Twinkies Are Forever.

Prince Of DorknessPrince Of Dorkness Posts: 3,763
edited November 2012 in A Moving Train
Before you get TOO angry at those money-grubbing Union Thugs that killed Twinkies... earlier this year, the CEO of Hostess was awarded a 300% 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.

Which pretty much underscores every one of the Occupy Wall Street talking points. The CEOs reward themselves with Golden Parachutes just before liquidating the companies.

Besides, this is just a ploy to liquidate the company, sell it and start again.

And in the mean time... Hostess is still in operation in Canada so the HoHos will just become the new contraband.
Post edited by Unknown User on
«1

Comments

  • DS1119DS1119 Posts: 33,497
    Good for them. Take what you can get when you can get it within the parameters of the law. Zero wrong with that.
  • More concerning, to me, is that this is the norm. CEO salaries accelerating at breakneck speed over the past 30 to 40 years while the average worker's wages have basically stagnated. Reminds me of Catapiller where they were earning $37K per employee in profit and yet wanted their workers to take a 6 year wage freeze. How's that treating the 25 year employee who makes $55K per year?

    You want to get this economy going? Start sharing the wealth with those who help you create it Corporate America.

    http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/0 ... orker-pay/?

    mobile=nchttp://www.kyklosproductions.com/articles/wages.html

    http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/0 ... ?mobile=nc

    Peace.
    09/15/1998 & 09/16/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/27/2008, Hartford; 06/28/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield; 08/18/2009, O2, London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA; 09/08/2022, Toronto, Ont; 09/11/2022, New York, NY; 09/14/2022, Camden, NJ; 09/02/2023, St. Paul, MN; 05/04/2024 & 05/06/2024, Vancouver, BC; 05/10/2024, Portland, OR;

    Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.

    Brilliantati©
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,090
    Don't worry, there will always be Winkies, Ho's and Dong's. And maybe when they reform they'll come out with Bunn Bunns and Doo Doos and and Coco Thongs to clog our arteries with. :lol:

    We're just dying to shove this stuff down our gullets, eh?
    “The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.” Variously credited to Mark Twain or Edward Abbey.
    Democracy Dies in Darkness- Washington Post













  • DS1119DS1119 Posts: 33,497
    I just wonder how CEO's and management protecting themselves and like others is any different than unions that actually just do the same? Oh yeah, management doesn't pay any dues to an organization that hires it's own management team who then protect themselves. :lol: I'll save the union dues and worry about myself and let my work speak for itself. :lol:
  • DS1119 wrote:
    I just wonder how CEO's and management protecting themselves and like others is any different than unions that actually just do the same?


    Yeah, because Unions give themselves raises to 2.5 million dollars per year as a reward for running companies into the ground.

    Happens all the time.

    Like here.
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 49,964
    I really liked those fruit pies on the way home from the bar in middle of the night.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,090
    DS1119 wrote:
    I just wonder how CEO's and management protecting themselves and like others is any different than unions that actually just do the same?


    Yeah, because Unions give themselves raises to 2.5 million dollars per year as a reward for running companies into the ground.

    Happens all the time.

    Like here.
    :lol:
    “The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.” Variously credited to Mark Twain or Edward Abbey.
    Democracy Dies in Darkness- Washington Post













  • lukin2006lukin2006 Posts: 9,087
    I doubt many union leaders make even close to what most of these executives make ... thats just shameful ...
    I have certain rules I live by ... My First Rule ... I don't believe anything the government tells me ... George Carlin

    "Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
  • DS1119DS1119 Posts: 33,497
    DS1119 wrote:
    I just wonder how CEO's and management protecting themselves and like others is any different than unions that actually just do the same?


    Yeah, because Unions give themselves raises to 2.5 million dollars per year as a reward for running companies into the ground.

    Happens all the time.

    Like here.


    No unions just protect lazy workers and employees who are easily replaceable. They also feel that all workers should be guaranteed a raise in spite of worker production our company success. And as far as increasing a salary to 2.5 million...I'm sure the union execs would do it for themselves if they actually had the power to do it. And if you believe it was the management's fault for the Hostess issue I suggest you look at your own tasteless link and substitute my picture for yours.
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 49,964
    DS1119 wrote:
    DS1119 wrote:
    I just wonder how CEO's and management protecting themselves and like others is any different than unions that actually just do the same?


    Yeah, because Unions give themselves raises to 2.5 million dollars per year as a reward for running companies into the ground.

    Happens all the time.

    Like here.


    No unions just protect lazy workers and employees who are easily replaceable. They also feel that all workers should be guaranteed a raise in spite of worker production our company success. And as far as increasing a salary to 2.5 million...I'm sure the union execs would do it for themselves if they actually had the power to do it. And if you believe it was the management's fault for the Hostess issue I suggest you look at your own tasteless link and substitute my picture for yours.
    I understand what your perception of unions is, but you are just plain wrong. You've embraced some very twisted views of what most unions are about. Those twisted views are propagated by the execs because it feels their own interests. It's just a propaganda war and you have fallen for their side of it.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • DS1119DS1119 Posts: 33,497
    PJ_Soul wrote:
    I understand what your perception of unions is, but you are just plain wrong. You've embraced some very twisted views of what most unions are about. Those twisted views are propagated by the execs because it feels their own interests. It's just a propaganda war and you have fallen for their side of it.


    ANd perhaps you have fallen to the propaganda of unions? :?
  • Cliffy6745Cliffy6745 Posts: 33,841
    Anyone who defends CEOs taking massive raises when the company is going under is just a plain idiot.

    Twinkies aren't going anywhere in the long run. Hostess may be gone, but there will be plenty of private equity's lining up to buy their assets.
  • DS1119DS1119 Posts: 33,497
    Cliffy6745 wrote:
    Anyone who defends CEOs taking massive raises when the company is going under is just a plain idiot.

    Twinkies aren't going anywhere in the long run. Hostess may be gone, but there will be plenty of private equity's lining up to buy their assets.


    I disagree. How is this any different than unions demanding raises for workers when the obvious business model is no longer working? If it going to go under, take what you can. Hope the 18,500 Hostess workers who put their faith in the union can find suitable employment.
  • Cliffy6745Cliffy6745 Posts: 33,841
    DS1119 wrote:
    Cliffy6745 wrote:
    Anyone who defends CEOs taking massive raises when the company is going under is just a plain idiot.

    Twinkies aren't going anywhere in the long run. Hostess may be gone, but there will be plenty of private equity's lining up to buy their assets.


    I disagree. How is this any different than unions demanding raises for workers when the obvious business model is no longer working? If it going to go under, take what you can. Hope the 18,500 Hostess workers who put their faith in the union can find suitable employment.

    Give me a break. A CEO who is set for life regardless needs to take what he can from the employees who have no real say in how things are going? How about better severance packages? How about thinking a little bit about the people working for you?

    Just such a terrible attitude. Like I always say, your greed is good philosophy is exactly what is wrong with this country.
  • DS1119DS1119 Posts: 33,497
    Cliffy6745 wrote:
    DS1119 wrote:
    Cliffy6745 wrote:
    Anyone who defends CEOs taking massive raises when the company is going under is just a plain idiot.

    Twinkies aren't going anywhere in the long run. Hostess may be gone, but there will be plenty of private equity's lining up to buy their assets.


    I disagree. How is this any different than unions demanding raises for workers when the obvious business model is no longer working? If it going to go under, take what you can. Hope the 18,500 Hostess workers who put their faith in the union can find suitable employment.

    Give me a break. A CEO who is set for life regardless needs to take what he can from the employees who have no real say in how things are going? How about better severance packages? How about thinking a little bit about the people working for you?

    Just such a terrible attitude. Like I always say, your greed is good philosophy is exactly what is wrong with this country.


    Who's to say what is "set for life". Everyone works to better there own situation whatever that situation is. That's capitalism. Why should a company worry about severance packages for workers who are striking? Why should a company worry about severance packages at all? If the business stops being productive and profitable that's the way it goes. If the guy who pumps the crèam into the Twinkies wants the same privelages as the guy who sits behind the big oak desks perhaps he should go back to school and work to get into that position?
  • Cliffy6745Cliffy6745 Posts: 33,841
    DS1119 wrote:


    Who's to say what is "set for life". Everyone works to better there own situation whatever that situation is. That's capitalism. Why should a company worry about severance packages for workers who are striking? Why should a company worry about severance packages at all? If the business stops being productive and profitable that's the way it goes. If the guy who pumps the crèam into the Twinkies wants the same privelages as the guy who sits behind the big oak desks perhaps he should go back to school and work to get into that position?

    But why should a CEO who runs a failing business get a raise? Go back to school and become CEO, HA. You sell Hondas right? Why aren't you the CEO if it's as easy as going back to school?

    And yes, a person who has the title "CEO - Hostess" is set for life, regardless if they have to find another job.
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 49,964
    DS1119 wrote:
    PJ_Soul wrote:
    I understand what your perception of unions is, but you are just plain wrong. You've embraced some very twisted views of what most unions are about. Those twisted views are propagated by the execs because it feels their own interests. It's just a propaganda war and you have fallen for their side of it.


    ANd perhaps you have fallen to the propaganda of unions? :?
    No, I actually live the reality of it. I am in a union, and i am telling you that most of your perceptions about how things are within a union environment are bullshit, and that that perception has been created by those whose interests lie in spreading such bullshit in an effort to get rid of unions for the sole reason of making more money by giving as little as possible to the workers.

    One thing I will say is that there are a few bad apple unions out there, but they are very much the exception, not the rule.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • lukin2006lukin2006 Posts: 9,087
    PJ_Soul wrote:
    DS1119 wrote:
    PJ_Soul wrote:
    I understand what your perception of unions is, but you are just plain wrong. You've embraced some very twisted views of what most unions are about. Those twisted views are propagated by the execs because it feels their own interests. It's just a propaganda war and you have fallen for their side of it.


    ANd perhaps you have fallen to the propaganda of unions? :?
    No, I actually live the reality of it. I am in a union, and i am telling you that most of your perceptions about how things are within a union environment are bullshit, and that that perception has been created by those whose interests lie in spreading such bullshit in an effort to get rid of unions for the sole reason of making more money by giving as little as possible to the workers.

    One thing I will say is that there are a few bad apple unions out there, but they are very much the exception, not the rule.

    ^THIS^
    I have certain rules I live by ... My First Rule ... I don't believe anything the government tells me ... George Carlin

    "Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
  • lukin2006lukin2006 Posts: 9,087
    I'm not so sure someone who works/sells cars for a living should generalize or paint unionist with the same brush...after all isn't that what a majority of people do with car sales men...except the union worker gets far more respect.
    I have certain rules I live by ... My First Rule ... I don't believe anything the government tells me ... George Carlin

    "Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
  • DS1119DS1119 Posts: 33,497
    Cliffy6745 wrote:
    DS1119 wrote:


    Who's to say what is "set for life". Everyone works to better there own situation whatever that situation is. That's capitalism. Why should a company worry about severance packages for workers who are striking? Why should a company worry about severance packages at all? If the business stops being productive and profitable that's the way it goes. If the guy who pumps the crèam into the Twinkies wants the same privelages as the guy who sits behind the big oak desks perhaps he should go back to school and work to get into that position?

    But why should a CEO who runs a failing business get a raise? Go back to school and become CEO, HA. You sell Hondas right? Why aren't you the CEO if it's as easy as going back to school?

    And yes, a person who has the title "CEO - Hostess" is set for life, regardless if they have to find another job.


    I don't sell Hondas even though that's a very good gig but I'm wondering what your definition of "set for life" is?
  • DS1119DS1119 Posts: 33,497
    PJ_Soul wrote:
    DS1119 wrote:
    PJ_Soul wrote:
    I understand what your perception of unions is, but you are just plain wrong. You've embraced some very twisted views of what most unions are about. Those twisted views are propagated by the execs because it feels their own interests. It's just a propaganda war and you have fallen for their side of it.


    ANd perhaps you have fallen to the propaganda of unions? :?
    No, I actually live the reality of it. I am in a union, and i am telling you that most of your perceptions about how things are within a union environment are bullshit, and that that perception has been created by those whose interests lie in spreading such bullshit in an effort to get rid of unions for the sole reason of making more money by giving as little as possible to the workers.

    One thing I will say is that there are a few bad apple unions out there, but they are very much the exception, not the rule.


    ...and I'm wondering why a management team who is trying to bring their product to market by spending the least on labor costs is a bad thing? Why is it bad to reward the hard worker and replace the inadequate one? Why is it bad to not want unions when quite simply someone not paying union dues to another form of bureaucracy and management team could be viewed as a raise?
  • DS1119DS1119 Posts: 33,497
    lukin2006 wrote:
    I'm not so sure someone who works/sells cars for a living should generalize or paint unionist with the same brush...after all isn't that what a majority of people do with car sales men...except the union worker gets far more respect.


    Respect from whom?
  • DS1119 wrote:
    If the business stops being productive and profitable that's the way it goes. If the guy who pumps the crèam into the Twinkies wants the same privelages as the guy who sits behind the big oak desks perhaps he should go back to school and work to get into that position?


    a) the filling is inserted by a machine.

    b) wow, what a totally obnoxious thing to say. And clueless. And plutocratic.
  • DS1119DS1119 Posts: 33,497
    DS1119 wrote:
    If the business stops being productive and profitable that's the way it goes. If the guy who pumps the crèam into the Twinkies wants the same privelages as the guy who sits behind the big oak desks perhaps he should go back to school and work to get into that position?


    a) the filling is inserted by a machine.

    b) wow, what a totally obnoxious thing to say. And clueless. And plutocratic.



    Sorry. That's just reality. I don't have unicorns and butterflies flying out of my ass that can make it all better, and there's actually nothing wrong with the way business works. The workers at Hostess that lost their jobs are more than free in this country to start their own pastry company using their own capital, even a loan, and start their own business. Then they can sit behind the big oak desk.
  • DS1119 wrote:
    Sorry. That's just reality. I don't have unicorns and butterflies flying out of my ass that can make it all better, and there's actually nothing wrong with the way business works. The workers at Hostess that lost their jobs are more than free in this country to start their own pastry company using their own capital, even a loan, and start their own business. Then they can sit behind the big oak desk.


    Yes.

    please... just like that... keep saying stuff like that. Show us the classist, plutocratic and obnoxious bullshit of the Romneys of the world... keep doing that for the next few years... remind the masses why they voted in overwhelming numbers against that bullshit.
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 49,964
    DS1119 wrote:
    PJ_Soul wrote:
    DS1119 wrote:


    ANd perhaps you have fallen to the propaganda of unions? :?
    No, I actually live the reality of it. I am in a union, and i am telling you that most of your perceptions about how things are within a union environment are bullshit, and that that perception has been created by those whose interests lie in spreading such bullshit in an effort to get rid of unions for the sole reason of making more money by giving as little as possible to the workers.

    One thing I will say is that there are a few bad apple unions out there, but they are very much the exception, not the rule.


    ...and I'm wondering why a management team who is trying to bring their product to market by spending the least on labor costs is a bad thing? Why is it bad to reward the hard worker and replace the inadequate one? Why is it bad to not want unions when quite simply someone not paying union dues to another form of bureaucracy and management team could be viewed as a raise?
    Because we as people ought to be working towards the greater good - paying people decent wages and providing them with benefits improve society as a whole. What you're talking about is letting those who will greedily profit undervalue the workers. They will.and do exactly that if the workers don't stand strongly for fair value. It reminds me of the US healthcare system, where the insurance companies are allowed to increase their profits by denying coverage... some things are just WRONG, and if there is a way to fight those things (I.e. labour unions), then that is wonderful as far as I'm concerned. It's strange that you ask what's wrong with what union busting companies do, but it doesn't seem to occur to you to ask what's wrong with workers trying to stand up for their well-being and fair treatment. You kind of seem to think that corporations are the only ones who have a justified right to stand up for what they want (the difference between the two being, of course, that one works to improve the lot forany who need it, while the other works to improve the lots for an already priviledged select few. I personally have no problem deciding which side I respect more).

    And your comment about keeping the good workers and replacing inadequate ones just again shows that you have been suckered by those whose interest it is for the public to think that way. It is pure bullshit that that is how it works in unions. Again, the bad apple unions where that is the case are few, but always the ones they hold up as examples of how it works. That simply is NOT the case. What MOST unions primarily do is protect workers from abuse of power, and ensure that they earn living wages and benefits for their hard, dedicated, and largely skilled labour. Most do NOT function to keep those who are inadequate or prevent those who are deserving from excelling. That is a union busting myth. Those who think that unions are no longer relevant are kidding themselves. Employers are as willing to mistreat and undervalue workers for their own massive profits today as they ever were. I see non reason at all not to fight for a system where business is mutually beneficial to all involved - the owners AND the workers. The owners have the money and the ownership on their side; the workers have the union on theirs. It's fair, and I like fairness.

    I know your attitude is "if you work hard enough you can sit behind the big desk too; until you do, fuck you." And the men behind the desks rule the world ... That thinking completely undervalues the role of workers. To the point that it makes me a bit sick to my stomach knowing that people are vicious enough to have this attitude. Plus, if everyone worked to sit behind a big desk (as though that is SO much more valuable than all.other work in the world, and ever so rewarding to giant egos), who in the fuck would do all the real work that actually keeps the world functioning on a day to day basis? ... The people who keep the world functioning on a day to day basis deserve fair treatment and reasonable wages and benefits, and say, they need unions to fight for that since corporations are too greedy and unappreciative to give it of their own free will most of the time.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • DS1119DS1119 Posts: 33,497
    PJ_Soul wrote:

    I know your attitude is "if you work hard enough you can sit behind the big desk too; until you do, fuck you." And the men behind the desks rule the world ... That thinking completely undervalues the role of workers. To the point that it makes me a bit sick to my stomach knowing that people are vicious enough to have this attitude. Plus, if everyone worked to sit behind a big desk (as though that is SO much more valuable than all.other work in the world, and ever so rewarding to giant egos), who in the fuck would do all the real work that actually keeps the world functioning on a day to day basis? ... The people who keep the world functioning on a day to day basis deserve fair treatment and reasonable wages and benefits, and say, they need unions to fight for that since corporations are too greedy and unappreciative to give it of their own free will most of the time.


    Workers are treated fairly and with fair wages. If their current situation doesn't they are free to seek employment elsewhere. They are also free to start their own business using their own capital.
  • DS1119DS1119 Posts: 33,497
    DS1119 wrote:
    Sorry. That's just reality. I don't have unicorns and butterflies flying out of my ass that can make it all better, and there's actually nothing wrong with the way business works. The workers at Hostess that lost their jobs are more than free in this country to start their own pastry company using their own capital, even a loan, and start their own business. Then they can sit behind the big oak desk.


    Yes.

    please... just like that... keep saying stuff like that. Show us the classist, plutocratic and obnoxious bullshit of the Romneys of the world... keep doing that for the next few years... remind the masses why they voted in overwhelming numbers against that bullshit.


    Overwhelming numbers? OK. :lol:

    And yes thank you for your permission, I will continue thinking like this. I would have to think you offering Donald Trump 5 million dollars to shove a dildo up his ass may have been slightly more obnoxious, classist, and plutocratic but that's just me I guess.
  • DS1119 wrote:
    I would have to think you offering Donald Trump 5 million dollars to shove a dildo up his ass may have been slightly more obnoxious, classist, and plutocratic but that's just me I guess.


    Yes, it's just you.

    the rest of us know what "classist" and "plutocratic" mean.
  • DS1119 wrote:
    Workers are treated fairly and with fair wages. If their current situation doesn't they are free to seek employment elsewhere. They are also free to start their own business using their own capital.

    And if YOU don't like how the majority of the American people voted and support the right of busines owners to pay their employees slave wages, treat them unfairly and expect them to work in unsafe conditions, you are free to move to North Korea where I'm sure you'll be much happier.
Sign In or Register to comment.