Reported Post by Liet

Lanzman · Nov 26, 2012

Liet has reported a post.

Reason:

Image spam from Sokar in comments
Click to expand...

Post: Ding Dong!
Forum: The Red Room
Assigned Moderators: N/A

Posted by: Liet
Original Content:

Paladin said: ↑

Man Afraid of his Shoes said: ↑

Correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that this wasn't a case of the union saying "we want more", but a case of Hostess saying "we're gonna give you less than we agreed to". If that is the case, then why is the union at fault?
Click to expand...

Because business circumstances change, and labor has to be flexible when they do.
Click to expand...

Labor, but not capital, management, or creditors is the net effect of the policies you espouse.

In any event, Hostess was dead in the water regardless of labor, and the scale of the concessions demanded was sufficient to make unemployment plus looking for a new job or waiting for the Hostess brand to be taken over by a company that would be properly capitalized and bargain with labor in good faith seem like a really good option.

The only purpose of the offer made to labor by Hostess was to lay the blame of the bankruptcy on the labor unions and thereby make continued looting of the company by management until the inevitable dissolution more feasible, and you're hopelessly naive if you believe otherwise considering that management was caught red-handed looting the company. If you think that management doubling, tripling, and quadrupling their own salaries in the run-up to bankruptcy and then trying to push through millions of dollars of executive bonuses on the eve of dissolution isn't looting then I don't know what to tell you.
Click to expand...

Clyde · Nov 26, 2012

Here's the rep comment -

Sokar disagrees:
Click to expand...

Log in or Sign up

Reported Post by Liet

Lanzman Vast, Cool and Unsympathetic Formerly Important

Clyde Orange

Log in or Sign up

Reported Post by Liet

Lanzman Vast, Cool and Unsympathetic Formerly Important

Clyde Orange

Useful Searches