This is ultimately the fault of those union administrators that claim they represent the view of all their members. A failure of a “collective mind.”

When will the Unions and the Politicians learn that Economics trump their perceived power? The real power is held by the producers / business owners and the laws of economics/ market forces which the business owners must respect. Government unions are the leading problem because the government’s ability to tax and print more funding distort the market, lead/ drive the demands of non-governmental unions and inflate compensation beyond sustainability in down markets. Apparently a full blown collapse/ strike is required. I have always been a holdout to the strike, more like a Reardon than a Galt, but it is becoming apparent that the takers would rather see Iconic American companies fail before they accept economic reality. Now I am leaning in the direction of Galt since the takers have increasingly demonstrated their ignorance and disregard for basic economics. They need a lesson in reality. The repercussions are unfortunately going to be painful for all, not just the takers, with the possible exceptions being the politicians who isolate themselves with a printing press.
O.A.

And where did I read yesterday that the Unions said that they were laying off the workers just so they could keep all the profits? Really? We get rich by CLOSING factories and SHUTTING DOWN operations? It wasn't so much the fact that he said it that shocked me, is that 50.5% of Americans aren't educated enough to know why it's absurd.

I just read that Hostess had to ask permission from the gov't to shut down and sell its assets. Even in failure, the gov't is in control! There's something very wrong with that.

Although it is easy to blame the company or the union, the real culprit, of course, is the federal government that imposes Obamacare on us. Add in there the NLRB for their totally union biased operations. Screw the unions. Different companies have different reasons for going Galt. Here is a good example of one more doing it.

Based on the title and many of the posts everyone seems to classify this company closing as a shrug. There is an implicit choice in the term shrug as it is used in the book. Galt and his friends chose to shrug. With Hostess, there was no choice. The changing market and culture of fitness weekened hostess. The labor burdens and of course the strike may have been the nails in the coffin. To be fair minded should we assume it was labors absolute fault? Don't we need to know more about how the company was run before we say that it must have been labor? I don't like collectivized labor anymore than the next objectivist but I really don't think there was a philosophical choice being made in this case.

I'm viewing Hostess more like Twentieth Century Motors... giving to employees more than they really could until it is too late. An absurdity I heard reported was striking employees continuing to "strike", hoping another company will swoop in and pick up where Hostess left off. I could understand an entrepreneur coming in & buying discounted equipment and/or plants, but I would not see them wanting to hire the striking employees... at least not in wholesale. If I were to be the entrepreneur, I'd let potential employees know what I was willing to pay and they could take it or leave.

The bakers union lost the "sanction of the victim." The only way we can be used is with our permission. Rearden was one of the last to go Galt. Hostess might be more like Danagger Coal or Hammond Automobile. Who/what company is next?

I guess whether management shrugged depended on whether they had the option to fire workers. If a labor contract was in force, then no. It is indeed comical that the union bosses thought the company could be sold and continue operations. What businessman in his right mind would buy an unprofitable company with ongoing labor strife? You don't see Democrat Warren Buffett riding in on a white horse to scoop up this company out of "fairness." Liberal or not, he knows how to read a balance sheet.

The mediation talks have, as I suspected they would, failed between Hostess and the baker's union. Interestingly, the secretary/treasurer of the Teamsters Local 145 in Stratford, CT said, "The baker's union thought they were playing a game with them, [Hostess], and they guessed wrong,".."We were gainfully employed,".."We had benefits. Now we have nothing." The IBT had reached an agreement to slash wages, pension funding and health benefits, but the bakers union wouldn't budge. I wonder if they like having their cake and eating it, too?

It's sad that a union which represents only about 30% of the employees can put all of the employees out of a job with their demands. Their demands included that the union (not the employees, the union) be given 25% ownership of the company. The government gave it to the UAW and now the precedent has been set.

I shrugged several years ago, I now have zero employees. I have kept the business open just treading water, but I am now leaning toward dissolving it. The rotters and looters will have nothing to eat but dirt if things continue they way they are.

It would be nice to be able to replace those people who lack in appreciation for the jobs they have with some of the millions who have been months trying to find one. How can this be done? It would save many people a whole lot of trouble.

Wonder Bread is about as good for you as GMO's are...Join IRT,PAN, OCA to make a real lasting difference.I work in the hospitality trade - if all chefs knew about GMO's & trans-fats, it would be a day to celebrate..