Follow Up News Report to EA Abuse to Employees

[MegaDrive20XX]

http://www.gamespot.com/news/2004/11...s_6113582.html

I dont know if this was posted else-where, but I remember reading the other thread a few weeks ago

[morphx]

"Not everyone sympathizes with game industry employees, who sometimes pull down six-figure salaries.

Go to (McDonald's) or a factory, then back to your air-conditioned offices with free coffee," one responder to last week's blog posting wrote. "

Comments like that drive me nuts because they're way out of context and mostly don't apply.

You often aren't required to have specalized technical training or higher education to work at a McDonalds or a factory. And you bet your ass that you'll be paid for every hour you work at those places.


Edit: Left out the important part of the quote.

[zmweasel]

"Not everyone sympathizes with game industry employees, who sometimes pull down six-figure salaries.

Go to (McDonald's) or a factory, then back to your air-conditioned offices with free coffee," one responder to last week's blog posting wrote. "

Comments like that drive me nuts because they're way out of context and mostly don't apply.

You often aren't required to have specalized technical training or higher education to work at a McDonalds or a factory. And you bet your ass that you'll be paid for every hour you work at those places.


Edit: Left out the important part of the quote.

Actually, McDonald's and most other fast-food chains are notorious for pressuring their employees into working "off the clock." McDonald's and most fast-food chains are also virurently anti-union. Check out "Fast Food Nation" sometime. Fantastic book, and extremely well-researched.

-- Z.

[rbudrick]

"Not everyone sympathizes with game industry employees, who sometimes pull down six-figure salaries.

Go to (McDonald's) or a factory, then back to your air-conditioned offices with free coffee," one responder to last week's blog posting wrote. "

Comments like that drive me nuts because they're way out of context and mostly don't apply.

You often aren't required to have specalized technical training or higher education to work at a McDonalds or a factory. And you bet your ass that you'll be paid for every hour you work at those places.


Edit: Left out the important part of the quote.

I couldn't agree more. Well said!

Those working 50 hours or so a week really shouldn't bitch....IF they are getting overime pay. I work 45 hours a week, every week, and 5 more hourse wouldn't be a huge stretch if a 6 figure salary was involved....and I sure as shit don't make a 6 figure salary. Howerver, when you get to 60, 70, and 80-120 hours a week, that is FUCKING REDICULOUS, and just plain cruel and tyrannical. Companies should have more respect for their people, especially employess so talented and resourceful as those.

-Rob

[morphx]

I think the point is that hourly employees are lawfully entitled to pay for every hour they work. It is understandable that big businesses often don't pay or try to find ways around it.

Most salaried employees however are expected to conform their schedule to the needs of the job. Thats the "loop hole" i think most of these game industry stories are centered around. What defines the resonable needs of your job.

[SoulBlazer]

Would it be so bad for the game industry to get unionized? After all, every other big industry is, and games bring in more money then movies these days.

[zmweasel]

There is much irony in that the hardcore gamers up in arms about game developers' "quality of life" spend many of their waking hours sitting on their asses in front of a TV set.

In any case, I'd love to see Naughty Dog co-founder Jason Rubin make a run at organizing a union, as he hinted at after his DICE diatribe.

-- Z.

[goatdan]

"Not everyone sympathizes with game industry employees, who sometimes pull down six-figure salaries.

Go to (McDonald's) or a factory, then back to your air-conditioned offices with free coffee," one responder to last week's blog posting wrote. "

Comments like that drive me nuts because they're way out of context and mostly don't apply.

You often aren't required to have specalized technical training or higher education to work at a McDonalds or a factory. And you bet your ass that you'll be paid for every hour you work at those places.

That's not necessarily true. I worked at one place for a while where people who were off the clock would often times be asked to continue helping and they wouldn't be paid for it... unless you were good about remembering to ask about it later.

Wal*Mart got sued over forcing their employees to work off the clock just last year. (Or earlier this year?)

On the other hand, I do agree with you. You don't have to have much in the way of specialized training to work at McDonalds or a factory, and you can get overtime. I can pretty much guarantee that no one that is working 80 hours a week at McDonalds would settle for getting paid for less than 40. And if they were, I would be disgusted by that too.

As someone that used to do a lot of programming, I totally understand the need for some "crunch" time at the end of a project, and even a week or two of 80 hours in the office is understandable -- games always have this amazing way of always having more stuff you'd like to do for them -- but if I was expected to work for 80 hours a week for a salary that I thought I'd be getting for 40 hours of work, I would be extremely unhappy.

If you're working 80 hours a week, that is about 11.5 hours a day. Add thirty minutes for driving, and you've got a 12 hour day every day. What time would that give you for a family or to enjoy whatever money it is that you get? I'd much rather make $50,000 and spend time enjoying it.

[morphx]

There is much irony in that the hardcore gamers up in arms about game developers' "quality of life" spend many of their waking hours sitting on their asses in front of a TV set.

There's a big difference in doing so voluntarily and having your paycheck held over your head.

[zmweasel]

There is much irony in that the hardcore gamers up in arms about game developers' "quality of life" spend many of their waking hours sitting on their asses in front of a TV set.

There's a big difference in doing so voluntarily and having your paycheck held over your head.

No one's forcing these people to pursue game development as a career, so their "suffering" is also purely voluntary.

-- Z.

[Ed Oscuro]

Already posted the IGDA's open letter.

[morphx]

There is much irony in that the hardcore gamers up in arms about game developers' "quality of life" spend many of their waking hours sitting on their asses in front of a TV set.

There's a big difference in doing so voluntarily and having your paycheck held over your head.

No one's forcing these people to pursue game development as a career, so their "suffering" is also purely voluntary.

-- Z.

That's a true point. But if you take it a bit futher than you could say that soldiers have no right to complain about dieing or factory workers shouldn't whine about loosing a limb. Hell those coal miners just need to grow up and stop worrying about cave-ins.

There comes a point where your employer has to provide you with a managable and realistic job expectation. And a descent environment to work in. I'm sure most of the game developers thrive in a fast pace high stress environment, I think the root of the complaints is that companies are taking that and trying to eek out a little more and it's driving them over the edge.

We could argue this all day.

[Nature Boy]

Would it be so bad for the game industry to get unionized?

In my opinion, absolutely. I'm a programmer and I want to be paid what I'm worth (based on my performance), not the same as the guy in the next cube just because we've been here the same length of time. If my company wanted to form a union I'd refuse to join.

[zmweasel]

There is much irony in that the hardcore gamers up in arms about game developers' "quality of life" spend many of their waking hours sitting on their asses in front of a TV set.

There's a big difference in doing so voluntarily and having your paycheck held over your head.

No one's forcing these people to pursue game development as a career, so their "suffering" is also purely voluntary.

-- Z.

That's a true point. But if you take it a bit futher than you could say that soldiers have no right to complain about dieing or factory workers shouldn't whine about loosing a limb. Hell those coal miners just need to grow up and stop worrying about cave-ins.

There comes a point where your employer has to provide you with a managable and realistic job expectation. And a descent environment to work in. I'm sure most of the game developers thrive in a fast pace high stress environment, I think the root of the complaints is that companies are taking that and trying to eek out a little more and it's driving them over the edge.

We could argue this all day.

Surely you can understand the difference between a video game artist and a soldier or a factory worker, as can everyone else. I wouldn't "take it a bit further" because it's absurd to do so.

The people most often forced into military work or factory work or other low-wage, high-risk, physically demanding jobs are the people with no alternatives. People who choose game development as a career, by contrast, are usually rich white people with any number of opportunities. My sympathy is with the people who work their asses off because they don't have a choice, as opposed to the people who get into game development because it's fun.

Have you seen EA's offices, incidentally? "Decent environment" doesn't begin to describe them.

-- Z.

[goatdan]

There is much irony in that the hardcore gamers up in arms about game developers' "quality of life" spend many of their waking hours sitting on their asses in front of a TV set.

There's a big difference in doing so voluntarily and having your paycheck held over your head.

No one's forcing these people to pursue game development as a career, so their "suffering" is also purely voluntary.

Depends on how you take "purely voluntary." If my job states that they will fire me if I do not work for 80 hours a week for a month, then that isn't purely voluntary, as if I don't work that long, I get fired which looks bad on a resume.

While I do think that the industry in itself is an environment that forces some overtime work at certain points, I don't think that it should be constant. And I don't think that people were expecting it to be constant when they got into the industry.

I'm just curious -- do you think that what EA has been accussed of doing with it's employees is totally fair? That programmers should be expected to work 80+ hours because that is the profession that they chose?

At the same time, is there any other profession in the world that requires an 80 hour work week? I have a friend who is an EMT who works up to 72 hours a week, but his job allows and encourages him to sleep throughout a shift (which can be 24 hours long). I really don't see there being a comprable job that forces you to work 11+ hours a day every day.

Interestingly enough, I learned that if you fall asleep on the way home from work because an employeer is forcing you to work long hours and get in a car accident, your employeer can be sued for forcing you to work too long. A lot of larger companies (and I'm talking about the entertainment / food industry mostly here, not gaming) don't allow over 60 hours now because of that.

[morphx]

No more counter points for me, I think they're falling on deaf ears.

[zmweasel]

Depends on how you take "purely voluntary." If my job states that they will fire me if I do not work for 80 hours a week for a month, then that isn't purely voluntary, as if I don't work that long, I get fired which looks bad on a resume.

"Purely voluntary" as in, no one forced these people to embark upon game development as a career. If they didn't research the profession beforehand, and determine that long hours and crunch time are a fact of game-industry life, they're foolish to blame EA for the status quo. And if they did the research but got into the industry anyway, they're even more foolish.

I'm just curious -- do you think that what EA has been accussed of doing with it's employees is totally fair? That programmers should be expected to work 80+ hours because that is the profession that they chose?

The people involved in the class-action suit are artists, apparently, which is a rather different field.

-- Z.

[goatdan]

Depends on how you take "purely voluntary." If my job states that they will fire me if I do not work for 80 hours a week for a month, then that isn't purely voluntary, as if I don't work that long, I get fired which looks bad on a resume.

"Purely voluntary" as in, no one forced these people to embark upon game development as a career. If they didn't research the profession beforehand, and determine that long hours and crunch time are a fact of game-industry life, they're foolish to blame EA for the status quo. And if they did the research but got into the industry anyway, they're even more foolish.

Game development -- and technology in general -- has developed at such a breakneck speed that I don't think it is fair to tell people that four or five years ago started a career and that by looking at it, it looked as if *everyone* in the gaming industry was constantly working 80 hours a week.

I'm just curious -- do you think that what EA has been accussed of doing with it's employees is totally fair? That programmers should be expected to work 80+ hours because that is the profession that they chose?

The people involved in the class-action suit are artists, apparently, which is a rather different field.

Milwaukee has a pretty big art scene, and I know a few people that are artists, including relatives of mine. From what I see that they do, they set their own pace for their work. They aren't told that if they don't put in at least 80 hours a week, they will be fired.

Is there any other profession in the world that requires an 80 hour work week? I have a friend who is an EMT who works up to 72 hours a week, but his job allows and encourages him to sleep throughout a shift (which can be 24 hours long). I really don't see there being a comprable job that forces you to work 11+ hours a day every day.

[zmweasel]

Game development -- and technology in general -- has developed at such a breakneck speed that I don't think it is fair to tell people that four or five years ago started a career and that by looking at it, it looked as if *everyone* in the gaming industry was constantly working 80 hours a week.

Game development, to hear the old-timers tell it, has always had extra-long work-weeks. It's not as if the game industry suddenly went from 40-hour normalcy to 80-hour insanity.

Milwaukee has a pretty big art scene, and I know a few people that are artists, including relatives of mine. From what I see that they do, they set their own pace for their work. They aren't told that if they don't put in at least 80 hours a week, they will be fired.

Your friends and relatives were wise to remain self-employed and choose the luxury of setting their own pace for their creative endeavors, as opposed to taking an hourly or salaried job in which they were required to meet their employers' expectations.

-- Z.

[le geek]

Unions exist by taking money out of employees pockets most oftern in the form of payroll deduction. Companies do not pay for them. And Union Presidents oftern may as much as CEOs...

I'm not saying all unions are unnecessary, but I wouldn't want to be in one...

[goatdan]

Game development -- and technology in general -- has developed at such a breakneck speed that I don't think it is fair to tell people that four or five years ago started a career and that by looking at it, it looked as if *everyone* in the gaming industry was constantly working 80 hours a week.

Game development, to hear the old-timers tell it, has always had extra-long work-weeks. It's not as if the game industry suddenly went from 40-hour normalcy to 80-hour insanity.

So 80 hours isn't insanity?

Is there any other profession in the world that requires an 80 hour work week? I have a friend who is an EMT who works up to 72 hours a week, but his job allows and encourages him to sleep throughout a shift (which can be 24 hours long). I really don't see there being a comprable job that forces you to work 11+ hours a day every day.

Milwaukee has a pretty big art scene, and I know a few people that are artists, including relatives of mine. From what I see that they do, they set their own pace for their work. They aren't told that if they don't put in at least 80 hours a week, they will be fired.

Your friends and relatives were wise to remain self-employed and choose the luxury of setting their own pace for their creative endeavors, as opposed to taking an hourly or salaried job in which they were required to meet their employers' expectations.

I don't know of any art "employers" that demand that people work 80 hours a week, but maybe that is just me. Seriously, could you name one? I would love to know...

[zmweasel]

So 80 hours isn't insanity?

80-hour work weeks are indeed insane, but when you sign up for a career of game development, you sign up for 80-hour work weeks. This has never been a dirty little secret. Books about getting a career in the game industry have devoted entire chapters to the topic. This current wave of Internet outrage seems to be fueled more by anti-EA sentiment than anything else.

If you don't want to work 80-hour weeks--and if you're fortunate enough not to be one of the millions of Americans forced to work 80-hour weeks just to make ends meet--there are thousands of other professions from which to choose. When you select a "career" in the creative arts, you should be grateful for ANY employment.

-- Z.

[midgey]

The people most often forced into military work or factory work or other low-wage, high-risk, physically demanding jobs are the people with no alternatives. My sympathy is with the people who work their asses off because they don't have a choice

I think you're forgetting the fact that most people with "no alternative" are in this situation because of choices they made. And I don't buy the whole "they were born into poverty and can't rise above it" excuse. I've known plenty of people who have done it, so if one has the mindset, then they can rise above. My Linear Systems and Signals Analysis professor was born in Nepal to a homeless family, and now he's probably the smartest person I've ever met.

I've had far too many friends/family complain about their job situation, when I witnessed the efforts (if you can call it that) they've put into education. I'm not saying all of the people in the military and factories are this way, but all the ones that I know are.

[zmweasel]

I think you're forgetting the fact that most people with "no alternative" are in this situation because of choices they made. And I don't buy the whole "they were born into poverty and can't rise above it" excuse. I've known plenty of people who have done it, so if one has the mindset, then they can rise above. My Linear Systems and Signals Analysis professor was born in Nepal to a homeless family, and now he's probably the smartest person I've ever met.

Congrats for your Nepalese prof. I'm sure he worked his ass off to achieve what he has. Probably logged a lot of 80-hour work weeks. And as you say, he's an unusually intelligent individual.

But it remains a plain fact that many Americans and immigrants are unable to rise out of poverty, despite their best efforts, for any number of societal and financial reasons. For every anecdote you can relate about a lazy bum who has a crappy job because he won't pursue higher education, I can relate one about a smart, driven individual who has a crappy job because of the color of his skin.

The video game artists filing this class-action lawsuit against EA chose to be artists, and chose to work for a video game company, despite knowing the commitment it required. (If they DIDN'T know, they're willfully ignorant, and I have even less sympathy for them than before.)

Now the artists are regretting their choices, but instead of taking responsibility for their decisions, they're blaming their employer for falsely classifying them as exempt from overtime. Perhaps they should have raised such concerns when they were initially hired, or received their first paychecks, instead of waiting until the job wasn't fun for them anymore.

-- Z.

[goatdan]

Zach,

I have the utmost respect for someone that has to work 80 hours a week to make ends meet. I know people that are in positions that are much like you say -- a smart, driven individual who has a crappy job -- not necessarily because of the color of their skin but because of the background they come from and the experiences that they have had. I have a friend who worked two jobs full time to support his wife and child while still actively seeking out other employment. I completely understand how stupid of a situation it is when you are stuck doing something like that.

At the same time, the way that you are saying that the EA people should have all known that their committments would be 80+ hours a week, every week and they shouldn't complain seems odd. Yes, there are times where you hear that people worked 80+ hours a week, and much of it does come from old timers, but a lot of them were starting their own software companies and in business for themselves. Not in a huge company like EA.

The game industry isn't in the same place that it was in even ten years ago, when it took a few people to make a game (and even an entire company), and if it sold halfway decent they could make money. We're now in an industry that it takes millions of dollars to make a game, and if that game is a success, it can generate millions of dollars of revenue.

Why don't companies that are bigger decide to hire more people for a project? It would keep everyone happier, it wouldn't cost too much more money than before (four employees at $50,000 / year wages is $300,000 per year after company taxes are factored in) and would probably make the environment better.

If the company decides that they should remain as small as possible, why would they set such strict release dates? Some people complain about iD Software and their "when it's done" approach, but it means that a company of 25 can create an entire game around their schedule and stay sane.

If you had read the complaints, one of them was from someone that had worked at Maxis for years before going to work at EA. He had said that he never had to put in such hours at Maxis except in milestone weeks. I don't think this is just an EA thing -- I have nothing against them at all, and I actually enjoy many of their games -- but I also don't think it is appropriate for any company to do. I don't think that only EA does it, and I'm positive that other development studios have done the same thing in the past and more will in the future. But it isn't a trend that I think in any way benefits the industry. I think that games that have longer and more realistic development cycles benefit from that -- Half Life 2 or Doom 3, anyone?

I've asked this three times before and you haven't answered because I guess perhaps there isn't an answer to it, and I don't suppose that you will this time so this will be my last post in the thread, but:

Is there any other profession in the world that requires an 80 hour work week? I have a friend who is an EMT who works up to 72 hours a week, but his job allows and encourages him to sleep throughout a shift (which can be 24 hours long). I really don't see there being a comprable job that forces you to work 11+ hours a day every day.