Really? Without unions, all workers will be at $8? Valuable employees won't be rewarded......just gloom and doom? Well then, thank heavens a good number of companies have been ruined for everyone's benefit! And little things like......unfunded bloated pensions and legacy commitments........and auto bailouts with UAW being a huge benafactor, all massive burdens to the taxpayer, seem to slip your mind.TSR said:Traveler said:TSR said:Now from the Journaltribune newspaper: The union members striked because of wage and benefit concessions hostess was imposing. John Jordan of the bakers union said something was fishy after they hired a liquidation specialist as CEO of hostess prior to the strike. Of course the judge said the company may pay 1.8 million in bonuses to the top exec.'s if they meet certain guidelines. Really :shock:
Just another viewpoint besides that of Faux news. Anyone interested feel free to read the story at Journaltribune.com
Since the meat of the article didn't sink in, here's another from a site you don't have a cute little name for.
http://seekingalpha.com/instablog/166130-paul-price/1301671-hostess-union-rules-were-harder-to-digest-than-twinkies
Hostess: Union Rules Were Harder To Digest Than Twinkies
Nov 21, 2012 6:05 PM
Union workers have now completed their mission. 18,500 jobs are gone forever.
The national labor bosses stood firm. Labor leaders are proud they stood up to those nasty 'suits' [see Entourage for definition] who refused to run a money-losing business simply to continue paying salaries and benefits.
Hostess posted a $341 million loss in 2011 on revenues of about $2.5 billion. Contributing to those 2011 losses:
$52 million in Workers' Comp Claims.
Dealing with 372 District Collective- Bargaining Contracts.
Administration of 80 seperate Health and Benefit Plans.
Funding and Tending to 40 Discreet Pension Plans.
$31 Million in year-over-year wage and befits increases for 2012 v 2011.
Unaccounted for in the above numbers were the outrageous union-imposed rules that made for a too-high-to-bear cost of sales:
No truck could carry both bread and snacks even when going to the same location.
Drivers were not permitted to load their own trucks.
Bringing products from back rooms to shelves required another set of union employees.
Multi-employer pension obligations made hostess liable for other, previously bankrupted, retirement plan contributions from employees that never worked for Hostess at all.
America has come to this. The only defense against insane union demands is the willingness to walk away and close shop.
With General Motors and Chrysler we found that even that remedy would not work.
What I am waiting for is to see some union actually pull together and buy a ruined company, and then run it with the same rules and obligations that they had forced upon it. If their business model is so damn good, then put their money where their mouth is. Of course it isn't posssible, because their parasitic demands are a recipe for destruction. Any of us running our own ranch, or any business for that matter, knows that we couldn't survive, much less thrive, under such weight.
In many instances what you would like to see doesn't have to happen because the "threat of unionization" forces some companies to pay a decent wage with decent benefits unlike for example, Walmart. Or would you like all workers to have to work for $8/hr. many partime and then have to be subsidized by the taxpayers because their pay is so low they qualify for gov't help??