Get your twinkies & ding dongs while you can!

[Twizzler]

I won't miss the Twinkies- never liked them. It's the orange cupcakes I'm upset about!!!

[lulu]

Alex Shibutani weighs in on twitter:

Alex cracks me up.

[sk8er1964]

According to some articles I have read (and it is mentioned in the article with the recipe), the top brass got the company up to its ears in debt ... and then asked the workers to take another cut in pay and benefits. But, the top brass finds it much easier to blame the unions rather than taking personal responsibility for their own decisions.

The Teamsters urged the bakers to take the deal, based on their review of the records. The Teamsters aren't known for being pro-management, so I can only assume that they knew the truth of what was going on. it's the bakers who were stupid -- but hey! They stood their ground and now nobody there has jobs. Way to go!

[cruisin]

Just like me and you those workers have bought homes and cars based on their income. Some are sending their kids through college. Some are supporting elderly parents. I haven't heard any figures as to how much of a cut in pay and benefits they were asked to take, only that it was "deep". Kind of like being asked to pay more taxes to keep the US afloat, isn't it? Upsets retirement plans and everyday life when you've trusted in a contract.

And yet, many think paying more taxes is a good thing. And if taxes go up, we will have no choice but to pay it. So, we will have less, not nothing.

[PeterG]

Well, I hope they enjoy their unemployment. I expect that they will also lose a parts or all of their pensions, depending on how things are set up there, and they will lose their health care too. Sometimes the stupidity of unions amazes me.

From wikipedia:

In March 2012, Brian Driscoll resigned from his position as CEO.[20] Gregory Rayburn, who had been hired and named Chief Restructuring Officer only nine days earlier, assumed the leadership position. Fortune reported that unions within the organization had been unhappy with Driscoll's proposed compensation package of $1.5 million, plus cash incentives and a $1.95 million "long term compensation" package. Additionally, the court had discovered that Hostess executives had received raises of up to 80% the year prior. In an effort to restore relations, Rayburn cut the salaries of the four top Hostess executives to $1, to be restored on January 1 the following year.[21]

I hope that their pensions were funded appropriately and legally so that they do not lose them. I thought that was the law. I haven't heard all of the information so I don't know if there is any corporate greed going on or how well the workers were paid in relation to their skills. Hopefully they can all get something worked out for now and go from there.

When is there NOT corporate greed?

This. Another reason I am thankful not to work for a unionized company - that's why I've remained employed in spite of the recession. Our hours may have been cut for 40 weeks, but at least no one got laid off, and we got unemployment (thanks NYS DOL!) for the hours we didn't work.

You took money from the government for hours that you did not work?

I think it is more about the short sightedness of those on strike hoping the company goes under. That might feel good in a revenge sort of way. But, they lose their jobs. Is it better to have less or nothing?

Also from wikipedia:

During the 2004–2009 bankruptcy period, Interstate closed nine of its 54 bakeries and more than 300 outlet stores. Interstate's work force declined from 32,000 to 22,000 employees.

The employees saw their co-workers losing their jobs while the corporate heads were not only failing at their jobs, but taking pay increases.

According to some articles I have read (and it is mentioned in the article with the recipe), the top brass got the company up to its ears in debt ... and then asked the workers to take another cut in pay and benefits. But, the top brass finds it much easier to blame the unions rather than taking personal responsibility for their own decisions.

I read that the workers took a pay cut around 2006 and were asked to take another pay cut recently while...

Gregory Rayburn, Hostess CEO, Allegedly Got 300 Percent Raise As Company Approached Bankruptcy

In a press release, the BCTGM claimed Hostess tripled the pay of CEO Gregory Rayburn up to $2,550,000 as the company prepared to file for bankruptcy.

[milanessa]

And yet, many think paying more taxes is a good thing. And if taxes go up, we will have no choice but to pay it. So, we will have less, not nothing.

Of course you have a choice, you just have to pay the consequences. And they have chosen that route.

[Karina1974]

You took money from the government for hours that you did not work?

Hey, that was my employer's decision to go with that program, not mine. I would much rather be working 40 hours a week than 32. FYI - we were allowed to be on this program for 53 weeks, but the POB decided to stop after 40 weeks, so that was a managerial decision that paid off for the company. And then a year ago every employee received a bonus check to make up for the fact that we hadn't gotten a COLA increase since 2008 (I got an increase this past March). We made it through with no layoffs - only two employees left, but that was their own choosing, & I took over for one of them, so I was bumped back to 40/week before anyone else was; I'm a firm believer in cross-training and taking on multiple responsibilities - it shows a person to be more of an asset to a company than those who say "it's not MY job!" so I was glad to do it.

That is nuts about the CEO getting an increase. One thing that stands out in my acenario is that fact that the owner of the company where I work stopped receiving a paycheck during that whole downturn (yep - he gets a 40/week tally and a paystub like everyone else). He's very consistant in putting his workers first (like giving us TWO 4-day weekends for Christmas and New Year's with Holiday Pay as opposed to making us use our Vacation/Personal Time ).

[Japanfan]

The Teamsters urged the bakers to take the deal, based on their review of the records. The Teamsters aren't known for being pro-management, so I can only assume that they knew the truth of what was going on. it's the bakers who were stupid -- but hey! They stood their ground and now nobody there has jobs. Way to go!

But should people just accept a pay cut, when they have already had a pay cut, and are probably having a lot of trouble making ends meet? Earning a fair wage was one of the major goals of unions and it seems reasonable to me. Do you want to live in a world where people are working for what amounts to slave wages? Especially if you are one of them? And companies are profiting off your backs while you count your pennies?

Sure, you can say that any wage is better than no wage and it's true to a point. But the minimum is barely holding up in many places - people need to earn a living wage.

[Garden Kitty]

From wikipedia:

I read that the workers took a pay cut around 2006 and were asked to take another pay cut recently while...

Gregory Rayburn, Hostess CEO, Allegedly Got 300 Percent Raise As Company Approached Bankruptcy

Rayburn was hired in March of this year as a restructuring expert to help the company through bankruptcy, and shortly after the bankruptcy he was promoted to CEO presumably with a corresponding raise. He didn't cause the financial problems at the company, but has significant restructuring experience maximizing value whether through a reorg if possible or a liquidation. His contract as CEO was approved by the bankruptcy court and interested parties had a chance to review and object as part of the court process.

The original article has been updated with a correction:

CORRECTION: An earlier version of as well as an earlier headline of this post incorrectly stated that Greg Rayburn received a 300 percent raise as CEO of Hostess as the company approached bankruptcy. Rayburn wasn't CEO of Hostess until after the company filed for bankruptcy. The post also incorrectly stated that he was paid a salary of up to $2,550,000 per year. His salary when he joined the company was $100,000 per month, according to a company spokesman.

[Susan1]

Our news reported that so many people stocked up when the story came out that they can't find any.

And they just came out with chocolate filled Twinkies not long ago! I like some Little Debbie things, but they don't make the strawberry cupcakes. I don't even like sugary stuff that much, but half of a chocolate filled Twinkie or the cupcake without the icing hits the "desert" spot. Little Debbie has always been cheaper, but about a month ago, Kroger had Hostess on sale 2 boxes for $5. I should have stocked up then!!!

[Garden Kitty]

I won't miss the Twinkies- never liked them. It's the orange cupcakes I'm upset about!!!

Uggggghhhh, I hadn't thought of them!

[sk8pics]

I love those orange cupcakes, too. Sigh.

[GarrAarghHrumph]

Just like me and you those workers have bought homes and cars based on their income. Some are sending their kids through college. Some are supporting elderly parents. I haven't heard any figures as to how much of a cut in pay and benefits they were asked to take, only that it was "deep". Kind of like being asked to pay more taxes to keep the US afloat, isn't it? Upsets retirement plans and everyday life when you've trusted in a contract.

At the facility up here near me, employees took a 20% pay cut in their last contract. I don't know if benefits and etc. were affected as well at that time.

The Teamsters urged the bakers to take the deal, based on their review of the records. The Teamsters aren't known for being pro-management, so I can only assume that they knew the truth of what was going on. it's the bakers who were stupid -- but hey! They stood their ground and now nobody there has jobs. Way to go!

That's really the thing that the workers up here are talking about - the majority of the workers, who were Teamsters, had already accepted the new deal. The bakers union held out, and brought the company down.

The workers seem torn over what's happened - some are talking about the reality of trying to find a new job up here, where jobs of that type and salary/benefit structure aren't plentiful; they don't seem angry at the baker's union - more numb, with some anger at management. Others are saying that they'd already given so much in the last negotiation (the 20% cut negotiation), when they had been told then they had to take those severe cuts to save the company. So they took that deal, and yet the company's situation did not improve, so they felt they couldn't take the cuts again - that doing so would be just as useless as the last round of cuts; that they were being used and manipulated.

[Really]

Maybe this is why some of unionized workers were skeptical?

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.

[PeterG]

That's really the thing that the workers up here are talking about - the majority of the workers, who were Teamsters, had already accepted the new deal. The bakers union held out, and brought the company down.

The workers took a pay cut and then were asked to take another pay cut. Meanwhile, the executives were getting raises, with salaries in the seven figures range. How can you say that workers brought the company down??

[GarrAarghHrumph]

The workers took a pay cut and then were asked to take another pay cut. Meanwhile, the executives were getting raises, with salaries in the seven figures range. How can you say that workers brought the company down??

In my post, I was reporting what local employees of this company were saying, not what I think.

[Simone411]

One of my friends posted on FB the other day and said that her DH was more than likely going to lose his job. He had been working for Hostess for over 20 years. They had investments in the company and feared they would probably lose it all.

[PeterG]

One of my friends posted on FB the other day and said that her DH was more than likely going to lose his job. He had been working for Hostess for over 20 years. They had investments in the company and feared they would probably lose it all.

What job did he hold? My guess is that if he's one of the executives, he does not need to worry about losing a penny of his investments.

[lurvylurker]

Ahh, no worries up here in Canada: The company that owns the Hostess brand here is fine and will continue to produce all the goodies for us Canucks. Now Twinkies will join Red Rose tea and Coffee Crisp bars in being "only in Canada eh?".

[susan6]

Ahh, no worries up here in Canada: The company that owns the Hostess brand here is fine and will continue to produce all the goodies for us Canucks. Now Twinkies will join Red Rose tea and Coffee Crisp bars in being "only in Canada eh?".

I was just in World Market yesterday, going through the awesome foreign candy and cookies aisles and it hit me.....Twinkies might show up here in the next few years, as a Canadian import!

http://www.worldmarket.com/category/...l-favorites.do