• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Tyson Breaks out The Axes

Help Support Ranchers.net:

Mike

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
28,480
Reaction score
2
Location
Montgomery, Al
Tyson to Implement Approximately $200 Million in Cost Reductions; Plan exceeds $110 million goal; some positions to be eliminated

Tyson Foods, Inc.
7/13/2006 9:53:50 AM


July 13, 2006 / Springdale, Ark. / Tyson Foods, Inc. (NYSE: TSN) will implement approximately $200 million in cost reductions as part of a strategy to return to profitability. The reductions significantly exceed the $110 million goal set by new CEO Richard L. Bond, and include the elimination of some positions.

"We've taken an aggressive look at all aspects of our business and also reviewed suggestions from our Team Members on ways we can more effectively manage our business," said Bond. "The result is a plan expected to generate significant savings for the company, principally in fiscal 2007."

Savings will be generated from reductions in such things as staffing, recruiting, relocation, consulting fees, sales related expenses and supplies, as well as travel. Virtually all of the savings measures should be in place by the end of the calendar year.

"This has been a difficult process, especially since it involves the displacement of some of our Team Members," said Bond. "However, we would not be doing this unless we believed it was absolutely necessary."

Tyson, which employs 114,000 people worldwide, currently plans to eliminate approximately 420 positions primarily held by Tyson management and management support Team Members. In addition, another 430 jobs that are currently open will not be filled and will be eliminated. All affected Team Members will be offered severance payments and outplacement assistance. They will also be given an opportunity to apply for other jobs in the company.

Severance payments and other costs related to this initiative are expected to result in a charge to Tyson's fourth quarter earnings in the range of $10 million to $15 million or $0.02 to $0.03 per share.

The process of notifying Team Members whose positions have currently been identified begins today and should near completion by Friday, July 14. Most of the position reductions will take effect by the end of the current fiscal year, which is September 30.

Jobs being eliminated include approximately 140 positions currently held by Tyson Team Members in northwest Arkansas and 90 in Dakota Dunes, South Dakota and Dakota City, Nebraska. The remaining positions are at various locations throughout the company. The company is also eliminating the services of 40 outside consultants. Hourly plant production jobs are not affected by this initiative.

Some steps have already been taken to provide the company with some immediate savings. Tyson's senior management team recently decided to delay annual merit increases for qualified management and management support Team Members from July 2006 to January 2007. The company has also temporarily suspended the company match on the Stock Purchase Plan for salaried management Team Members for the remainder of 2006.

"We realize we can't save our way back to profitability," Bond said. "That's why in addition to improved cost management, our team will spend more time on activities that make money and provide top line growth." He noted the company's existing long-term strategies provide the company with a focused long-term perspective for the future. They include creating more value-added products, improving operational efficiencies and expanding its international business.
 
So, they're expanding into foreign markets while 'losing team members' at home?

I wonder how long its going to be before they close up all the small packing plants they've purchased, while expanding larger plants? I think they're shooting for the Inland Grain Terminal style of processing where the producers furthest from the terminals end up losing money to shipping fees.

Rod
 
DiamondSCattleCo said:
So, they're expanding into foreign markets while 'losing team members' at home?

I wonder how long its going to be before they close up all the small packing plants they've purchased, while expanding larger plants? I think they're shooting for the Inland Grain Terminal style of processing where the producers furthest from the terminals end up losing money to shipping fees.

Rod

This is exactly what happened to the Roman empire before its collapse.

The movie the Gladiator had the esssence of this historical event in it if you would look at it closely and read a little history.
 
Econ101 said:
This is exactly what happened to the Roman empire before its collapse.

I don't know much about the Romans, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see what consolidation is doing to the economy of small towns. Everytime a small packing plant closes, or an elevator shuts down, a certain number of people are then out of work. Since there are no jobs available, they move, and eventually you lose services, since there are fewer people to service.

I had a University prof who once said that it was rediculous to waste money saving small towns. While I had a great deal of respect for the man, I wonder if he realized just how much our economy is carried on the backs of those small towns?

Rod
 
DiamondSCattleCo said:
Econ101 said:
This is exactly what happened to the Roman empire before its collapse.

I don't know much about the Romans, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see what consolidation is doing to the economy of small towns. Everytime a small packing plant closes, or an elevator shuts down, a certain number of people are then out of work. Since there are no jobs available, they move, and eventually you lose services, since there are fewer people to service.

I had a University prof who once said that it was rediculous to waste money saving small towns. While I had a great deal of respect for the man, I wonder if he realized just how much our economy is carried on the backs of those small towns?

Rod

I agree with your professor. Money shouldn't be wasted on saving small towns. The money being stolen from them with poor economic policies and poor distribution of wealth created by those in power should stop. When it does, small towns will not be the losers.

Agriculture has cascading effects on the fabric of communities. The more money taken out by cheap food policies, the more we lose them.

The roman empire lost its army base of the countryside by the "cheap" goods brought from foreign lands. They then lost the empire.
 
DiamondSCattleCo said:
So, they're expanding into foreign markets while 'losing team members' at home?

I wonder how long its going to be before they close up all the small packing plants they've purchased, while expanding larger plants? I think they're shooting for the Inland Grain Terminal style of processing where the producers furthest from the terminals end up losing money to shipping fees.

Rod

Where did he say they were closing any plants?
 
agman said:
DiamondSCattleCo said:
So, they're expanding into foreign markets while 'losing team members' at home?

I wonder how long its going to be before they close up all the small packing plants they've purchased, while expanding larger plants? I think they're shooting for the Inland Grain Terminal style of processing where the producers furthest from the terminals end up losing money to shipping fees.

Rod

Where did he say they were closing any plants?

He said he was wondering when, agman. Lay off the fiz while reading.
 
agman said:
Where did he say they were closing any plants?

Didn't they just shut down 2 plants in Nebraska? Now this release states they'll be 'losing team members', while they've posted their expansion into Australia. I think it sucks that they're allowed to buy out small plants, shut them down, fire local workers, then expand into foreign markets.

Don't you?

And Econ, point taken about spending money to save small towns. I should have been clearer though: Until our governments adopt fiscal policies that allow agriculture to once again thrive, I don't believe the money spent on small towns is a waste. They need to be there, and for every buck spent on keeping a small town alive, I believe there are many more dollars earned further down the line. Otherwise, everyone is going to end up being on welfare in a city somewhere.

Rod
 
DiamondSCattleCo said:
agman said:
Where did he say they were closing any plants?

Didn't they just shut down 2 plants in Nebraska? Now this release states they'll be 'losing team members', while they've posted their expansion into Australia. I think it sucks that they're allowed to buy out small plants, shut them down, fire local workers, then expand into foreign markets.

Don't you?

And Econ, point taken about spending money to save small towns. I should have been clearer though: Until our governments adopt fiscal policies that allow agriculture to once again thrive, I don't believe the money spent on small towns is a waste. They need to be there, and for every buck spent on keeping a small town alive, I believe there are many more dollars earned further down the line. Otherwise, everyone is going to end up being on welfare in a city somewhere.

Rod

I knew you were right Rod, I just wanted it phrased a better way. A lot of the problem (or future problems) is how the problem is framed.
 
Didn't they just shut down 2 plants in Nebraska? Now this release states they'll be 'losing team members', while they've posted their expansion into Australia. I think it sucks that they're allowed to buy out small plants, shut them down, fire local workers, then expand into foreign markets

Only a fool would not of seen Cargill and Tyson expanding into australia.

That's where the value is to be added. Record amounts into Japan and the US.

You go where the raw product is, and you export to the consuming nations. "Is that why they are expanding in Canada?"

You fools at RCALF, don't see the big picture at all do you?

Do you think the large corporations are going to close down, cause some small group of producers, based in Montana, with spokespersons on "Ranchers", are saying they "control the market".

You are losing your export capability in the US, all the while requiring it as a prerequsite to trade!

You are getting what you wished for, good luck with that!

Why would they be losing "team members", lack of numbers in the team would be my first guess. They are shutting down small plants in the US, due to availabilty of cattle to kill. Lack of raw resources, leads to less competition. But that's what RCALF wants, welcome to the real world.
 
Murgen said:
Didn't they just shut down 2 plants in Nebraska? Now this release states they'll be 'losing team members', while they've posted their expansion into Australia. I think it sucks that they're allowed to buy out small plants, shut them down, fire local workers, then expand into foreign markets

Only a fool would not of seen Cargill and Tyson expanding into australia.

That's where the value is to be added. Record amounts into Japan and the US.

You go where the raw product is, and you export to the consuming nations. "Is that why they are expanding in Canada?"

You fools at RCALF, don't see the big picture at all do you?

Do you think the large corporations are going to close down, cause some small group of producers, based in Montana, with spokespersons on "Ranchers", are saying they "control the market".

You are losing your export capability in the US, all the while requiring it as a prerequsite to trade!

You are getting what you wished for, good luck with that!

Why would they be losing "team members", lack of numbers in the team would be my first guess. They are shutting down small plants in the US, due to availabilty of cattle to kill. Lack of raw resources, leads to less competition. But that's what RCALF wants, welcome to the real world.

As usual you've nailed it Murgen!!!!!!Just watch the screams of denial from the shortsighted "blamers"![/b]
 
Murgen said:
1) Only a fool would not of seen Cargill and Tyson expanding into australia.

2) That's where the value is to be added. Record amounts into Japan and the US.

3) You go where the raw product is, and you export to the consuming nations. "Is that why they are expanding in Canada?"

4) You fools at RCALF, don't see the big picture at all do you?

5) Why would they be losing "team members", lack of numbers in the team would be my first guess.

1) I don't think anyone is surprised by Cargill and Tyson expanding into Australia, but it certainly doesn't help our cattle markets to have the two largest packers going elsewhere. They ship into Japan from Australia, and lose any incentive to pressure the US or Canadian governments to give them the tools to ship beef into Japan. Haven't you wondered why we're not shipping more beef into Japan?

2) Exactly. And as a Canadian cattle producer, I want to see my beef heading to Japan. As long as our age verified beef heads south and small independents aren't allowed access to BSE tests, its not going to head south.

3) We have lots of raw product here to ship into Japan. And the Japanese market is more lucrative.

4) I must have missed something. I'm not a member of RCalf, nor am I an admirer. All I've ever said is that I wish we had a producer group as rabid as RCalf protecting Canadian concerns.

5) Re-read the press release Murgen. Tyson said they were 'losing team members', ie: firing local workers. From their own website, they're expanding into foreign markets. So they're scaling back within North America (hopefully no Canuck jobs are lost) and hiring foreigners to work in foreign packing plants to service export markets that we need at home. Wouldn't you like to see our reliance on the US market end? Any company with only one customer is on shaky ground, and thats where we are right now. Despite the CCAs vehemence about expanding our markets, we haven't seen much real tonnage going anywhere but into the US. This is bad news, especially when they find the 11th case of BSE, and the USDA shuts the border again.

Rod
 
I am just a dumb, really an uneducated farmer and rancher. I know very little about economics, but I believe the US got where it is today because of the resources we have. Then we had the people who were willing to work and learn how to add value to these resources.

Today we want to take farmland out of production, drill no oil wells, develop no mines, or harvest our forests. We want to build big cities but return the land to what is was 300 years ago so city folks can go there and play pretend.

No, the sky is not falling, we are not on the rocks. Still we need to look back and see where we came from, and look ahead to see what we are aiming for.
 
Rod,

Agman is correct on the US beef cartel's reasons for expanding into foreign markets. They are going to move into Aust. and NZ and take over their processing just as they did in Canada. They will then supply the regional markets...Japan and Asia. Same for Brazil and Arg. to supply S.A. and the European markets. These four countries have the most freedom to export beef through out the world. This is their solution to BSE and COOL...to side step the problem. The USA and Canadian industry will be reduced to serve N.A. only and export only when it is advantages.

And before some Canadians ask for the border to be closed, they should look at where their export markets are...98% to USA and Mexico(IIRC from Canfax)! :eek: :shock: :wink:

Check these links...

http://www.fas.usda.gov/DLP/circular/2005/05-04LP/beefoverview.html

http://www.fas.usda.gov/dlp/circular/2006/06-03LP/beef_sum.pdf
 
Clarence said:
I am just a dumb, really an uneducated farmer and rancher. I know very little about economics, but I believe the US got where it is today because of the resources we have. Then we had the people who were willing to work and learn how to add value to these resources.

Today we want to take farmland out of production, drill no oil wells, develop no mines, or harvest our forests. We want to build big cities but return the land to what is was 300 years ago so city folks can go there and play pretend.

No, the sky is not falling, we are not on the rocks. Still we need to look back and see where we came from, and look ahead to see what we are aiming for.

Clarence, again you show there is no direct link between education and wisdom. Well Said!!!

The results of 50 years of Democratic party rule is that we have run our manufacturing base out of the country with government regulations, taxes, and high labor cost. We are becoming like the Roman Empire...too dependent on foreign countries for far too many things. The Republicans are dropping the ball by pushing free trade which only perpetuates the exodus of our manufacturing base. Government policy should push for USA self reliance...then we won't be relying on China for goods and the middle east for oil! :mad:
 
Clarence said:
I am just a dumb, really an uneducated farmer and rancher. I know very little about economics, but I believe the US got where it is today because of the resources we have. Then we had the people who were willing to work and learn how to add value to these resources.

Today we want to take farmland out of production, drill no oil wells, develop no mines, or harvest our forests. We want to build big cities but return the land to what is was 300 years ago so city folks can go there and play pretend.

No, the sky is not falling, we are not on the rocks. Still we need to look back and see where we came from, and look ahead to see what we are aiming for.


Clarence, I read your post first on this thread, and not knowing what else has been said, I must say you posted excellent thoughts on the problems of our country.

MRJ
 
RobertMac said:
Murgen said:
then we won't be relying on China for goods and the middle east for oil!

Canada is your number one supplier of oil. Not the middle east.

Murgen, get a grip...I didn't say the middle east was number one! :roll:

Murgen I personally wish we weren't number one as look what they have done in the Middle east for OIL. Just what would they do to us if we as their number one supplier decided to use oil and power to regain some trading power over them? :shock:
 
Tam said:
RobertMac said:
Murgen said:
Canada is your number one supplier of oil. Not the middle east.

Murgen, get a grip...I didn't say the middle east was number one! :roll:

Murgen I personally wish we weren't number one as look what they have done in the Middle east for OIL. Just what would they do to us if we as their number one supplier decided to use oil and power to regain some trading power over them? :shock:

Look at it this way Tam. You've GOT to be Number 1 in something!

Heck ya'll can't even win a lil Hockey Tournament and it's your national pastime! :lol: :lol:
 

Latest posts

Top