6 ms·

I generally agree. What we do need is better worker protections and consumer protections. Get rid of no-competes. Get rid of right to work statutes. Add mandato

I generally agree. What we do need is better worker protections and consumer protections. Get rid of no-competes. Get rid of right to work statutes. Add mandatory retirement contributions. Add mandatory and standard severance packages.

friendlybus 7y ago
The best outcome is the industry self-regulating these amendments into their business practices under the threat of unionizing, rather than actually turning the industry into an institution itself and losing it's creative spark.
- jgon 7y ago
  The industry has had roughly 4 decades to make those self-regulating adjustments, how much longer should we wait?
  - friendlybus 7y ago
    Who is waiting? Most people I know that didn't like the conditions got better jobs in other industries. Finance pays well and is cushy in comparison. Architecture visualizations, media jobs, programming roles are easier to find after obtaining the ability to outperform the norms for other industries. For most of gaming's history it has been a niche product without mainstream appeal. Do you unionize every fledgling industry? No. It hasn't been four decades in the making. The majority of bad sentiment has come in the past five years, exacerbated by a goldrush mentality and kickstarter burns. The goldrush is over, the big projects are paying out massively to employees. Star Citizen has spent hundred of millions on staff and capital and needs to raise more. Epic is pouring cash back into the industry rewarding workers. There are more people employed in the industry than ever and some see the collective as a route to personal power. I can't agree with that.
    - unapologetic 7y ago
      > The majority of bad sentiment has come in the past five years Literally the first 3rd party gaming company was because workers were unsatisfied with Atari.
      - friendlybus 7y ago
        The key engineers who left Ferrari in '61 became the key engineers that lifted Lamborghini into existence. They didn't start a union and stepped away from deaths of Ferrari drivers and verbal abuse to start something new with Lamborghini. Both companies survived and no unions were started. https://www.gptoday.net/en/news/f1/207607/history-ferrari-and-the-great-walkout-of-1961 https://www.gptoday.net/en/news/f1/207607/history-ferrari-an... Disgruntled employees are the birth of something new, not a call to clamp down. Who is calling for tech & gaming unionization because of the first 3rd party gaming company? It's not the majority of bad sentiment. It's not even news.
        unapologetic 7y ago
        I was pointing out that the claim this sort of thing is new is complete and total bullshit.
        friendlybus 7y ago
        Nobody claimed it was new. The majority of this is recent.
        unapologetic 7y ago
        https://boards.fool.com/letter-from-an-ea-spouse-long-21588406.aspx?sort=recommendations https://boards.fool.com/letter-from-an-ea-spouse-long-215884... Not new. Not recent.
        midnightclubbed 7y ago
        Both Ferrari and Lamborghini are unionized. Indeed the financing that helped start Lamborghini in 1963 was contingent on there being a workers union. I don't understand your point.
forrestthewoods 7y ago
> Get rid of right to work statutes I would not call taking away a worker’s right to work a benefit for a skilled worker.
- SauciestGNU 7y ago
  "Right to work" is one of those legal principles that follows a dystopian naming scheme. It was lobbied for by the owner class because it allows freeloaders to benefit from collective bargaining without paying membership dues in the union representing them. This weakens the union, with the eventual goal of eliminating the union (and the benefits it negotiated for workers) altogether.
  - AnimalMuppet 7y ago
    Your alternative puts workers in a straitjacket of having to belong to a union to work certain places. You say it's for their good. But all I see is the straitjacket.
  - forrestthewoods 7y ago
    And yet the alternative is not being allowed to work unless you donate money to extraordinarily political organizations who lobby for policies you may actively oppose. Sorry, but I’m going to call the compelled speech option far more dystopian than right to work.
- unapologetic 7y ago
  We can always go back to physically preventing scabs from working instead. Personally I think we should just get rid of anti-union laws.
unapologetic 7y ago
That will just drive more employers towards part time employees and outsourcing. The latter, I agree with the former reforms. You also aren't getting this sort of top down reform without obtaining more political power than the upper class. That's not going to happen without better organizing (Union, political movements, whatever).
- friendlybus 7y ago
  These utopian goals turn into dystopias.
  - unapologetic 7y ago
    They don't. They exist all over and work fine.
    - friendlybus 7y ago
      Except for all the times they don't. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Commission_into_Trade_Union_Governance_and_Corruption https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Commission_into_Trade_Un... https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/detroit-city/2018/11/01/uaw-uses-non-union-labor-construction-home-resort-spot/1811055002/ https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/detroit-city/20... https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2tsg3e/eli5_prounion_vs_antiunion_arguments/ https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2tsg3e/e...
      - unapologetic 7y ago
        explainlikeimfive, for when we really want an intellectual discussion.
        friendlybus 7y ago
        Attacking appearing of argument instead of it's content is a fallacy.
AnimalMuppet 7y ago
> Get rid of right to work statutes. Meaning that you're fine with me being required to join a union in order to work? No. I'd rather have the freedom to choose for myself, even if it means I have to give the same freedom to others.
- snarf21 7y ago
  No, I meant that when you take a job you are given a contract with clear rules about your job and for fixed durations. I was suggesting this instead of unions but this does require legislation.

friendlybus 7y ago

The best outcome is the industry self-regulating these amendments into their business practices under the threat of unionizing, rather than actually turning the industry into an institution itself and losing it's creative spark.

jgon 7y ago
The industry has had roughly 4 decades to make those self-regulating adjustments, how much longer should we wait?
- friendlybus 7y ago
  Who is waiting? Most people I know that didn't like the conditions got better jobs in other industries. Finance pays well and is cushy in comparison. Architecture visualizations, media jobs, programming roles are easier to find after obtaining the ability to outperform the norms for other industries. For most of gaming's history it has been a niche product without mainstream appeal. Do you unionize every fledgling industry? No. It hasn't been four decades in the making. The majority of bad sentiment has come in the past five years, exacerbated by a goldrush mentality and kickstarter burns. The goldrush is over, the big projects are paying out massively to employees. Star Citizen has spent hundred of millions on staff and capital and needs to raise more. Epic is pouring cash back into the industry rewarding workers. There are more people employed in the industry than ever and some see the collective as a route to personal power. I can't agree with that.
  - unapologetic 7y ago
    > The majority of bad sentiment has come in the past five years Literally the first 3rd party gaming company was because workers were unsatisfied with Atari.
    - friendlybus 7y ago
      The key engineers who left Ferrari in '61 became the key engineers that lifted Lamborghini into existence. They didn't start a union and stepped away from deaths of Ferrari drivers and verbal abuse to start something new with Lamborghini. Both companies survived and no unions were started. https://www.gptoday.net/en/news/f1/207607/history-ferrari-and-the-great-walkout-of-1961 https://www.gptoday.net/en/news/f1/207607/history-ferrari-an... Disgruntled employees are the birth of something new, not a call to clamp down. Who is calling for tech & gaming unionization because of the first 3rd party gaming company? It's not the majority of bad sentiment. It's not even news.
      - unapologetic 7y ago
        I was pointing out that the claim this sort of thing is new is complete and total bullshit.
        friendlybus 7y ago
        Nobody claimed it was new. The majority of this is recent.
        unapologetic 7y ago
        https://boards.fool.com/letter-from-an-ea-spouse-long-21588406.aspx?sort=recommendations https://boards.fool.com/letter-from-an-ea-spouse-long-215884... Not new. Not recent.
      - midnightclubbed 7y ago
        Both Ferrari and Lamborghini are unionized. Indeed the financing that helped start Lamborghini in 1963 was contingent on there being a workers union. I don't understand your point.

forrestthewoods 7y ago

> Get rid of right to work statutes I would not call taking away a worker’s right to work a benefit for a skilled worker.

SauciestGNU 7y ago
"Right to work" is one of those legal principles that follows a dystopian naming scheme. It was lobbied for by the owner class because it allows freeloaders to benefit from collective bargaining without paying membership dues in the union representing them. This weakens the union, with the eventual goal of eliminating the union (and the benefits it negotiated for workers) altogether.
- AnimalMuppet 7y ago
  Your alternative puts workers in a straitjacket of having to belong to a union to work certain places. You say it's for their good. But all I see is the straitjacket.
- forrestthewoods 7y ago
  And yet the alternative is not being allowed to work unless you donate money to extraordinarily political organizations who lobby for policies you may actively oppose. Sorry, but I’m going to call the compelled speech option far more dystopian than right to work.
unapologetic 7y ago
We can always go back to physically preventing scabs from working instead. Personally I think we should just get rid of anti-union laws.

unapologetic 7y ago

That will just drive more employers towards part time employees and outsourcing. The latter, I agree with the former reforms. You also aren't getting this sort of top down reform without obtaining more political power than the upper class. That's not going to happen without better organizing (Union, political movements, whatever).

friendlybus 7y ago
These utopian goals turn into dystopias.
- unapologetic 7y ago
  They don't. They exist all over and work fine.
  - friendlybus 7y ago
    Except for all the times they don't. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Commission_into_Trade_Union_Governance_and_Corruption https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Commission_into_Trade_Un... https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/detroit-city/2018/11/01/uaw-uses-non-union-labor-construction-home-resort-spot/1811055002/ https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/detroit-city/20... https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2tsg3e/eli5_prounion_vs_antiunion_arguments/ https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2tsg3e/e...
    - unapologetic 7y ago
      explainlikeimfive, for when we really want an intellectual discussion.
      - friendlybus 7y ago
        Attacking appearing of argument instead of it's content is a fallacy.

AnimalMuppet 7y ago

> Get rid of right to work statutes. Meaning that you're fine with me being required to join a union in order to work? No. I'd rather have the freedom to choose for myself, even if it means I have to give the same freedom to others.

snarf21 7y ago
No, I meant that when you take a job you are given a contract with clear rules about your job and for fixed durations. I was suggesting this instead of unions but this does require legislation.