Skip to comments.Union Sticks It to Hostess and Leaves Workers Jobless
Posted on 11/16/2012 8:39:19 PM PST by SquarePants
You may be right about that. This Hostess story probably came closer to violence than most people realize. In the last days before the company decided to liquidate, they ended up with a situation where the Teamsters union was authorized by their own leadership to cross the picket line of the bakers union.
I predict that's going to be the ultimate demise of labor unions in this country ... when one is pitted against another as employment opportunities for low-skill labor shrink considerably.
Looks like most of those workers are hispanics. Now the illegals will be unemployed as well. I think soon unemployment will reach 25% across the country and then things will start getting nasty.
My grandfather had to join a union at the last place he worked - after his own business had been squeezed out by a company (from Chicago) who used mob tactics - and he had similar thoughts. He despised the absentee company men (from Chicago) that drove out occasionally to check on the peons, but he reserved the majority of his scorn for the union bosses (from Chicago) that drove out occasionally to check on the peons.
When I went back to school, I got to help choose my replacement before leaving the small company I worked for. One idiot had the gall to include "Union Organizer" on his resume. We called him just to see if he would come in, but he was a no-show for his appointment.
Let them eat Twinkies.
It’s likely a formality required by bankruptcy proceedings.
No judge is going to tell them not to stop working....
And, at the new company, they will be at the bottom of the seniority list.
Looking for contacts at Hostess.
Deal in distressed type merchandise.
No. We don’t deal with any tangible products. Just data. “Scan Based Trading” is our biggest product. We have an online app and I work Support.
I talked with a few at Hostess a lot.
Stating that the company doesn't have the resources to weather an extended strike, Hostess CEO Gregory Rayburn announced today that everyone's losing their jobs, and the company's assets will be sold. Big win for the union, I guess, but it's a huge loss for the 18,000 workers. Correction. Ex-workers. The most mystifying thing about is that most likely Twinkies and Ding-Dongs and their related products will survive. The product brands will be sold, and we probably won't have to suffer any type of interruption in our Twinkie supply, thank God.The union bosses will still get their paychecks, and go on to bigger and better unions to destroy more jobs. And of course, this is also a stealthy Obamacare story.
This particular union’s bigwigs have now ticked off the Teamsters. Some union on union violence coming? For some reason I couldn’t care less if it does...
Soon to be made in China with melamine added as a flavor enhancer!
Or... government twinks.
This blather totally ignores the insane burden fedgov regulations but on state economies.
Ooops, prev comment posted in wrong thread...
It’s what unions do best.
I could have bought and sold a virtual Twinkie. Too late now.
Googled it. Hey, and I’d not heard of that before.
Scan based trading means that Hostess owned that Twinkie till somebody bought it at the cash register, by scanning as is the modern mode. And here I was thinking that Wal-Mart had bought it wholesale.
The feds tried that with the Mustang Ranch. They couldn’t successfully sell sex and booze. How incompetent does that tell you they are?
Walmart may have - as Hostess doing SBT thru us with WM. Other retailers, though...several others.
I meant “Hostess wasn’t doing SBT thru us with WM”.
Well no, would that not be two different things? If Wal Mart bought the Twinkies outright that were delivered to its warehouse, that’s not scan based trading any more, if Wikipedia’s article on it is correct. Scan based trading happened only when the Twinkies remained in Hostess’ legal possession until a retail customer rang it up at a register and paid.
oh. that’s what i thought.
Which would have given Wal-Mart more freedom to do what it wanted with the Twinkies. Instead of being contracted to do a consignment sale on Hostess’ terms, it owned the Twinkies and could mark them down to clearance shelves near end of code, give them away in promos, whatever.
Walmart is such a big buyer that it already can do pretty much whatever it wants with it’s vendors. Big buyers with clout have onerous rules, and the infraction of said rules causes chargebacks (fines against the cost of the merchandise). So they not only strike a favorable deal based on volume, but can incrementally lower the price all sorts of ways.
yeah, i’d just want to sell them the stuff outright, and let walmart worry about it from there
scan based trading is only going to work in particular situations. It benefits the vendor only so much as it gives an inside track on sales and inventory levels, and likely might get you in a store that you might otherwise not (since the retailer is not making any investment in inventory) but that is a double edged sword since it isn’t sold until...sold. From a manufacturers or distributors perspective that would be rather tenuous IMHO. It’s beneficial to a retailer if they essentially are not having to invest in inventory if there isn’t a buy-back policy (unsold items returned to vendor). Some retailers want more control, for instance larger chains have their own distribution centers. Some suppliers directly supply stores rather than the DC’s though (fresh food for instance). It depends on the product. They are also likely to get a better price buying up front and assuming some of the risk. I can see where there would be some advantages for both sides.
That is a really nice story, Eva.
Takes me back to simpler (and I think better) times, when families did what they could and got by as well as possible and viewed something like a “boughten” shortcake as a wonderful treat and rarity.
(p.s. With apologies to the perfectly fine Twinkies among us, of course!)
Also, the recipe for these things didn’t read like the parts list on Junior’s chemistry set.
You gotta point there.
On the other hand I live near a university town and everybody there avoids beef, sugar, nuts, gluten, fructose, lactose, fractose and craptose...
And somehow they’re still always sick and tired and whinin’ about it.
Oh for the good old days lol...
Our suppliers give retailers promotional costs, on occasion, too. Most of the advantages of SBT are on the retailers’ side. They don’t have to stock perishable items and split the shrink cost with their suppliers. It frees up retailer resources, too. They don’t have to keep inventory or manage orders and deliveries.
I have a feeling the retailers Hostess is doing SBT with will be selling thru the product and still paying them per sale.
And Bimbo, who just might take over these sugary snack names, is one of my biggest SBT customers (along with some others mentioned here).
They sound like a logical choice. The product is at their level. I understand Bimbo has its own line of Hispanic themed sweet snacks. They’d probably sell on both sides of the border. Twinquis here we come.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.