Fans of Hostess Twinkies, Ho Hos and Ding Dongs are going to have to find new fixes before much longer. The Texas-based company has announced it plans to call it quits. Tuesday is expected to be the last day.
The move comes on the heels of a national worker strike and may impact an estimated 18,500 jobs across America. The company filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection earlier this year.
“Hostess Brands is unprofitable under its current cost structure, much of which is determined by union wages and pension costs,” a company press release stated, according to the Huffington Post.
On its website, Hostess said, "We are sorry to announce that Hostess Brands, Inc. has been forced by a Bakers Union strike to shut down all operations and sell all company assets."
Frank Hurt, president of the Bakers Union, however, blames bad business practices for the demise of Hostess Twinkies, not the union.
Who do you think is responsible? Tell us in the comments section below.
If Hostess Company could take advantage of the war on obesity and find something that tastes good yet is nutritious, they might find a new market. Of course, you and I both know that won't change anything. Until most people have health problems, they won't change. It's just sad that they don't at least try to change it for their children.
But, I've never had a Twinkie so I won't miss them. Although I suddenly have a craving to taste one now that they are going away.
Union foolishness killed something that a nuclear holocaust couldn't. But the Twinkies may indeed live on after the brand is purchased by Beebo, a Mexican firm... Unions off-shoring jobs ... BRILLIANT!
http://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/news/2012/11/16/flowers-foods-stock-jumps-on-hostess.html
Problems are always deeper than what the surface can show you, many of have made assumptions - the Union is the problem the management is the problem. Simple, these are very bad times for many corporations, and ones that are already having difficulty, well it's even worse. I don't care for most unions for one reason, the union does not care about the individual, even though that is what they sell. It is all about power, honestly why would you sell out 18,500 co-workers to prove what. That is stupidity, that is union. Yup, the bosses move on to another group, the individual needs to start thinking and questioning the bosses, both the corporate boss and the union boss. Too many jobs have been lost because of unions, I feel sorry for the guy who just doesn't have a clue.
■Brian Driscoll, CEO, from around $750,000 to $2,550,000 ■Gary Wandscheider, EVP, $500,000 to $900,000 ■John Stewart, EVP, $400,000 to $700,000 ■David Loeser, EVP, $375,000 to $656,256 ■Kent Magill, EVP, $375,000 to $656,256 ■Richard Seban, EVP, $375,00o to $656,256 ■John Akeson, SVP, $300,000 to $480,000 ■Steven Birgfeld, SVP, $240,000 to $360,000 ■Martha Ross, SVP, $240,000 to $360,000 ■Rob Kissick, SVP, $182,000 t0 $273,008" http://dailynewsfinder.com/2012/11/17/everything-you-probably-didnt-know-about-the-hostess-brands-story/ The article above sites many examples of poor management and/or poor decisions that have been made in the past 10 years that caused the demise of this company. By the way, I have never been in a union, but I was in management for 28 years working with union employees.
In all the years Hostess was in business, the workers had no say in how the company was run. Blaming them now, with the water not only under the bridge but all the way out to sea, is outrageous. Who bailed this company out 8 years ago, when they first declared bankruptcy, and how many smaller but better run companies weren't given the same help, because they're not huge corporations? I say let the big guys ALL fall, and let's start over with reasonably sized companies that still have to put effort into succeeding.
Of course the CEO is saying there's plenty of blame to go around. He wants help shouldering it. Do you have any idea how much money a CEO of a company this size gets and why? They're paid to make sure all hell doesn't break loose, and to take the responsiblity if they fail to do so. I hope the share holders understand how it works, and hold the right guy responsible. It takes two parties to negotiate, so even if that last straw belongs to the union issue, the straw has two ends, and management is one of them. And don't tell me the union wouldnt budge. I've worked as a negotiator (not related to unions). that is the whole point to negotiating - to give the other party incentive to budge.
My own business background is in upper management, but my philosophy has always been that a workforce is a TEAM and everyone deserves respect and a fair wage for the work they do. When I owned my own company, I had a policy that any time an employee needed a day off, they could have it, no questions asked. The payback for that small measure of kindness was enormous. No one ever once abused the policy and it had a psychological effect on people that made them work really hard for me. It's such a no brainer to me, and yet it's incredibly rare to see a proper give and take relationship in a business. I don't care what anyone says; in businesses and schools, the people at the top set the tone, and that is why you get whole companies and schools that are either decent or lousy.
As for R's comment - I saw a museum exhibit on lead hazards at the Mutter museum in Philadelphia. It outright said never eat candies from Mexico because they're loaded with lead. There was a large display of candy with the ratings. I can see why this type product would appeal to a company from a country that has no safety standards to speak of.
Turn in an unopened box of Twinkies and get a free FEDERAL Work Permit … Talk about the teeming shores… (of the Rio Grande)
Try your tea with a Krimpet?
PLEASE create an edit feature ...