Comment Re:GO UNIONS! (Score 1) 674
I wonder what these idiots were thinking.
They were thinking they would rather work with a new company who has a product consumers want to buy instead of going down with a sinking ship that would bleed them dry on the way down.
If hostess can't properly market and sell products then they should go bankrupt.
I've seen this happen numerous times: a company starts doing poorly, they ask their employees to take cuts. The employees take cuts. The company keeps doing worse, the employees even sometimes start working for free "don't worry we'll turn this around soon." A few months later the company declares bankruptcy and everybody gets fired anyway and the company refuses back pay.
Hostess could have sold to another company which wanted to buy them but they said no. As the article mentions, Pringles was doing poorly, it sold off and now it's incredibly successful because it got new management and marketing.
I haven't eaten a hostess product in years. When I think hostess I think truck stop 10 year old Styrofoam. I can't remember the last time I saw someone eat a Hostess product. Cutting wages isn't going to help. The sooner its property and assets are sold off to someone who can either reinvigorate the brand or put its kitchens to better use the better imo.
The Baker's union was under the impression that there's a White Knight buyer on the horizon (Bimbo). Bimbo could've just waited for liquidation and buy the brand and formula and NONE of the union contract and pension obligation. Which is what's it's shaping up to be. I wonder if the union leadership was paid by Bimbo to deliberately kill the company to facilitate this?
