By now everyone’s heard much about the demise of Twinkie-maker and sugar-enabler, Hostess Brands. This week, a bankruptcy court granted permission to the company to initiate the selling of its assets, a move that punctuates 10 years of economic decline for the company. And though executives like CEO Greg Rayburn have been quick to blame the bakers' union in particular for its financial difficulties, recently revealed numbers about executives' money management choices tell a different story.
According to MSNBC, in 2011 when the company was mired in almost a billion dollar debt, then-CEO Brian Driscoll tripled his own salary to $2.24 million per year while other top executives got 35-80% raises as well. Though Driscoll was replaced by Rayburn earlier this year, workers complain that this type of money mismanagement was par for the course at Hostess.
To add insult to injury, the Washington Post reports that this week Hostess’ executive board not only asked the bankruptcy court for permission to immediately liquidate 15,000 factory workers’ jobs, but in also asked permission to grant its current executive board $1.75 million in bonuses.
In contrast, according to Reuters, full-time bakers, including those who've been at the company for decades, were as of late, making $35,000 per year (with overtime), which was down from the $45,000 they were making five years prior.
Factory workers were also recently asked to take another 8% cut in pay and a 17% cut in health benefits. This was especially frustrating because they had already accepted a round of pay cuts several years earlier, which were supposed to have saved the company $100 million per year. The fact that those savings seem to have disappeared have many pointing back at executives for gross mismanagement.
Employees also report that at the same time the most recent round of pay cuts were being proposed, executives were also handing down mandates to increase production levels beyond what was reasonable. Several told Reuters they were often threatened with factory closure by the executive board if those increases were not met.
Hostess' financial choices may be sound reason for workers' revolt, but they're all too common in modern American business where workers pay has stagnated since the 1970s, while CEO pay has increased by 725 percent. Think that's a typo? It's not.
And according to ThinkProgress, the impetus to protect executives over workers, even during executive-led financial misery, is now simply standard protocol. At the manufacturing company Caterpillar, workers pay was frozen while the CEO received a $17 million raise. And at Citigroup, CEO Vikram Pandit received more than $260 million in compensation even after his company’s stocks lost 88 percent of their value while he was in charge.
In the most telling news of all, despite the almost billion dollar debt held by Hostess, and the ten years it failed to battle back from it, on the homepage of its website, the company still contends that it was its bakers' union's refusal to take another pay cut that finally closed the company.
Do you think the success of Hostess hinged on circumventing this workers' strike, or was management too out of touch to save it? Let us know in the Comments.
Related Stories on TakePart:
A Bay Area native, Andri Antoniades previously worked as a fashion industry journalist and medical writer. In addition to reporting the weekend news on TakePart, she volunteers as a web editor for locally-based nonprofits and works as a freelance feature writer for TimeOutLA.com. Email Andri | @andritweets | TakePart.com