Those unions watching out for their workers...

[variant]

Non sequitur

No?

I wonder what the board members get out of the liquidation of Hostess.

 

[TeddyReceptus]

Who is to say the reason they were failing is not because they were paying higher wages than the market will bear which is often the case where unions are involved.

LOL! In the case of Hostess after they filed for bankruptcy they were planning on giving the CEO a pay raise to $1.5 Million to oversee the transition through bankruptcy. And executives the year before bankruptcy had apparently secured 80% raises.

In early February, Hostess had asked the bankruptcy judge to approve a sweet new employment deal for Driscoll. Its terms guaranteed him a base annual salary of $1.5 million, plus cash incentives and “long-term incentive” compensation of up to $2 million. If Hostess liquidated or Driscoll were fired without cause, he’d still get severance pay of $1.95 million as long as he honored a noncompete agreement.(SOURCE)

How, again, is this something the "market could bear"?

 

[MachZer0]

Um, the "h" is usually lower case in PhD. Just an FYI. (Don't worry, I don't hold it against you not knowing this. There are so few PhD's in America and even fewer are in the Sciences so you are obviously among a large number who know almost nothing about these things.)

But otherwise I find your naivete charming. Sadly uninformed and simplistic.

Yet another non sequitur

 

[MachZer0]

No?

I wonder what the board members get out of the liquidation of Hostess.

The question more to the point is are they liquidating because they are getting theirs or because they have no choice. It appears they have no choice

 

[PreachersWife2004]

Degrees don't always mean something in the "real world".

Before I had my bachelor's degree, I was making $42,000, had good benefits and it was just me and my son.

Not a bad haul.

Now I have my bachelor's degree and I'm working in retail pulling in barely $13/hour. But it's a job and I'm thankful for that.

 

[MachZer0]

LOL! In the case of Hostess after they filed for bankruptcy they were planning on giving the CEO a pay raise to $1.5 Million to oversee the transition through bankruptcy. And executives the year before bankruptcy had apparently secured 80% raises.

How, again, is this something the "market could bear"?

Sounds like chump change as far as CEO's go

 

[MachZer0]

Degrees don't always mean something in the "real world".

Before I had my bachelor's degree, I was making $42,000, had good benefits and it was just me and my son.

Not a bad haul.

Now I have my bachelor's degree and I'm working in retail pulling in barely $13/hour. But it's a job and I'm thankful for that.

The point is that you're paid for the value of your contribution, not for your degree. If you have a PhD (hope everyone's happy ) and you drive a truck, you get a truck driver's salary.

 

[variant]

The question more to the point is are they liquidating because they are getting theirs or because they have no choice. It appears they have no choice

I'm sure.

The entire process looks like a smash and grab job, and they get the bonus of blaming it on the union workers for not wanting to work for 11.50/hr and being happy about having their pensions stolen.

The hedge funds that invested the cash to keep them going after the last time they did this are likely to get the lions share of the booty.

 

[TeddyReceptus]

Degrees don't always mean something in the "real world".

I hear that more often from people who don't have or couldn't cut it to get a doctorate in the physical sciences.

Before I had my bachelor's degree, I was making $42,000, had good benefits and it was just me and my son.

Not a bad haul.

Now I have my bachelor's degree and I'm working in retail pulling in barely $13/hour. But it's a job and I'm thankful for that.

Oh, I agree that degrees don't always equate to better income, especially if one gets a degree in something that isn't particularly useful to a given industry.

Personally I got my degree in geology but because I had spent so much time preparing for CHEMISTRY I could get 2 postdocs in chemistry and end up working as a chemist.

Either way I was setting myself up to work in a relatively stable well paying field. Now, mind you, I didn't choose these areas because of money. I chose them because I sincerely liked them.

One thing that bothers me about America today is that we have so oversold the concept that education is the only way up...but education is not for everyone!

There are always going to be people who are hard workers who couldn't care less about taking the kind of classes I took. And they will outproduce me at the drop of a hat.

But the executives and hiring managers are, themselves, so poorly prepared for their job that they think that if someone doesn't have a degree they aren't worthy of a job. And further more America has systematically shipped the jobs that don't require college degrees off to China!

We have made an atmosphere suitable only for those who want to make their own club.

My job is in jeopardy because industry is now setting up R&D centers in China as well!

So you see, I don't think having a degree is necessary to being a productive member of society.

But when someone comes at me with how "rare" a CEO is and therefore must deserve exhorbitant pay I like to point out that I am even more rare still, yet I don't seem to "deserve" that kind of pay.

I'm fortunate in that I can see the debate from both sides. I have the degree but it doesn't put me in the "magic club". I'm not a business person and in America the only thing that counts is making money.

We are, indeed, ONE NATION UNDER MAMMON.

 

[TeddyReceptus]

The point is that you're paid for the value of your contribution, not for your degree. If you have a PhD (hope everyone's happy ) and you drive a truck, you get a truck driver's salary.

I have a PhD and do a PhD level job. Why is it valued so much less than an MBA job of a CEO? I thought we were talking about "rarity" as a proxy for value.

 

[TeddyReceptus]

Sounds like chump change as far as CEO's go

So because $1.5 million is, in your estimation "chump change" for a CEO the rank and file were out of line to find that to be excessive and offensive? What about the other execs who secured themselves and 80% raise the year before bankruptcy? That chumpchange too? Because 80 is such a small number for executives.

LOL! This is fun! I LOVE watching people justify this kind of excess after it was pointed that the union demands are often "more than the market can bear"!

This is priceless. I've got to get a screenshot of this!

 

[kiwimac]

What was this last/best/final offer? You'd never know by watching the main stream media tell the story. So here you go...
1) 8% hourly pay cut in year 1 with additional cuts totaling 27% over 5 years. Currently, I make $16.12 an hour at TOP rate of pay in the bakery. I would drop to $11.26 in 5 years.
2) They get to keep our $3+ an hour forever.
3) Doubling of weekly insurance premium.
4) Lowering of overall quality of insurance plan.
5) TOTAL withdrawal from ALL pensions. If you don't have it now then you never will.

Would YOU take the deal?

While the CEO walks away with a 300% raise and bonuses, would YOU take the deal?

 

[PreachersWife2004]

I hear that more often from people who don't have or couldn't cut it to get a doctorate in the physical sciences.

Now you sound like some of my sciencesnob friends. That's how they refer to themselves.

I had no desire to get a degree in the physical sciences, although the money probably would've been outstanding, given that I'm a women and all that.

Oh, I agree that degrees don't always equate to better income, especially if one gets a degree in something that isn't particularly useful to a given industry.

There's a funny picture around on Facebook showing a girl with dreds and a Bob Marley hat with a caption about how this women is a feminist and wants equal pay for women and more CEO positions for women, etc...and then the bottom part states: majored in Art History. Or something along those lines...

The guy that I worked for when I was making really good money was a few credits short of a degree...not sure which one. He would occasionally joke about going back to school. He owns his company, he takes good care of his workers and he makes excellent money. In his mind, it would be foolish to spend so much money on a degree that, in the long run for him, means nothing.

Personally I got my degree in geology but because I had spent so much time preparing for CHEMISTRY I could get 2 postdocs in chemistry and end up working as a chemist.

Either way I was setting myself up to work in a relatively stable well paying field. Now, mind you, I didn't choose these areas because of money. I chose them because I sincerely liked them.

I think I tend to view PhDs in the sciences a bit differently than, say, liberal arts.

One thing that bothers me about America today is that we have so oversold the concept that education is the only way up...but education is not for everyone!

There are always going to be people who are hard workers who couldn't care less about taking the kind of classes I took. And they will outproduce me at the drop of a hat.

Times certainly have changed.

But the executives and hiring managers are, themselves, so poorly prepared for their job that they think that if someone doesn't have a degree they aren't worthy of a job. And further more America has systematically shipped the jobs that don't require college degrees off to China!

We have made an atmosphere suitable only for those who want to make their own club.

My job is in jeopardy because industry is now setting up R&D centers in China as well!

So you see, I don't think having a degree is necessary to being a productive member of society.

But when someone comes at me with how "rare" a CEO is and therefore must deserve exhorbitant pay I like to point out that I am even more rare still, yet I don't seem to "deserve" that kind of pay.

Yeah, I'm not sure that it's "rare", but it does take a lot more to RUN a company than it does to work for a company. Anyone in any management capacity should know that.

Off the top of my head, I have no idea what my CEOs make. To be honest, I don't really care. That's just me.

I'm fortunate in that I can see the debate from both sides. I have the degree but it doesn't put me in the "magic club". I'm not a business person and in America the only thing that counts is making money.

We are, indeed, ONE NATION UNDER MAMMON.

There is truth to that. Without money, a business dies.

 

[MachZer0]

I have a PhD and do a PhD level job. Why is it valued so much less than an MBA job of a CEO? I thought we were talking about "rarity" as a proxy for value.

Because doing a PhD level job isn't the same as running the company. Having a PhD doesn't necessarily even qualify you to run the company. As pointed out earlier, there are people with no college education that make far more money than you do working at a PhD level job. The reason is, DEMAND. There are far fewer NBA level shooting guards than there are PhD's, ;so the demand is greater and the salary is higher, regardless of the athlete's education. The CEO makes more money than you because of supply and demand. As noted earlier, you can test the law of supply and demand by applying for the CEO's job, offer your services at a lower rather than the current CEO, note your qualifications as a PhD, then let us know how it works out.

 

[MachZer0]

So because $1.5 million is, in your estimation "chump change" for a CEO the rank and file were out of line to find that to be excessive and offensive? What about the other execs who secured themselves and 80% raise the year before bankruptcy? That chumpchange too? Because 80 is such a small number for executives.

LOL! This is fun! I LOVE watching people justify this kind of excess after it was pointed that the union demands are often "more than the market can bear"!This is priceless. I've got to get a screenshot of this!

I love watching the display of envy by union workers like those at Hostess. How did that work out?

 

[CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN]

Semiblind post: Didn't I read somewhere the dispute was that they would not accept a pay DECREASE? I would have voted NO on that contract as well. That is why we unionize. To collectively bargain for fair wages. The company was mismanaged. The workers did their job.

A lot buisness have been lost. People that need jobs take lower paying jobs, or they lose them. Now these people have no job,(around Christmas time) may have to take a lower paying job anyways. They lost big time eitherway.

 

[TeddyReceptus]

I love watching the display of envy by union workers like those at Hostess. How did that work out?

So you seem to be of the opinion that no amount of greed or excess by the Execs is bad because the union folks would get to keep getting a paycheck.

This is like negotiating with hostage takers.

I honestly find it amazing that you see nothing wrong with Hostess's desire to pay their CEO a higher salary while they go through bankruptcy and you don't seem to think there's a leverage point for the workers in that.

Fascinating!

You are just the kind of person American industry needs! You will apparently do anything you can to keep some money coming in! If you worked for me I could take and take and take and when I had exhausted all the company could give I'd blame you for not giving more!
This is kind of how pimps-and-prostitutes work. That's really nice.

 

[rturner76]

Not only did they jack the workers, they stole their retirement from them and their children and turned around and blamed them for it. Sounds pretty pimpish to me. These anti union posters are just playing politics. They just want to see the unions hurt right or wrong as long as a union member is hurt it will gladden certain posters hearts to see.

 

[MachZer0]

So you seem to be of the opinion that no amount of greed or excess by the Execs is bad because the union folks would get to keep getting a paycheck.

Claiming that someone else's salary id greed or excess suggests envy to me.

This is like negotiating with hostage takers.

Odd comparison

I honestly find it amazing that you see nothing wrong with Hostess's desire to pay their CEO a higher salary while they go through bankruptcy and you don't seem to think there's a leverage point for the workers in that.

Fascinating!

Do you suppose it's easier to manage a company as is, or to guide it through a bankruptcy?

You are just the kind of person American industry needs! You will apparently do anything you can to keep some money coming in! If you worked for me I could take and take and take and when I had exhausted all the company could give I'd blame you for not giving more!
This is kind of how pimps-and-prostitutes work. That's really nice.

Interesting perspective. What it boils down to is that I don't have to work for you. if I do, it's because the compensation I receive is worth my labor.

It's notable however that you haven't tried to get the CEO's job which you would apparently gladly do for a much lower rate of compensation.

 

[MachZer0]

Not only did they jack the workers, they stole their retirement from them and their children and turned around and blamed them for it. Sounds pretty pimpish to me. These anti union posters are just playing politics. They just want to see the unions hurt right or wrong as long as a union member is hurt it will gladden certain posters hearts to see.

It's just that we have a different perspective on the purpose for a business.