I Am Bored

Loads of viral videos, games, memes, lists and social networking for when you're bored. Updated every day, so visit often.
LatestPopularMost BookmarkedMost EmailedTop RatedMy FavoritesRandomChat
AllGamesFunnyEntertainmentQuizzesWeirdTechLifestyle, Arts & Lit.News & PoliticsScienceSportsMisc
Submit Content  


friendsmore friends | add your site

Gorilla Mask

Free Samples

Extreme Humor

FreeGame Heaven

Funny Videos


Funny Games

Crazy Games

123 Games


Funny Stuff

Funny stuff

Wow Funny Jokes

Old Age Humor

Lastminute Auct

Funny Junk

Hot Games

Comics Alliance


Back to Listing

RIP Hostess Twinkies, Ding Dongs, Etc [Pic+]

Hits: 11198 | Rating: (2.5) | Category: News & Politics | Added by: CrakrJak
Page: 1 2 3 4 Next >   Jump to: Bottom    Last Post
Male, 50-59, Canada
 28514 Posts
Tuesday, November 20, 2012 12:49:28 AM
@chalket: Sorry, but I'm a-gonna get all serious:

I used to abbreviate @CrakrJak as @Crakr...

The he explained one day that "Crakr" meant old-school "code cracking" and "Jak" referes to that era too.
Hense his name meant something like: I'm good at code hacking!
BUT Others simply called him "Cracker" in that "bad way"!
So I stopped shortening it and now call him by his full name. HE NEVER complained! I did so freely!
Others? Like "patchgrabber" = @patchy.
"FoolsPrussia" = @FP
"AuburnJunky" = @aj
Them I asked if it was OK to use shortened or altered versions of their names, and they said yes! So now I do!

Respect is NOT something you demand of others, it's something you SHOW and hopefully earn in return...

NOTE: I sometimes shorten other names, but NOT every time!
QZ =QueenZira but I've never asked if that was OK all the time... just fyi...

Male, 50-59, Southern US
 2481 Posts
Monday, November 19, 2012 3:41:04 PM
Wellll, I dunno... I still respect cats too much
How does 5Bats sound? 5Hats?

Male, 50-59, Canada
 28514 Posts
Monday, November 19, 2012 12:47:32 PM
No worries mate! I explain it often.

But would it "kill you" to say "5Cats"? Harm you in any way?

Male, 50-59, Southern US
 2481 Posts
Monday, November 19, 2012 12:17:37 PM
@5Rats: Thanks for the "quote issue" clarification...

Male, 50-59, Canada
 28514 Posts
Monday, November 19, 2012 11:06:03 AM
>>@chalket: It's an "IAB Wierdness": You cannot have both Quotes AND Links in the same post. Images are OK though... @FancyLad knows about it, it's been here since DAY ONE! lolz!

I've never, even once denied that the "top execs" were looting the company! I've even said so outright: "burning building" ring a bell?

BUT that's only a side-effect of the problem, stop it and what? NOTHING changes! The company STILL loses a Million bucks a WEEK! The Union is STILL on strike! There's till NO MONEY to pay what's owed...

Again I point out that the $110 million savings was likely through layoffs (according to your articles, but it's not too clear) NOT wage concessions.

If there had been wage DE-creases? I think the Unions would be shouting about them from every rooftop! Their silence on the matter...

Male, 50-59, Southern US
 2481 Posts
Monday, November 19, 2012 12:17:27 AM

Male, 50-59, Southern US
 2481 Posts
Monday, November 19, 2012 12:16:34 AM
@5Rats: Whodat was right, the execs got pay raises when the company KNEW it was going to file for bankruptcy. The only reason the pay was reduced to $1 (for just 4 execs, btw) was they were caught manipulating salaries to get around bankruptcy compensation rules! Source And now those same "benevolent" execs are asking the bankruptcy court to allow $1.75 million in incentive bonuses to senior managers! Source Bonuses for running the company into bankruptcy!

[quote"> You spout poo while demanding others quote sources? [/quote">

Pretty funny to see such a poo-spouter as yourself pointing fingers! lol

Male, 50-59, Southern US
 2481 Posts
Sunday, November 18, 2012 11:49:44 PM
What a lot of you have missed is that these union workers already gave major concessions in pay and benefits to help keep the company afloat in 2009. One of the stipulations was that the ~$110 million a year savings was to be reinvested in the company to update equipment and improve advertising and market share. That was not done, the savings went straight to executive pay raises and bonuses and the 2 venture capital companies who bought the business.

When Hostess came back again asking for more big concessions (after laying the legal groundwork for another bankruptcy filing, and giving the execs another raise, up to 80% for some), the union basically said "Been there, done that... hell NO!" and went on strike. Hostess has been failing for many years, they just now have a scapegoat.

Male, 50-59, Canada
 28514 Posts
Sunday, November 18, 2012 9:37:33 PM
VV @WhoDat: So typical: read the headline and ignore the news.
Those reports are FALSE! HuffPost has already RETRACTED them.
In April the CEOs reduced their pay to $1 = FACT.

Cheesus man! You spout poo while demanding others quote sources? F-DAT!

Male, 30-39, Eastern US
 3795 Posts
Sunday, November 18, 2012 11:25:12 AM
Well I'll be damned! Now there are reports coming out saying that the Hostess CEO and other execs received pay increases back in April when the company was in the middle of filing for bankruptcy! Yup, that's the union's fault!

Male, 60-69, Midwest US
 15860 Posts
Saturday, November 17, 2012 10:23:29 PM
Q: How many Teamsters does it take to change a lightbulb?

A: 12. You got a problem with that, buddy?

Male, 50-59, Canada
 28514 Posts
Saturday, November 17, 2012 7:03:50 PM
@whodat: Not to belabour the point (no pun intended) but that's what the "profit sharing" thing was about (as far as I know, eh?)
If the employees OWN 25% of the company, and the company makes money? THEY make more than the 8% they gave up! Seats on the BoD means the CEOs will be answerable to them. At least in theory.

Ratchet Effect is why companies do NOT give out pay raises easily. Once given they CANNOT lower pay! The Union makes SURE of that!

After the company goes broke? What good did that strike do for the workers?

As I say: I've seen it up close! It's mind-numbing how the Union feeds on the greed, stupidity and ignorance of it's members... until the members are OUT of a job!
Then the Union is gone baby gone!

Male, 30-39, Eastern US
 3795 Posts
Saturday, November 17, 2012 1:20:04 PM
@5Cats - It's not only that they're not willing to accept it when times are tough, an 8% pay cut is better than no pay at all. The problem with that, and I've seen it happen many times, is that once things start getting better you're not getting back what you thought you temporarily gave up without a fight.

Male, 50-59, Canada
 28514 Posts
Saturday, November 17, 2012 12:45:05 PM
i could easily say the same about all corporations.

@jops360: True, but the fact is that corporations answer to their shareholders! If the CEOs make bad decisions it's not the "employees" who decide to fire them, eh? 95% of companies treat their employees well! It's common sense AND cheaper in the long run.

@WhoDat: I'm glad you've had a good Union experience, but these are TEAMSTERS ffs! They've been 100% Mob-owned since the 50's!
I've seen many cases where "the Union" refused paycuts and POOF! The jobs were gone! These guys might get their jobs back, but the pay-cut they'll face will be more like 25% - 50%, not 8...

Everyone wants more pay when times are good, but NO ONE is willing to accept less pay when times are bad = human nature.
Corporations are run by humans with the same nature, eh?
Who are the WORST "Union Busters"? OTHER Unions!

Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 2303 Posts
Saturday, November 17, 2012 12:29:54 PM
more like this is what happens when unions get treated like poo

Male, 40-49, Southern US
 5285 Posts
Saturday, November 17, 2012 11:47:47 AM
After working for two unions, I decided they are basically useless for any hardworking individual.

Just a few problems I had with unions:
A union member filing a grievance because 'he missed his break because no one woke him up'. (the Union's position was that his job did not require him to be awake the entire 8 hour shift)
A grievance filed against ME because I was working 'too hard'. (The Union did not want the management to get 'unrealistic expectations' of production.)
I was also threatened with violence if I did not 'slow down'.
An illiterate person getting a highly techinical position because it was 'his turn', which caused the company to actually hire an 'assistant' to DO the job, while the illiterate sat on his ass.
Knowing that if I worked hard, I could get the SAME EXACT 'merit' raise as the illiterate sitting on his ass.

Male, 30-39, Eastern US
 3795 Posts
Saturday, November 17, 2012 11:26:14 AM
@CrakrJak - A few months ago there was a hearing at the hall because a handful of bad apples did something like that. They ended up being kicked out of the union. I know they've been banned from the IBEW nationwide, not sure if they'd still be accepted in other unions like the CWA though. Like I said before, the IBEW is the only union I've been a member of so I can't speak for any others, but we run a pretty tight ship here & don't f*ck around. That's why the IBEW in general, not just NY state, have been so prosperous.

Male, 18-29, Southern US
 10601 Posts
Saturday, November 17, 2012 11:15:30 AM
To add to what CodeJockey's saying the pension and medical liabilities enumerated in the bankruptcy affidavit DWARF all other operating expenses. All that is contigent and unliquidated are pension and medical claimed by unions the biggest item being the BCTGM.

Male, 40-49, Midwest US
 17367 Posts
Saturday, November 17, 2012 11:11:54 AM
whodat: What I've seen in unions halls during labor disputes has made me want to puke, it's just been sickening. Vandalism, Threats, Intimidation, Thuggery, Beating people up, all were encouraged with pictures of "Scabs", their vehicles, homes and families plastered on the walls. Thugs from a union my dad belonged to tossed buckets of animal feces into an executives backyard pool. I've seen police reports of slashed tires, smashed glass, keyed cars, spray painted vulgarities and more.

Sorry, but that's just f*cked up and unions that encourage their members to act like goons have no place in civilized society.

Fighting for a decent wage and benefits is fine, promoting criminal behavior when they don't get their way is not.

Male, 40-49, Midwest US
 5391 Posts
Saturday, November 17, 2012 10:33:47 AM
whodat, they didn't stop operating by choice.
When you are under bankruptcy protection, whatever isn't being used to fund day to day operations is going to whomever wasn't paid as a result of the filing.
They weren't even meeting that.

Male, 30-39, Eastern US
 3795 Posts
Saturday, November 17, 2012 10:22:12 AM
Well I don't know how it works down south, but the majority of non-union shops in the NY, NJ, CT & New England area are notorious for doing sh*t work and cutting corners. I've been on several jobs that were first given to non-union shops who then lost the contracts for many different reasons. We went in and had fix the mess they made and those customers, some big named companies too (IBM is one) have never hired a non-union shop since. They'd rather pay a little more to have the job done right than pay twice as much to have it fixed.

Male, 18-29, Southern US
 10601 Posts
Saturday, November 17, 2012 10:08:28 AM
A union contractor wins the bid & takes that $100/hr, giving $50/hr to the electrician, keeping $50/hr for themselves. A non-union contractor wins the bid & takes that same $100/hr, giving $25/hr to the electrician, keeping $75/hr for themselves.

Yet if the latter has a better track record than the former then I'd still choose the latter. As it is the former electrician can't fully justify his expense.

Male, 30-39, Eastern US
 3795 Posts
Saturday, November 17, 2012 10:08:20 AM
They're union, they'll be back to work soon. The company was going under regardless, they're just placing the blame on the union so people don't focus on the mistakes management made that put them in that situation in the first place. I'm sure that list is a mile long.

Male, 40-49, Midwest US
 5391 Posts
Saturday, November 17, 2012 10:00:07 AM
whodat, they were already out of money. Under those conditions, they likely had to get daily loans to operate. The people they were borrowing from would have terms.

What wages do you suppose the workers will receive now?
They do have the option of buying the company they turned down 25% stake in.

Male, 30-39, Eastern US
 3795 Posts
Saturday, November 17, 2012 9:53:30 AM
@CodeJockey - Well, if they needed them back to work that bad they should have agreed not to cut their wages/benefits. That's what everyone's problem is, you're brainwashed into thinking you need the company, that's wrong. Without skilled workers, a company is useless, it's just a name, they need you, and if they try to f*ck you over they lose!

Page: 1 2 3 4 Next > 

You Must be Signed in to Add a Comment

If you've already got an I-Am-Bored.com account,
click here to sign in.

If you don't have an account yet,
Click Here to Create a Free Account

Back to Listing ^top

Bored | Suggest a Link | Advertise | Contact I Am Bored | About I Am Bored | Link to I Am Bored | Live Submission | Privacy | TOS | Ad Choices | Copyright Policy |
© 2015 Demand Media, Inc. All rights reserved.