ADVERTISEMENT

Bad news for breakfast cereal

WK Kellogg said it will increase production and invest in new infrastructure, equipment and technology at its plants in Battle Creek, Michigan; Lancaster, Pennsylvania; and Belleville, Ontario. The company said it plans to invest $390 million in new technology and infrastructure and will incur a one-time charge of $110 million in restructuring costs.
Battle Creek-based WK Kellogg said the plan will result in a net loss of 550 jobs, a number that includes hirings at the plants that will increase production. The company didn’t immediately respond when asked Tuesday how many workers would lose their jobs in Omaha and Memphis.
 
You keep talking about labor costs. How much does the CEO and upper management make. We didn’t go on strike for a raise. We were trying to get rid of the two tiered system we let them have when cereal sales dipped before.
You weren't trying to get a raise, yeah right.

So if you accomplished your "goal" of getting rid of the two tiered system and the CEO & upper management got huge reduction in salary while your pay, benefits, etc all stayed exactly the same, you'd claim victory and be satisfied?
 
I’ll concede that. The fact remains that labor costs company wide are driving part of the rising cost of their product which decreases demand. Unions have driven a large share of our manufacturing out of our country and made us dependent on our enemies.
And Nebraska unemployment rate isn't attractive for businesses. The blue states do have an advantage since they became sanctuary states
 
They pay that and more. The difference is, no one struts into work, eating a bowl of rice crispies, but it is important to the status chasers that everyone knows they drink overpriced coffee while holding the latest iPhone

3910edfb190c2ff32b47789aa836461715be6713.gifv
 
  • Haha
Reactions: HuskerO
What royally sucks is the high paying jobs that will go away here when that happens. I was engaged to a chick several years back who worked there and gawd damn do they pay well. Yes they work you to death, but they paid you for it. She was making $125(ish) ...downside is she'd go 3 weeks straight without a day off but there aren't to many jobs you can make that at...and it didn't require a degree.

I don't know why they closed and don't care enough to research it, but I know their employees like to hold the plant hostage with strikes every once and a while...cannot help but wonder if that had sumthin to do with it. Pretty sure, if I remember correctly, they were unionized, which i'm also pretty sure didn't help their cause.

Regardless, that sucks for them and Omaha.
Feel like you should write a book of your life experiences. I'd buy it in a heartbeat
 
  • Haha
Reactions: litespeedhuskerfan
I would want to spend more than five seconds looking into why the Omaha plant is closing, before bloviating about why it's happening.
Actually, @dinglefritz is about dead on (from what I kind of recall), regardless of the time he took to come up with that decision. I know LOTS of people that put in years at Kellogg's.

Through one of the last contract negotiations I know that Union fought against some type of a two tiered payroll. Management threatened moving to Mexico then. Nobody believed they'd do it....and thought they were just blowing smoke.

Some here have brought up the fact that they don't buy the brand name anymore because of cost. You think charging double the price as off brand doesn't have anything to do with this?

As far as negotiations go, I MIGHT be off on that a bit....just kind of what I recall hearing.
 
Last edited:
Are you saying you went on strike because you think the ceo and upper management make to much?? Gawd I hope that's not what you're saying.

You weren't trying to get a raise, yeah right.

So if you accomplished your "goal" of getting rid of the two tiered system and the CEO & upper management got huge reduction in salary while your pay, benefits, etc all stayed exactly the same, you'd claim victory and be satisfied?
Absolutely. I make way tools much money for the job I do. It’s hard to work with people doing the same job, but they are getting paid $15-20 less an hour. Their benefits were less also.
 
WK Kellogg said it will increase production and invest in new infrastructure, equipment and technology at its plants in Battle Creek, Michigan; Lancaster, Pennsylvania; and Belleville, Ontario. The company said it plans to invest $390 million in new technology and infrastructure and will incur a one-time charge of $110 million in restructuring costs.
Battle Creek-based WK Kellogg said the plan will result in a
Sounds like cost cutting/modernization of the production process at their factories, which I'm all for. Sucks for workers, but that's just the march of technological progress.
 
Sounds like cost cutting/modernization of the production process, which I'm all for. Sucks for workers, but that's just the march of technological progress.
That’s probably true to some degree but increasing labor costs often force management to find ways to reduce their workforce. Would they have done this if their labor costs hadn’t increased dramatically? Chicken or egg.
 
Absolutely. I make way tools much money for the job I do. It’s hard to work with people doing the same job, but they are getting paid $15-20 less an hour. Their benefits were less also.

I'm not going to pretend to know as much about this as somebody who worked there...but I was fvcking a super cute girl who did work there for a few years and i was engaged to her as well, so my knowledge level on this isn't zero either....I'm curious how much salary the tier 1 workers offered to give up so the tier 2 workers could close the gap? Did it dawn on any of the tier 1 folks there is no way they could pay everyone those wages...and it's very common to make less when you go to work for a company versus somebody who's been there for 9 years already?

Lastly, when Bernie Sanders was invited to speak about it do you think it helped or hurt to have a flaming socialist speak on your behalf? I can't think of a dumber idea personally
 
  • Like
Reactions: dinglefritz
I'm not going to pretend to know as much about this as somebody who worked there...but I was fvcking a super cute girl who did work there for a few years and i was engaged to her as well, so my knowledge level on this isn't zero either....I'm curious how much salary the tier 1 workers offered to give up so the tier 2 workers could close the gap? Did it dawn on any of the tier 1 folks there is no way they could pay everyone those wages...and it's very common to make less when you go to work for a company versus somebody who's been there for 9 years already?

Lastly, when Bernie Sanders was invited to speak about it do you think it helped or hurt to have a flaming socialist speak on your behalf? I can't think of a dumber idea personally
The pay gap for production work kind of boggles my mind in light of fair market practices.

The guy that’s been there for 15 years has gotten raises and makes significantly more than the guy that’s been there for two years. Does the first guy actually have one year of experience repeated 15 times, or is he actually much more skilled and able to apply those skills at another company? I think it’s the latter in most cases. I base this on my experience working in a window factory in college. As it applied to the line, you could be proficient in almost any job within about a week. After a while, one begins understand why capital seeks out cheaper labor markets.
 
The pay gap for production work kind of boggles my mind in light of fair market practices.

The guy that’s been there for 15 years has gotten raises and makes significantly more than the guy that’s been there for two years. Does the first guy actually have one year of experience repeated 15 times, or is he actually much more skilled and able to apply those skills at another company? I think it’s the latter in most cases. I base this on my experience working in a window factory in college. As it applied to the line, you could be proficient in almost any job within about a week. After a while, one begins understand why capital seeks out cheaper labor markets.

I have zero problem with a company paying an employee who has been there longer, more. I could list a variety of reasons of why that is a better model than what you are eluding to.

So I'll ask again..how much did tier 1 offer to give up so tier 2 could close the gap? I think the answer is zero. Somebody correct me if i'm wrong. So now what?
 
  • Like
Reactions: SeaOfRed75
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT