what happened. it’s called a leveraged buyout. the LBO buys the company and puts it’s friends into the executive positions. they leverage every bit of equity then can. This means that they borrow money from the bank on everything, the plant, equipment, the good will from an on-going business. in this case they raised the executives (their friends) compensation from 750k/year to 2.1 million a year. Now the company is losing money, the banks (us taxpayers) are on the hook. They point to the unions unreasonable demands to not have their pay cut 30% as the problem. If they get the pay cut, they get the difference in bonus (which isn’t what they’re after). company goes bankrupt, the assetts are sold to another company that then starts up and makes twinkees in somalia for slave wages. the proceeds from the sale of the assetts goes to the payments guaranteed to the executives (because a contract is a contract!). workers out of work. bank settles for pennies on the dollar (taxpayer funded), executives are out of work too, but they have all that money to spend, and invest in the next LBO. It’s all legal. anyone think it’s ethical, moral and right?
Why didn’t the Big 3 Auto CEO’s take pay cuts? Had they taken pay cuts, then Obama would not have had to bail them out.If executives had actually paid attention to the changing market place and adapted instead of putting every single egg into the SUV basket, they wouldn’t have needed a bailout or asked for worker pay cuts. And why can’t the executives take pay cuts? Just how much were they getting paid to make the poor decisions that lead to such a steep decline in market share?
Ralph Dunagin and Dana Summers
April 03, 2015