Home / Latest News /
Hostess to seek OK for executive bonuses
By The Associated Press
This article was published November 29, 2012 at 7:48 a.m.
- Comments (14)
- aAFont Size
NEW YORK — Hostess Brands Inc. plans to ask for a judge’s approval Thursday to give its top executives bonuses totaling up to $1.8 million as part of its wind-down plans.
The maker of Twinkies, Ding Dongs and Ho Hos says the incentive pay is needed to retain the 19 managers during the liquidation process, which could take about a year.
Two of those executives would be eligible for additional rewards depending on how efficiently they carry out the liquidation.
Hostess is also seeking final approval for its wind-down, which was approved on an interim basis last week.
The process includes the quick sale of its brands, which also include Wonder Bread. Hostess says it has received a flood of interest in the brands.
The company’s bankruptcy means loss of about 18,000 jobs.
Comments on: Hostess to seek OK for executive bonuses
To report abuse or misuse of this area please hit the "Suggest Removal" link in the comment to alert our online managers. Read our Terms of Use policy.
You must login to make comments.
NONSHEEPLE says... November 29, 2012 at 7:56 a.m.
THIS should NOT be allowed to happen.
( permalink | suggest removal )
melisai says... November 29, 2012 at 9:01 a.m.
That is the biggest load of crap I have ever read. They're in BANKRUPTCY! Their top execs don't deserve that money. Give it to the those 18,000 who are about to be out of work thanks to those execs.
( permalink | suggest removal )
HotSpringsLawyer says... November 29, 2012 at 9:39 a.m.
Have to maximize returns for hedge funds. Otherwise we would be communists, or like Europe, or something.
( permalink | suggest removal )
lazybar says... November 29, 2012 at 11:02 a.m.
should give the bonus to the unions as a reward for thier part in putting 18k people in the unemployment line.
( permalink | suggest removal )
1soni says... November 29, 2012 at 12:02 p.m.
Lazybar and T6 et al - step up and start defending these executives getting these bonuses you think they deserve before I have to.
( permalink | suggest removal )
RBBrittain says... November 29, 2012 at 12:39 p.m.
Bonuses are just plain stupid. The ONLY people who should earn bonuses off Hostess are the CEOs of Grupo Bimbo, Flowers Foods & Campbell Soup (Pepperidge Farm), the three remaining national bakeries, for (a) using Hostess' demise to raise prices (anyone notice name-brand bread is now even MORE expensive with Wonder off the shelves?) and (b) buying its valuable assets on the cheap in bankruptcy auctions.
( permalink | suggest removal )
1soni says... November 29, 2012 at 3 p.m.
OK, guys, I'll cover for you: Ya see, It's all a perspective. 1.8 mill would pay for only about a month's pension into the retirement system (Yes, I know that quit paying into that over a year ago, but that was because Hostess unilaterally ended the contractually obligated payments to the workers’ pension plan). And yes they were bringing in 2.5 billion a year in sales but they can make that much or more by just selling off their assets. See, small potatoes to the bonuses they need to maintain their current lifestyles until the sales are completed and they get their severance packages next year.
( permalink | suggest removal )
Packman says... November 29, 2012 at 4:14 p.m.
Class warfare stoogies unite! A mind consumed with jealously and envy will never be able to understand the concept of "market rate" . Does Arkansas's next head football coach deserve $3 million/yr when the head football coach at Yellville High School makes 45k/yr? They're both head football coaches so why don't they both make the same amount of pay? There's all kind of precedent for paying "wind down" executives and whatever rate is approved will be consistent with market rates. It's not about what they "deserve", it's about just compensation based on the market.
( permalink | suggest removal )
melisai says... November 29, 2012 at 4:17 p.m.
1soni, the amount of money isn't the point we're arguing. Their company is going bankrupt. Maybe it's not all their fault, but some of the blame must be placed on the execs, and to get a bonus during all this is just wrong. Maybe $1.8 million won't do a whole lot for that 18,000, but it would do more to help them keep their homes, cars, etc, than it will help "maintain lifestyles" of the already rich. Maybe those execs should learn a thing or two about what it means to struggle. At least they probably have something to fall back on, while they're sending that 18,000 out with nothing.
( permalink | suggest removal )
lazybar says... November 29, 2012 at 4:41 p.m.
maybe the 18,000 should have thought about that before striking?
( permalink | suggest removal )
cliffcarson says... November 29, 2012 at 9 p.m.
Years ago when the company I was working for went bankrupt and no one was on strike, 100,000 of us went out the door. The company owed me and several thousand like me, 80% of our annual salary.
We didn't get a penny of it.
The cause of the Company's downfall was the Executive Management making bad decisions.
They drove off in their Cadillac and stretch Limos, with the back seats full of money - enjoying life.
Somewhere later there were starving people in soup lines when the Cad's and limo's Chauffeurs drove their passengers by. "Look at the poor" said the former owners, "see what happens when you make bad decisions!"
( permalink | suggest removal )
HotSpringsLawyer says... November 30, 2012 at 5:29 a.m.
New York bankruptcy court is not a free market. It is ultimately run topside and bottom by the bankers and hedge funds. Would not be shocking by any means if it turned out that they planned to provoke the strike intentionally to finally force the judge to give them what they wanted.
( permalink | suggest removal )
RonalFos says... November 30, 2012 at 7:26 a.m.
A lot of these employees will probably be hired back and be paid at least as much as the company's final offer. But at least this time they won't be working for the pathetic management that is in place now.
( permalink | suggest removal )
1soni says... November 30, 2012 at 8:25 a.m.
1) 18,000 people didn't go on strike. 2) The strike was at 1 plant in Texas, the other 32 plants couldn't meet demand? 3) Why not have the judge de-certify the union for non-compliance? 4) "Market Rate" kind of a contractual thing right? Kind of like the contract the company had with the union and decided not to honor it. 5) Melisai - sorry you missed the point I was trying to make.
( permalink | suggest removal )
To report abuse or misuse of this area please hit the "Suggest Removal" link in the comment to alert our online managers. Read our Terms of Use policy.