Those unions watching out for their workers...

[MachZer0]

Protip:
Mach actually understands that a $1/year salary is not a full accounting of their compensation. However, he will not actually admit the fact. He will instead dance around the issue to keep people riled up.

Perhaps you could give us a full accounting of their compensation

 

[[serious]]

Perhaps you could give us a full accounting of their compensation

Secrecy always means you can trust them...

 

[rturner76]

Rayburn said 11 executives received pay hikes that were made by the board of directors in a bid to "stabilize" the management team. Three of those executives, including the general counsel and former CEO Brian Driscoll, have since left the company




After word of the pay hikes surfaced last week, the Teamsters Union said that that if true, "Hostess executives have violated their agreement with the Teamsters that all parties, including management, would share equally in concessions that would help keep this company alive."

 

[rturner76]

The maker of Ding Dongs and Twinkies said the top four top executives under new CEO Greg Rayburn have agreed to reduce their salaries to $1 a year until the company emerges from bankruptcy or Dec. 31, whichever comes first.

 

[kiwimac]

In this case one of the unions screwed up and all the employees paid for it.

Yup, they screwed up by asking to be paid a living wage, something they could pay their rents and feed their families on.

 

[kiwimac]

That one moment resulted in liquidation of a company trying to remain viable. If I give you investment advice for many years and then in one moment give you advice that results in you going broke, then you're broke as a result of that one moment

Heiferdust. The blame for this situation is squarely on the successive management who drove this company down all the while lining their own pockets. So much for the glories of capitalism! See my sig.

 

[MachZer0]

Yup, they screwed up by asking to be paid a living wage, something they could pay their rents and feed their families on.

I have no reason to believe the wage they were offered was not a living wage, which is a vague concept to begin with

 

[MachZer0]

Heiferdust. The blame for this situation is squarely on the successive management who drove this company down all the while lining their own pockets. So much for the glories of capitalism! See my sig.

I would say that workers who won't work while the company is in trouble would bear part of the blame. They bear more than that now since they'll have to seek that vague notion of a living wage elsewhere. Not only that, they forced others into the same consequence.

 

[MachZer0]

Secrecy always means you can trust them...

So you alluded to a greater compensation for the executives but when asked to elaborate, you can't.

 

[[serious]]

So you alluded to a greater compensation for the executives but when asked to elaborate, you can't.

When specific details are absent, the logical course of action is to look at similar situations in which details are available. CEOs routinely get many forms of compensation of which salary is only a small part.

Your claim that a CEO would come in to manage a bankruptcy for free is patently absurd.

 

[Rion]

Yup, they screwed up by asking to be paid a living wage, something they could pay their rents and feed their families on.

Their janitors topped out at something along $29/hour. A "living wage" would have been a bigger cut than the one the company was asking for.

 

[nightflight]

And here comes the Hostess twist: because Tim Collins of Ripplewood, was a prominent Democrat, a position which allowed him to get involved in the first bankruptcy process in the first place, due to his proximity with the Teamsters' long-term heartthrob Dick Gephardt (whose consulting group just happens to also be an equity owner of Hostess). In other words, the traditional republican-cum-PE scapegoating strategy here will be a tough one to pull off since the narrative collapses when considering that it was a Democrat who rescued the firm, only to see it implode in a trainwreck that has resulted in the liquidation of a legendary brand, and 18,500 layoffs.

The Hostess Liquidation: A Curious Cast Of Characters As The Twinkie Tumbles | ZeroHedge

 

[MachZer0]

When specific details are absent, the logical course of action is to look at similar situations in which details are available. CEOs routinely get many forms of compensation of which salary is only a small part.

So you have no information about additional compensation. Glad we cleared that up

Your claim that a CEO would come in to manage a bankruptcy for free is patently absurd.

I don't recall making such a claim.

 

[MachZer0]

The Hostess Liquidation: A Curious Cast Of Characters As The Twinkie Tumbles | ZeroHedge

Oops

 

[Thekla]

The Hostess Liquidation: A Curious Cast Of Characters As The Twinkie Tumbles | ZeroHedge

Thanks for posting this (think it's gotten lost in the thread).

But I don't think the political affiliations negate the train-wreck ...

 

[TeddyReceptus]

Nov 19th:

Hostess Brands, the maker of sweet snacks like Twinkies that filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection last week, will ask a bankruptcy judge today to approve a plan that will allow it to pay $1.75 million in bonuses to 19 of its executives. (SOURCE)

How is this even marginally defensible?

 

[MachZer0]

Nov 19th:

[/color]

How is this even marginally defensible?

That will be up to the bankruptcy judge. If he approves it, maybe you can find a way to ask him to defend his decision

 

[MachZer0]

I find it odd that our liberal friends object to bankruptcy proceedings in this case but gave hearty approval to the subversion of existing bankruptcy law by Obama in the auto company bankruptcies. Odd indeed.

 

[Thekla]

I find it odd that our liberal friends object to bankruptcy proceedings in this case but gave hearty approval to the subversion of existing bankruptcy law by Obama in the auto company bankruptcies. Odd indeed.

Whatever they may think, the fact is that the financial sector is not in the 2008 crisis-mode at this time. Different situation, different environment.

 

[MachZer0]

Whatever they may think, the fact is that the financial sector is not in the 2008 crisis-mode at this time. Different situation, different environment.

So during a crisis it's acceptable to violate the law and cheat people? I never knew that.