For the past week, America has been mourning the loss of one of its history’s greatest figures: the Twinkie.
As of Nov. 16, Hostess, the producers of fine American snacks such as the Twinkie, Ding Dongs, Wonder Bread and Fruit Pies, has filed bankruptcy for the second time. The president of Hostess, Gregory F. Rayburn, has made the claim that it was the multiple strikes and union staged walk outs from within the company that has pushed them to their breaking point.
For months now, two unions from within the company, the Teamsters, which represent the delivery workers and the Bakery, Confectionary, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers International Union (the BCTGM), have been fighting with the company about reduced wages.
Some media like Fox News have taken this strike as the cause for the liquidation of the Hostess Company.
For a minute, let’s humor the idea that the union workers are responsible for the company’s collapse. Let’s ignore that during the strike, according to the Kansas City Star, 24 out of the company’s 33 factories were still operational or that the Teamsters Union actually did concede to the company’s cut wages and accepted their new deal. Let’s also ignore the number of supervisors and union workers who crossed the picket lines to keep the company moving.
What is left is a company that has repeatedly failed to meet the modern standards of baking production, selling the same products with little to no innovation for nearly a century. It’s a company that has been struggling out of its first bankruptcy in 2004. A company that in spite of all the concessions and pay cuts it forced upon its laborers in the face of the bankruptcy had still, according to a statement released by the BCTGM, managed to give its CEO a 300 percent raise increase.
When history looks back on the footnote that is the Hostess company, it will not be a story of how the evil powers of unions brought down one of the few American companies that was still producing in America. Instead it will prove a demonstration of what happens when a company refuses to adapt and operate on the terms of modern time. This historic fall of the Twinkie was not because of an evil, greedy union but rather the result of poor management.
For those who love the fatty, mildly sentient snack food known as the Twinkie, do not buy into the fear of the boxes of Hostess products selling for hundreds of dollars on eBay. The Twinkie itself is still far from flatlining. Vachon Inc., the company that owns the Canadian production rights for the Twinkie, is still going strong, and sooner or later what remains of Hostess will sell the name and recipe for those cream-filled horrors to the highest bidder. Like the phoenix, Twinkie the Kid will rise from his own ashes.
But for the rest of us, Little Debbie always had better snack foods anyway.
Patrick Larose is a creative writing sophomore and may be reached at [email protected].
Two questions – what’ s your bright idea for “moderninzing” a Twinkie?? And secondly, if the Canadian version of this “company” is still going strong with the SAME product – there is clearly still a demand for the “cream-filled horrer” and your point is lost and you’re back to the Union argument. Opps! Better think through your op ed a little better!
Great point Patricia.
This is not a nonprofit company. They will produce only to make money. If their cost are too high or their AC is extremely high due to the quantity they are forced to produce because strikes reduce their output then they have no choice but to shut down.
Little Debbie has always been a poor imitation of the original. As far as innovation, they haven’t needed to because everyone loves the products they have.
Let us just say there is lots of blame to go on both sides union and management. Both have helped bring about the demise of the company. But if the unions really wanted to make themselves look good and help instill an image for the future to help their cause then taking the pay cut and then having the company fail any way would have put them in a better light than what many see as a case of them choosing to fight an 8% decrease in pay vs a 100% decrease in pay of the company folding.
In the end all sides lose and some more jobs will get sent out of the country.
The union took a paycut once already, after the company filed for bankruptcy in 2004. After the union agreed to take the first salary cut, the CEO then received a 300% raise.
When the union was asked to take another salary cut a few years later, they said no. I don’t blame them one bit. It’s obvious that the company was being run by less-than-stellar upper management, who couldn’t figure out how to get their act together.
This company didn’t fail because of a union strike, it failed because it was ran into the ground by incompetent individuals at the top.
Why do we keep getting all these news agencies whining about modernizing production while at the same time defending the unions. Unions = expensive, overrated labor costs and old school wasteful production methods. You can’t decry management for folding the company under union pressure while at the same time whining that they failed to modernize. Look at the auto industry in this country and how the unions resisted robot driven production lines for decades. That’s how you become profiable. Nearly every member of this bakers union would be replaceable by an automated task. The teamsters who tried to bargain, not so replaceable…..