Hostess vs Bakers Union
Hostess VS Bakers Union
Alexandria Allen
HUM/114
November 21, 2012
Dr. Jake Golden
Hostess VS Bakers Union
The news story of Hostess going bankrupt and the Bakers union going on strike was very clear, but it was not completely accurate with sufficient depth and breadth. It is known why Hostess filed for bankruptcy, but there was not sufficient information as to what the Bakers union was expecting. From all of the news stories that I have read, it seems as if all of the facts are present except for the ignored fact of what the Bakers Union was demanding. The story did not consider alternative perspectives and worldviews. There were not any views debuted to the public, but the views of the company and a judge. A judge ordered mediation between Hostess and the Bakers union because the judge did not feel that all alternatives were taken into consideration. There is a questionable assumption that the company was holding back and not being 100 percent truthful and negotiating in good faith with the Bakers union. The implications that were being ignored were that of the company finally deciding to go bankrupt. The implications that were empathized were that of the 18, 500 Bakers union workers losing their jobs. It is important to make distinctions when undertaking a critical evaluation because not everyone involved knows all of the facts to make concrete decisions. If the Bakers union took the time to completely evaluate the predicament, they would have just taken cutbacks instead of losing their jobs entirely. The Bakers union looked at themselves in a different light, whereas the Hostess Company was accumulating more debt. The Bakers union did not want to compromise the benefits that they had and Hostess had to make an executive decision. Hostess was doing what was best for the company and their shareholders, while the Bakers union decided to go on strike demanding nothing less than the benefits already given. Which in turn, lead them to be without
Alexandria Allen
HUM/114
November 21, 2012
Dr. Jake Golden
Hostess VS Bakers Union
The news story of Hostess going bankrupt and the Bakers union going on strike was very clear, but it was not completely accurate with sufficient depth and breadth. It is known why Hostess filed for bankruptcy, but there was not sufficient information as to what the Bakers union was expecting. From all of the news stories that I have read, it seems as if all of the facts are present except for the ignored fact of what the Bakers Union was demanding. The story did not consider alternative perspectives and worldviews. There were not any views debuted to the public, but the views of the company and a judge. A judge ordered mediation between Hostess and the Bakers union because the judge did not feel that all alternatives were taken into consideration. There is a questionable assumption that the company was holding back and not being 100 percent truthful and negotiating in good faith with the Bakers union. The implications that were being ignored were that of the company finally deciding to go bankrupt. The implications that were empathized were that of the 18, 500 Bakers union workers losing their jobs. It is important to make distinctions when undertaking a critical evaluation because not everyone involved knows all of the facts to make concrete decisions. If the Bakers union took the time to completely evaluate the predicament, they would have just taken cutbacks instead of losing their jobs entirely. The Bakers union looked at themselves in a different light, whereas the Hostess Company was accumulating more debt. The Bakers union did not want to compromise the benefits that they had and Hostess had to make an executive decision. Hostess was doing what was best for the company and their shareholders, while the Bakers union decided to go on strike demanding nothing less than the benefits already given. Which in turn, lead them to be without