So, what is your article trying to say? Is the company wrong or is the union wrong? Or aren't both sides equally wrong and equally right? Which party is interested in keeping the business operating and which party doesn't care whether the business stays operating or not? Is there a solution that both parties can accept or does there have to be a winner and a loser? Let's work together like adults OK?

The union would not give in which is normal they have to run everything it is their way or the highway and they will not give.

When will we all realize that the fate of workers--skilled and "unskilled"-- is shared by all of us. Those of us who enjoy weekends off, standards such as 40 hours being a typical full-time work week (as opposed to 50 or60 or more hours), safe and decent working conditions, and benefits, can thank unions for securing those standards. Would the management of Hostess take huge pay and benefits cuts and other "concessions" to bring their compensation and working conditions down to the level of the workers who actually make the product, in order to save Hostess? No. The management owners decided to dissolve the company and take off with a nice big profit. How many of those owners worked in a factory 6 days a week for paltry compensation with wage and benefit cutbacks so that manager/owners could continue in the lifestyle to which they were accustomed? The fate of us all, and particularly our kids, is bound up in these typed of struggles. Hostess-type rollbacks in EVERYONE'S pay, benefits, and working conditions are in the future. Like weekends and a decent life? Thank unions. Want to work more, for less, with far fewer benefits, and under medieval working conditions? Then support manager/owners such as Hostess and Walmart, who would treat their workers like as if they are expendable.

Ah, unions and democrats showed those "rich" people at Hostess they meant business, now they're out of business. Smart. Liberalism is a mental disorder. Anyway, they'll all get years of unemployment payments and any other give away Obama has arranged.

The executives of Hostess raped this company through massive wage increases for themselves while at the same time asking low level workers for more, more, more. There may be blame on both sides of the bargaining table, but greed on the part of the executives payed a major role in Hostess' demise. Some previous comments imply greed on the part of the union workers. There is, in my opinion, a huge difference between fighting for a wage that allows you to buy food and clothes and to take a vacation once in a while and the pillaging of a company to pad your own wealth.

never liked twinkie's anyway. good riddance.

LOL yeah, those evil capitalists destroyed their own company. Too bad they just didn't hand it over to the union bosses who I'm sure could have made this company an example of business success. No wonder we are headed down this Obama socialist rathole.

The market sets the price for everything; Twinkies, houses, cars, union labor, executive pay. The union labor at Hostess caused their own demise by worrying about the pay in the front office instead of their own job. Tail tried to wag the dog and it didn't work. Pretty much ended up how it was supposed to, huh?

To those of you who are blaming the unions and Liberalism for this closure I believe you are misguided. To the more severe "insult" responders you just show your lack of class.

My father was a business agent for this union years ago and he fought for these people to make thier lives better. I grew up with my father toiling in these plants. Not sure where some of you responders worked or work now but I will bet it does not match the work in these plants, where it is extremely hard, the wages pretty low, and the environment extremely hot and hard to breath.
Not to mention the hours and time off are no where near what one would call "Normal"
I know first hand that there was no flexibility or consideration ever given no matter what the reason, even in a tragedy, yet some fault these men and women the dignaty and litle balance they got from organizing.

This was not the first give back that these workers and Union endured.
How do you respond when someone takes something away from you?
Something tangible now that gets taken away by corporate America
not your percivied losses at the hands of the government. What has Obama got to do with this? What harm has a union done to you, but you blame unions.

I feel if you keep driving down the wages of the working class there is no one left to support Social Security and the US economy which is a "Consumer" economy. This destroys us all.

This is a sign of things to come in this economy. Unions have become the Dictators in running a company (Yes, I am a former union worker) under our current administration. Maybe Obama will have the Department of Labor buy out Hostess and we can all be in the bakery business along with the car business now!

Blaming labor for a company's demise is like blaming a divorce on the kids. The buck stops at the top, and when a company fails, it is almost universally a failure of management to either (1) run the company competently or ethically or (2) adapt to changes in the market and change their business plan accordingly.

First, the company didn't say they couldn't survive without the cuts, they said they couldn't survive a strike - and they still said "take it or leave it". I am glad the unions made a stand here. If management truly could not run that company without paying these workers a decent wage with benefits (as they had contractually agreed to), then maybe they should be delivering bread themselves, instead of making millions running a company into the ground.

not every union employee makes big bucks, so a cut of 8% and paying more for benefits may have taken a huge cut from their paychecks. This company was doomed long ago when venture capitalist took over, wall street learned long ago that destroying a company and selling of the assets makes big profits quick, taking the long road of building up and making it strong takes to long.

Hostess Corporate Management raises broke Hostess. They had raises of 300% and made up this story about the union workers bankrupting the company. Hostess was unfair to their employees and blamed them publicly for running them out of business. Definitely check into this story! Shame on you Hostess

No business can stay in business if you continue to lose money. Hostess is not the federal government. Corporate bonuses or not this company was bleeding a lot of cash. The union for the bakers played their hand and now 18,500 people are out of work. If the bakers union think some other company or group will buy the assets and Hostess name and re hire them is yet to be seen but I have serious dough that will happen. The pushing point was the baker’s 40K retirement benefit that was to go to 33.5K, but now they are going to be at the mercy of the pension resolution trust for what is left and be distributed. If the pension was not fully funded, they will lose big time. Hostess is no longer a company and 18.5 K people are out of work. This did not have to happen so who is to blame, all of them.

If people remember correctly, Hostess warned the workers in advance that if they strike, the plant will close. They did exactly what they said they would do... I applaud Hostess and maybe the next time a company want's to strike..... they might think about this economy and job security and opt for the pay check...... I'll bet most of the workers could turn back the hands of time. Now you have no pay check. Kinda sucks especially at this time of year. I wish these people well but they were warned.

Well maybe if the overhead "Management" and the overall buisness would of takin a equal cut to all employees instead of attacking the union workers, then they might still be in buisness! First of all they had a contract, when all else fails the first ones they go after is the ones that are the work force behind the company, the ones that are productive, the ones that actually handle the operations of making, packaging, distributing, delivering. Not the ones making triple digit salaries sitting behind a desk answering phone calls, playing angry birds on the computer, calling stupid unnecessary meetings while holding a fresh cup of coffee in their hand. All i'm trying to say is if an agreement was across the board they would of benefitted from it, But this was not the case. Management told the union take it or leave it! I tottally applaude the union for thier decision. Now what would of happened if they wouldn't of had a union? Hostess "Made in China" or Indonesia, or Not that there is anything wrong with that since 85% of our products come from other countries, the workers here would of either had to move to one of these countries for maybe half the wages and higher cost of living. Don't mean negative Just Saying

Am I the only one who purchased boxes of Twinkies on Ebay as an investment?

This situation reminds me of one my husband experienced about 5 years ago. His company told the union they would be making "other arrangements" if they didn't sign another contract. This contract didn't include cuts, but kept benefits and pay the same. The union leadership wouldn't even consider the contract. Sadly 700 local employees plus a few hundred more in Dallas, TX lost their jobs. The folks in Dallas has voted 9 to 1 in support of the contract--those in our area didn't get to vote at all. My husband was fortunate to find another job, but this happened just as the economy started to sour, and we still know co-workers of his that are looking for full employment years later. When he asked the union leadership what they'd be doing for him when he lost his job, they assured them he'd get the "severance package he had coming to him." Wow! That's comforting! Personally, I'd have rather him had a job than a raise.

Rabbi, I bet you're one of the only posters here who have bought a Twinkie in the last 12 months. IMO, that's the symbolic heart of the problem. The rub is I feel all parties are to blame: the management failed to adapt to the times, the union leaders tried to call a bluff by going "all in" without a strong hand, and the workers who failed to figure out any kind of a "plan B" for themselves when it was clear for quite some time they were continuing to produce food that American society generally considered unhealthy. The reality of a free market can be very harsh, but it is what it is.

I was a business reporter in Kansas City ten years ago when then-owner Interstate Bakeries gave warnings in quarterly earnings reports they were having problems. To Chip who posted about the "fat cats": You don't know what you are talking about. A third of the executives at Interstate Bakeries were let go and the rest took pay cuts of 10 percent and more. This was TWO YEARS before they filed bankruptcy and were bought by debtors. This story is not new, it is not a surprise except for the union (and I was a AFL-CIO treasurer in Kansas City) who continues to be in denial when a company reports poor earnings, thinking it's just a "the sky is falling" story. The cuts started 10 years ago were not enough. The union got 10 years more than they probably should have. Employment is NOT a right in this country.

Folks, for the all the talk about who won and who lost, let me be clear, there were no winners. The private equity guys lost their investment and the unions lost their jobs. Meanwhile, not one person has posted the real reason for the demise of the company, rising sugar prices which are the result of Federal intervention to protect domestic sugar growers. Those higher prices, combined with antiquated union work rules led to the a business model that was doomed. I heard the CEO on CNBC talking about the union rules which, for example, prohibited a worker from pushing a cart of twinkles if he was designated as a bread cart guy. Same went for drivers. Unions must understand that times change and job descriptions must change. They must recognize that the company making a profit is integral to them having a job. Investors do no one a favor by investing in terminal enterprises, however with so much cash on the sidelines, you have money chasing bad deals. Here's what will happen. The big Mexican baker will buy the brands, bake them in Mexico where they can get the sugar at lower prices and not have to worry about who pushes the bread cart and use NAFTA to bring them over the border to Schnucks. Meanwhile, the line for our dole continues to grow faster than the waistlines of Hostess addicts.

A reader commented that his "assumption" was that regular/permanent workers in the factory in which he worked during college years ..(to paraphrase) either were promoted or kept on doing (again the reader is being paraphrased) the 'bare minimum' and ended up in lousy jobs because they were lazy people....Well, just how many management jobs are available in any one factory? And, as someone who has been in the work force since age 9, I know that not everyone who is promoted up to any level of management position is worthy of that promotion or competent to carry out his/her new, managerial duties. Have you heard of the Peter Priniciple? It is alive and well! And there are of course people who "play the game" and "kiss up" in order to become managers. So, don't blame the hard working worker bees for not getting promoted. Many who stir things up and try to make changes end up not pleasing the "higher ups" and end up in poorly-paying jobs for the long term. Please look honestly at the work world. Not everyone has the privileges that this reader/writer had, i.e., a good education with college and graduate school. Everyone does not have the executive function skills to move into a good-paying job. Does that mean that the workers, those common people, should have terrible working conditions and long hours??? Why shouldn't management as well? They are making often hundreds of times what the workers--who are actually producing something--are making.

I'd rather take an 8% pay cut than a 100% pay cut.

"Unions" vs. "Owners".
Confused?
The owners of Hostess probably have over $3mil invested in the trucks AND Factory equipment. (Just to open the doors.)
How many union members understand that.? I'm surprised no union member offered to invest "In their Job". Why not make a $5,000 investment to help pay for the Trucks, Equipment repairs, Taxes, Buildings etc.. Why not Buy your own company, and pay yourselves what you want? You should have tried that!
How many understand that it is the OWNER who decides who to keep and must pay to keep them.
Maybe, bonuses were given to Executives to keep them there working as many were about to jump ship. They (The Executives had other opportunities to go elsewhere.) Executives can find another job when the company is about to go bankrupt. GM followed the same pattern. Executives were paid very high bonuses to keep them on board ---FOR THE WORKERS.
Face it, the way to get more pay is to Go find another job. Don't expect any owner to invest millions for YOUR JOB while that owner sees his own business crumble to major losses.
Maybe the union should have de-certified and those who wanted a job , WOULD ALL BE WORKING TODAY. Making more money than any union allowed your Hostess/Wonder bread employer to pay.
It is amazing how many Union bread-delivery-workers are Accountants and Lawyers commenting here.
Your detailed knowledge of this business, (the why's and reasons for) and it's operations is astounding.
.

Mr. "Paul Revere",
Up to this point, I've ignored the condescending tone of those discussants who view the non management laborers as expendable, while the managers and owners are the only ones bringing value to the company. And the comment that the workers should just cough up a mere $5,000 reminds me of a certain presidential candidate who cavalierly made a little &10,000 bet during a nationally televised debate...he also assumed that most kids wanting to go to college could just turn to their parents for a loan.

The point is that workers do NOT have the same pikes of cash laying around as many owners or managers do. and, just as important to recognize is this fact: worker/laborers DO invest: they invest their very hard work, their blood, sweat, tears, and their health. How managers end up with work-related disability? How many lose las on the job, incur life-threatening illnesses on the job?

How many managers died in that Bangaladesh factory fire this past weekend?

If managers give so much of themselves that they are so invaluable that they must be paid huge sums to be retained, why are these same managers so disloyal as to jump ship at the drop if the hat unless they can extract/extort more money from a financially-troubled firm in the form of bonuses and golden parachutes?

How many companies exist with managers, owners, and stockholders, and NO worker laborers?

Union vs Management - SSDD. Somethimes in negotiations agreements cannot be reached. The Union would not accept the wages the company was willing to pay so the company closed. End of story. But reading these post makes one wonder how any negotiations ever results in workable solutions. I have been on both sides of the table and believe me, both sides are working to get as much as they can. But there is always risk and here the risk was bankruptcy and so you have it - everyone lost. Just pleassse, quit crying.

I saw a quote from one of the workers who said, he may not be able to find a job as good as the one he used to have-- but he was sure he could find one better than the one they were offering him now.

Meanwhile -St. Louis could lose yet another employer - Ralcorp, to corporate monopoly.

Tom M comments:
The owners (not the management) have a need to produce a product to satisfy themselves.
The unions have a resource that management needs to satisfy its owners.

Owners are usually Mangement for starters.
Tom, this quote leaves off the most necessary ingredient to ANY JOB.
Any "need to produce" requires INVESTMENT DOLLARS (Big time!!)
What?--Owners INVESTEMENT. That is my previous statement.
A need to produce is only on drawing boards.

SO let me make it clear. What comes first-- The buildings, machinery, Delivery Trucks, Raw materials ingredients, Heat, Telephones, insurance, real estate taxes, salesmen, office and factory equipment, tools, customers????
(This is called "Skin/money in the game" for owners investments.)
OR Do the Laborers come First.??

As to my name? If I told you my real name is "Barack O", would that make me more likeable?

To Tom,
Thank you for asking "Paul Revere" to be more civil. I'm not going to address him directly due to the bullying and bombastic tone of his comments. Too bad his education--for which he seems to have little regard--did not teach him how to discuss or listen respectfully. And, when "Paul" says "trust me...." Well, didn't Richard Nixon say that too? I have enjoyed your informed, and rational comments. At this time I am bowing out of the forum because "Paul R" has turned it into a shouting match.
Have a great day.

Yo quero Twinkies. I bet the Mexicans can run the living HELL out of this company. They should sell interest in the company to the drug lords. It would be a win on both sides for them. Plus, labor disputes don't end well with Mexican drug lords (as is evident in the desert of Southern Arizona!

By the way...I have a cat that has more writing talent than you (buried in the back yard). I picked up more writing ability in the third grade while learning cursive. Please tell me that you didn't waste your time in college. It must be awful having to pay off student loans on the salary of a third world rag (such as this). Is it too late for you to get a management position at McDonalds? I pray that you didn't burn that bridge.

Typical union behavior.

Real smart - refuse to accept reality and then be out of a job all together. They get what they deserve. I bet all of the arms folded, stone jawed union folks are rethinking there position now.

The US of A will be a much better place when all unions are gone. They were needed in the 30's... not any more.

MUtiger: You are correct. Unions days are numbered. However the public sector vs Private sector unions must be treated separately.
Why? I am for Private sector unions because they have competition to deal with.
But,They will be unnecessary as all new Workers in USA will BE FORCED TO GET HEALTH INSURANCE. (Obamacare mandate!)
That will take away the biggest reason to unionize any business.
All union organizers have Health benefits as the number 1 reason to vote for a union.
All Private union bosses will be sorry for the Obama-care mandating the one benefit used for union membership.
Eventually ALL young workers WILL NOT NEED union sponsored health care benefits. Thanks to Obamacare. Unions have voted for their own demise.
That last reason to organize will be gone, because most companies will have the 401k pensions far more beneficial than what any union can offer.
So, I expect a major drop in private unions. Almost a blip on labor screen.
Public service unions are another problem another story.
THE PEOPLE HAVE THAT VOTE TO KNOCK THEM OUT.
There are more non-union people in any District that could easily rid themselves of union control. It takes an organized campaign to do it.
If Residents can get 50% real estate tax reductions, I am sure it can be accomplished. Too many Poor & needy are supporting Rich lifestyles of the Public service employees in Missouri.

I commend Tom Maher on his comments to all that are union haters out there! Believe me I have worked on both sides of the fence, working non-union and currently union, difference If I would have stayed non-union, I would still be barely making over mininum wage, half the benefits, could be let go without any reason, while management benefits from bonuses, trips, hiring brothers, sisters, friends, cousins, etc. that has had no prior experience except they know someone! As for unions I have to say they at least fight for what is right for the company but as well as the union workers! I have done a lot better from working for a place that is union not from sitting on my as$%%%$$. It used to be called an honest days worked for an honest days payed! not he case anymore, The more you do the more they want (management) or (owners) whoever! They want 12hrs squashed into 8hrs worth of work! While management still does the same amount of time or less to do what they have always been doing, If some of these children that are posting comments that are sitting behind a desk because they went to college for 4 or 6 yrs, or because mommy and daddy got them a job, I haven't seen any of those people that actually, said that they have worked their way up to management positions step down to get their hands dirty and try to get the company back on their feet! Instead want to sit back and point fingers and not recognize the real problem why the company is taking a downward spiral.