Hostess Execs Still Seeking Bonuses While Cutting Pensions

Even though Hostess is asking for permission to cut employee pensions by over $1 million per month, they’re also still asking for permission to dish out bonuses totaling $1.75 million.

Hostess Brands Inc., the defunct maker of Twinkies and Wonder Bread, told a bankruptcy court that it must cut $1.1 million a month in retiree benefits as part of its liquidation plan.

U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Robert Drain in White Plains, New York, today approved formation of a committee of retired employees to defend their rights in connection with the intended cuts. Drain is also being asked to consider Hostess’s request to close and its bid to pay as much as $1.75 million in incentive bonuses to 19 senior managers during the company’s wind-down. [...]

The union and a pension fund have asked the judge to appoint a trustee to take control of the wind-down.

Let them eat Ding Dongs?

Hostess’ 18,000 employees are already going to lose their jobs, and now company execs want to cut their pensions by $1.1 million per month while dishing out $1.75 million in bonuses to themselves. Because this company won’t bury itself on its own. They need to provide an incentive to the sensitive, talented masters so they can bear the burden of shuttering the company in an orderly fashion. It’s a terrible job and someone has to do it.

With any luck, Judge Robert Drain will grant the union’s request to give control to a trustee rather than the executives who ran the company into the ground.

Print Friendly
This entry was posted in Corporate Crime and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.
  • i_a_c

    These golden parachutes are getting more ridiculous by the day. While rank-and-file workers are depending on their livelihood to feed and house their families, corporate executives give themselves millions regardless of their performance or whether they run the company into the ground. The executives still get to go home to their car elevators and dressage horses, while their workers are just fucked.

    But I guess according to free marketeers, none of that is any of our business and the workers are just supposed to work harder or make better decisions or something?

    • Nefercat

      I didn’t realize it until I read your comment, but now, Eureka! It is all so clear! “Free” market means free of consequences to the incompetent greedheads at the top. I see now.

      It explains why all expenses and adverse consequences have to be borne by the workers. One of the “entitlements” of the “takers” at the top is no negative consequences to their clear incompetence to run a company anywhere except into the ground.

  • muselet

    Incentive bonuses?

    Incentive to do what? Not steal the lightbulbs?

    –alopecia

  • Victor_the_Crab

    Fucking knobs!

  • agrazingmoose

    I think that it is interesting that the company hired a “bankruptcy expert” back in January.

  • hanadora444

    I’ve never understood the rationale behind these bonuses. I’m sure these big cheeses get salariews (and probably very good ones) for doing their jobs. So, why do they need bonuses? I can see offering an occasional bonus as an incentive to perform in an unusually wonderful and amazing manner but running a company whose products everyone seems to love but goes into bankruptcy as often as the birds fly south does not seem to be deserving of even very small bonuses

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/BEGIJHH3WP4DYQHBUMH3QKX6OE Comic

    Well, the “good guys” won — they got their bonuses! Those mooching workers can just suck it!

    Apparently executive contracts are more “legitimate” than mere “promises” to employees.