« The Brilliance of Bill Whittle | Main | Baker's Union-- Not Just Foolish, But Selfish Too. »



J. Hohn

True statements all around. Of course, it seems inconsistent to make a wage concession first, then say not another when the potential benefit of the second concession is much greater than the first.

It's one thing to strike when you see the CEO getting huge pay and all that and the company is booming. It's quite another to strike while your company is actually in bankruptcy and has told the court (and gained approval of such for labor contract changes) that it will be insolvent without lower labor costs.

Bravo to the Teamsters Union (which signs my grandfather's retirement checks) for having the sense to at least try to be part of a solution.

If the Bakers had agreed to similar concessions, might it have mattered? Maybe not; they've seen this movie before as this is not Hostess' first trip to bankruptcy court.

Your point about undercutting other union members seems to force the conclusion that the BCTWGM threw their Hostess folks under the bus for the good of the rest of the union.

Oh, well. Live by union, die by union. I'm not opposed to private unions and attempting to bargain collectively. But such bargaining must not be a term of employment. You should never be forced to join a union to work a job.



One other point: the Teamsters agreed to go back to work after a secret ballot was held of the workers and they narrowly voted to return to work. The BCTWGM never held a secret ballot; it's possible that a majority of their members wanted to return to work, but the final decision was with the union bosses, who may have sold their members down the river, or maybe knew Hostess was screwed either way.


To be fair, the union had already agreed to cuts to benefits and wages in the past. Also, the Teamsters Union did agree to this latest round of cuts, it was the BCTWGM who refused the next round of cuts. That union also has to consider all their other contracts with bakery companies. If Hostess was going down either way (pretty good chance that it was, although it's not certain) then giving in yet again to another pay cut could have undercut all the other members of the union.

The comments to this entry are closed.