In what way to "vulture capitalists" gain from this?

If the union accepts the terms of the agreement the employees get a salary reduction but they will still (probably) earn more than any job they can get in this economy, bondholders take a haircut and (probably) lose a large portion of their investment while shareholders still have their equity wiped out. This is a no-win situation, and the best option for everyone involved is to take a little loss in the hopes that the company will recover.

I understand it sucks to take a wage reduction, when the banking meltdown happened I was working for a start-up that was backed (in a large part) by a Wall Street investment firm that needed to back out of the investment and I was forced to take a 20% salary reduction. If you're unhappy with it and believe you can make more money elsewhere you can look for a better job while you continue to work at your current job (and if it takes you 6 months or 1 year to find a job at least your bills are being paid), but if you can't find a better job at least you are still employeed at a wage that is in line (or better than) what you can make elsewhere.

I was lucky enough that it only took 3 months to find a new VC to invest in the company and my wages were restored, but I couldn't image what it would be like to be unemployeed in a country with 16% (or higher) real unemployment with 18500 other people in the same field as me. I could be wrong but I suspect that most of these former-employees will find out that most of Hostess' competition will carve up their marketshare with limited need for new employees, and they will be unable to find similar work at a similar wage.

In what way to "vulture capitalists" gain from this?

If the union accepts the terms of the agreement the employees get a salary reduction but they will still (probably) earn more than any job they can get in this economy, bondholders take a haircut and (probably) lose a large portion of their investment while shareholders still have their equity wiped out. This is a no-win situation, and the best option for everyone involved is to take a little loss in the hopes that the company will recover.

I understand it sucks to take a wage reduction, when the banking meltdown happened I was working for a start-up that was backed (in a large part) by a Wall Street investment firm that needed to back out of the investment and I was forced to take a 20% salary reduction. If you're unhappy with it and believe you can make more money elsewhere you can look for a better job while you continue to work at your current job (and if it takes you 6 months or 1 year to find a job at least your bills are being paid), but if you can't find a better job at least you are still employeed at a wage that is in line (or better than) what you can make elsewhere.

I was lucky enough that it only took 3 months to find a new VC to invest in the company and my wages were restored, but I couldn't image what it would be like to be unemployeed in a country with 16% (or higher) real unemployment with 18500 other people in the same field as me. I could be wrong but I suspect that most of these former-employees will find out that most of Hostess' competition will carve up their marketshare with limited need for new employees, and they will be unable to find similar work at a similar wage.

Executives demand a pay cut from the workers, the people who actually make the business run, but give their own useless, parasitic asses a pay raise.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/hostess.asp

The CEO's pay went up by 300%.  The executive class has a real good scam going there.

I feel like you didn't read your own link.

Or not the whole way through in anycase.

Yeah, I did.  If you think that they're only getting $1 over the next year then I have a bridge in Brooklyn for sale (cheap).

I have no doubt that there is some sort of salary deferment going on there.

One skill executives have is being able to make a profit look like a loss on paper.  Another one is the ability to make ordinarily intelligent people believe that they are getting paid only $1 a year.