Hostess Sends layoff notices to all 18,500 employees

[plwhit]

^^^

[jojajn]

Apparently Hostess is trying to screw its employees.

U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Robert Drain denied Hostess’ motion to reject all International Brotherhood of Teamsters contracts, the Teamsters said in a release. A Hostess spokesman did not immediately respond to an inquiry Tuesday.

“We told our Hostess members all along that we would vigorously oppose the imposition of unjust working conditions since Hostess first filed bankruptcy, and we have done just that,”

Teamsters: Judge refuses to reject Hostess labor contracts - Kansas City Business Journal

[texdav]

I the ned they are likely just nakig the componay actaulky go under for good.the contracts in bandrupsy has a line of bonhoders that are automatic with judge not decding that as its standard, the unions are pretty far down teh list and other investors con=me fist i asset returns.

[Mircea]

Originally Posted by stillkit

No surprise. It's just blatant union busting.

And what's wrong with that?

My union benefit was $0.10 over minimum wage, and the funny thing is that without the union, I would have made $3.25 over minimum wage.

You're still living in a fantasy world. You think the cost-of-living is uniform throughout the entire US; you think labor markets are identical in each and every single MSA (Metropolitan Statistical Area); you think economic conditions are identical in each and every MSA.

None of those things are true.

Wages are set by Supply & Demand, and the Supply & Demand for laborers of any kind varies from MSA to MSA to MSA, as do economic conditions which can also affect costs.

Unions are agents of Socialism who employ Command Economics just like the Soviet Union did. Unions go into an area and they violate the Law of Supply & Demand by setting wages way over market value, or way under market value (as was the case for me and so many others).

The Laws of Economics can never be violated. What is so hard to understand? If god cannot violate the Laws of Economics, who in the right mind would think that Unions can?

When you violate the Laws of Economics, you are penalized. The penalty is not optional. You have no choice in the matter. You will be penalized whether you want to be or not.

If you're so pathetic you need a union to set your wage, then you'd better hope they set it based on market rates, or you'll end up on the short end of the stick...guaranteed.

Supply & Demand...it's the Law

Mircea

Originally Posted by Yooperkat

I think the unions should be crushed.

Originally Posted by Yooperkat

The main objective for any company ( or state government ) is survival.

When regulations are so heavy -- as they are under this administration, survival is tougher by the day.

They don't get it.

Product costs me $5/per unit, the federal, State, county and city tack on bizarre rules and regulations that drive up the cost $3 to $8/unit, I can only sell it for $10/unit and then idiot unions and dumb ass union workers only makes 6 units per hour, but demand that I pay them $20/hour.

Ain't no freaking way. The math just ain't there I don't care how much the unions try to fudge it.

Crushing...

Mircea

Originally Posted by NeilVA

Read the labels. There is no food in our food, just a list of fillers and chemicals.

That's funny, and sad, and true. It's probably sawdust listed as "healthy celulostic natural fiber."

Organically...

Mircea

Originally Posted by slackjaw

SityData lie #16,822. They didn't lay off anyone, they sent notices that they might be and it says right in the article it doesn't mean anyone is getting laid off.

And that is because federal law requires them to do so. That was that damn Jew senator from Ohio. The Democrat. I underwent psycho-therapy and hypnosis (and subliminal messaging) to block out his name.

J C Penny is on deck.

J.C. Penney swings to loss, discontinues dividend - MarketWatch

Metzenbaum. Howard Metzenbaum. And his damn son-in-law Joel Hyatt.

I'll have nightmares for a month now.

Now I lay me down to sleep...

Mircea

[california-jewel]

Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC

No, what's upsetting is that lefties try to make it as if someone who indulges in a Twinkie every now and then is a criminal. Even more disturbing is that your line of reasoning is similar to that of Big Government who is seeking to tell you what you can and can't eat. You should listen to yourself sometime, instead of parroting ideals that erode individualism and liberty.

Yeah ha, your right. And i am someone very healthy and trim and fit. A sweet now and then ain't going to hurt or kill anyone. There is stuff out there way worse then the ingredients in Hostess. InterState Bakery use to own Hostess, don't know if they still do.
They use to be a client of my husband years and years ago. They sell bread, and hamburger and hot dog buns too. They did have sugar free also at one time, don't know if they still do.
Adults should be able to make their own decisions as to what they put in their body, everything within reason, is not going to hurt you.
Anything you abuse, of course it will, but that is true of people who smoke, and do drugs which in my opinion, is much worse then a sweet now and then.