wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member Topic Starter
11 years ago

Hostess is betting on a sweet comeback for Twinkies when they return to shelves next month.

The company that went bankrupt after an acrimonious fight with its unionized workers last year is back up and running under new owners and a leaner structure. It says it plans to have Twinkies and other snack cakes back on shelves starting July 15.

Metropoulos & Co. and Apollo bought Twinkies and other Hostess cakes for $410 million.



link 
DakotaT
11 years ago

[URL="http://www.nbcnews.com/business/sweetest-comeback-twinkies-hit-shelves-july-15-6C10423619"]link[/URL]

Originally Posted by: wpr 



Your link sucks Wayne.
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member Topic Starter
11 years ago

Your link sucks Wayne.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 



fixed
DakotaT
11 years ago
"Some workers were hired back, but are no longer unionized." Let me guess, they get a 70/30 health care plan and a 3% 401K worthless pension subject to sways in the market caused by the greedy thieves on Wall Street. Gotta love America. But hey, we have our Twinkies back. As Texas would put it, life is good.
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member Topic Starter
11 years ago

"Some workers were hired back, but are no longer unionized." Let me guess, they get a 70/30 health care plan and a 3% 401K worthless pension subject to sways in the market caused by the greedy thieves on Wall Street. Gotta love America. But hey, we have our Twinkies back. As Texas would put it, life is good.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 



I suppose it is better for them to sit on their butts at home without a job and draw unemployment?
DakotaT
11 years ago

I suppose it is better for them to sit on their butts at home without a job and draw unemployment?

Originally Posted by: wpr 



No, there should be laws against allowing a company to reorganize with the sole purpose of breaking a union. When the doors opened back up, the labor force should have been fully reinstated.
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member Topic Starter
11 years ago

No, there should be laws against allowing a company to reorganize with the sole purpose of breaking a union. When the doors opened back up, the labor force should have been fully reinstated.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 



If you bothered to read the whole story someone else owns Hostess now. hey did not "break the union" these people bought a name and hired former employees back. That is admirable. The story also said that most of the other junk food makers are not unionized. That means the Hostess workers priced themselves right out of the market. Now that the new employees are not unionized Hostess has a chance to compete in the marketplace. They can't expect to have people pay $5 for a snack just so unions can enforce an artificially higher pay scale.

As for your consistently bashing 401k, stop being such a jerk. (I edited myself.) I don' see you weeping for me or anyone else who is self employed like I am. I have to take money out of my own pocket and set aside for my retirement. But that is ok with you. Why should a lunch bucket guy who may not have even bothered to graduate from high school get a better retirement plan? You want a retirement then do it yourself don't expect someone else to do it for you.
DakotaT
11 years ago

If you bothered to read the whole story someone else owns Hostess now. hey did not "break the union" these people bought a name and hired former employees back. That is admirable. The story also said that most of the other junk food makers are not unionized. That means the Hostess workers priced themselves right out of the market. Now that the new employees are not unionized Hostess has a chance to compete in the marketplace. They can't expect to have people pay $5 for a snack just so unions can enforce an artificially higher pay scale.

As for your consistently bashing 401k, stop being such a jerk. (I edited myself.) I don' see you weeping for me or anyone else who is self employed like I am. I have to take money out of my own pocket and set aside for my retirement. But that is ok with you. Why should a lunch bucket guy who may not have even bothered to graduate from high school get a better retirement plan? You want a retirement then do it yourself don't expect someone else to do it for you.

Originally Posted by: wpr 



Actually, I have read up on this. There was mismanagement - meaning fat boys at the top taking too much, and there was overcompensation paid out based on the good years. I agree that unions price their workers to an unsustainable compensation package, but don't insult my intelligence by insinuating the boys at the top of the food chain weren't taking too much.

I too am self employed in part of my working life, and I am also a union millwright. So please don't judge my perspective on this kind of topic, when I am the only one involved in these conversations that sees and lives both sides of the argument. Everyone else is totally one way or the other and is very selfish with his point of view - which is why these arguments never can be discussed reasonably.


wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member Topic Starter
11 years ago

Actually, I have read up on this. There was mismanagement - meaning fat boys at the top taking too much, and there was overcompensation paid out based on the good years. I agree that unions price their workers to an unsustainable compensation package, but don't insult my intelligence by insinuating the boys at the top of the food chain weren't taking too much.

I too am self employed in part of my working life, and I am also a union millwright. So please don't judge my perspective on this kind of topic, when I am the only one involved in these conversations that sees and lives both sides of the argument. Everyone else is totally one way or the other and is very selfish with his point of view - which is why these arguments never can be discussed reasonably.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 



You can bash the prior management all you want. I don't care. The new owners are not them and your post insinuates they folded the corp only to bust the union then opened the doors once again. That is blatantly wrong. Certainly some companies have done something like that but that is not the case here and you knew that.

Yes I know you have two jobs a union one and a real one. [grin1] but that doesn't mean you are the only one who has worked in a union shop. I have worked for the unions who hire their employees out companies as well. I know you bust your butt to make a life for your family. So do many of us. Don't act holier than anyone else. You are not.

The unions today are just as corrupt as many of the businesses if not more so. They are not there looking out for the little guy. They are only looking out for themselves. I had a customer who was a hard working schmoe. He blacktopped driveways and parking lots. He his son and a couple of guys who he treated like family. What did the union do? They shot at his house at nite. They stole his equipment. They tore up his work. They damaged his trucks. Why? because he didn't pay the union their bride money. They forced him to lay off his employees. his son had to leave and find another job and he had to go work at Home Depot.



texaspackerbacker
11 years ago

"Some workers were hired back, but are no longer unionized." Let me guess, they get a 70/30 health care plan and a 3% 401K worthless pension subject to sways in the market caused by the greedy thieves on Wall Street. Gotta love America. But hey, we have our Twinkies back. As Texas would put it, life is good.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 



Sounds pretty good to me.

Unions have their place (if I was sarcastic, I'd say that place in in the past hahaha). What you don't seem to be able to grasp, Dakota, is this:

Corporations owe their allegiance to ONE group - the stockholders - NOT the employees, NOT the customers, etc. Usually, of course, it is advantageous to keep harmony with the employees and to keep the customers satisfied, but PRIMARY is the bottom line - profit for the stockholders. Most of the time, they do a pretty good job of that, causing people like you to fly off the handle with your anti-rich rants.

Unions owe their allegiance to ONE group - the employees/membership - NOT the employer, NOT the consumers of the products, etc. Unlike corporations, however, unions do NOT do a very good job of representing the interests of their members. They donate damn near 100% to the Democrats, regardless of what side their membership is on, but that is the LESSER problem. The GREATER problem is illustrated beautifully with this Twinkie thing. The union broke the fundamental biological rule of a parasite - which basically, unions are. They KILLED the host - or in this case Hostess - pun intended hahahaha. So often, unions do just that - demand so much that a company has two choices operate themselves into bankruptcy OR just give up and go out of business. THAT ain't doing a good job for the workers. Compromising - keeping things going in terms of jobs and production is what is needed. Unfortunately, it usually takes BREAKING the union before that compromise can occur.

My First and Best thought when reading this thread title, though is: Take that, you fat ugly pig, Michelle Obama and your idiotic nutrition non-sense. The PEOPLE will HAVE their Twinkies!!!!


Expressing the Good Normal Views of Good Normal Americans.
If Anything I Say Smacks of Extremism, Please Tell Me EXACTLY What.
Fan Shout
TheKanataThrilla (5h) : Hope to see everyone in the Chat tonight!!! Go Pack Go!!!
TheKanataThrilla (5h) : Jeanty would be a great pick-up for the Bears. I see Warren mocked to them as well who I think would be a great selection.
Zero2Cool (6h) : GameDay Chat is open. Posting bits an tids in there.
Zero2Cool (6h) : Excellent Source: The Bears have a deal in place to move up to 5 if Jeanty is there.
Zero2Cool (7h) : Probably not until 10pm will be making pick
dfosterf (8h) : But it is still not tonight. Lol
wpr (8h) : Today is finally here.
dfosterf (9h) : I should have put it in quotes
dfosterf (9h) : It is the title of a you tube video.
dfosterf (9h) : I'm not assuming anything
beast (15h) : If they aren't doing it, then why are you assuming they know how to do it?
dfosterf (21h) : Mackelvie
dfosterf (21h) : Michael Macelvie- NFL teams know how to draft- Why don"t they?
dfosterf (21h) : Youtube
Zero2Cool (23-Apr) : Packers were not selected for the 2025 Hall of Fame game.
dfosterf (23-Apr) : PFOW Out of our division would be a good thing imo
Zero2Cool (23-Apr) : Jameson Williams is done at 24 years old? What? He's a WR, not QB. I'm missing something here haha
wpr (23-Apr) : Tomorrow is almost here.
packerfanoutwest (23-Apr) : would you want him if Pack needed a back up qb?
packerfanoutwest (23-Apr) : JW is done......stick a fork in him
Zero2Cool (23-Apr) : You should. He goes to AFC that helps Packers.
packerfanoutwest (23-Apr) : don't care
Zero2Cool (22-Apr) : Lions shopping Jameson Williams?
packerfanoutwest (22-Apr) : Packers General Manager Brian Gutekunst says Green Bay’s roster can win, even without adding anyone in the draft.
Zero2Cool (22-Apr) : It's a poor design. New site has SignalR like our gameday chat
wpr (22-Apr) : Ah today's Shout was very quick to post.
wpr (22-Apr) : now 3
Zero2Cool (22-Apr) : Who? What?
beast (22-Apr) : What is he supposed to say? He doesn't want players currently on the team?
Martha Careful (21-Apr) : meh
Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : Sounds like Walker and Wyatt will be with Packers for beyond 2026
Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : It's so awesome.
Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : new site fan shout post fast
wpr (21-Apr) : Slow posting in Fan shout.
wpr (21-Apr) : Only 4
wpr (21-Apr) : Only 4
Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : If only we had a topic to read about and discuss it. That's something new website must have!!!
dfosterf (21-Apr) : Justice Musqueda over at Acme Packing put up an excellent synopsis of the Packers 1st round options this am
wpr (19-Apr) : 5 days
beast (18-Apr) : 6 days
wpr (17-Apr) : 7 days
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : sounds like Packers don't get good compensation, Jaire staying
dfosterf (16-Apr) : Nobody coming up with a keep, but at x amount
dfosterf (16-Apr) : Trade, cut or keep
dfosterf (16-Apr) : that from Jaire
dfosterf (16-Apr) : My guess is the Packers floated the concept of a reworked contract via his agent and agent got a f'
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Yes, and that is why I think Rob worded it how he did. Rather than say "agent"
dfosterf (16-Apr) : Same laws apply. Agent must present such an offer to Jaire. Cannot accept or reject without presenting it
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : I'm thinking that is why Rob worded it how he did.
dfosterf (16-Apr) : The Packers can certainly still make the offer to the agent
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Recent Topics
3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

8h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

8h / Packers Draft Threads / wpr

22-Apr / Random Babble / Martha Careful

22-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

22-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

17-Apr / Random Babble / wpr

13-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

12-Apr / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Zero2Cool

11-Apr / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Rockmolder

2-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

2-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

1-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

1-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

31-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.