3 ms·

Despite the popular belief, game developers are pretty well paid. Not every indie or QA contractor, of course, but it's a rich industry with 6 figure salaries a

Despite the popular belief, game developers are pretty well paid. Not every indie or QA contractor, of course, but it's a rich industry with 6 figure salaries and profit sharing/royalty bonuses in successful studios. So, of course, any union would love to represent game developers for a share of their income. Likewise, you don't often hear of, say, restaurant workers needing union representation because they do not make much money and rarely interest unions. This is what's driving calls for unionization IMHO. And I agree with manfredo, I started in the industry in 90s, and crunch was already there. If anything, the situation improved in mid 00s, with CA strengthening exempt employees classification and later 00s with ea_spouse lawsuit. E.g. mandatory crunches are gone, it used to be that people were forced to stay late and come in on weekends even if they had nothing to do but good luck pulling this now. Nowadays people mostly crunch either because their bonus comes out of the game's sales (and/or metacritic score, like in EA) or because they are paid OT.

einpoklum 7y ago
> So, of course, any union would love to represent game developers for a share of their income You're talking about the large, collaborationist unions we know in the US - e.g. those in the AFL-CIO - where "the union" is an external entity to "the unionizing workers"; and often with the bureaucratic motivations you describe. I specifically mentioned that's not the kind of unionization I advise. Also, payment is just one of many issues in a workplace. The basic need for a union is that the company's owners have the mechanisms for thinking, discussing, deciding acting collectively and concertedly, but its employees do not. That's what a union should be. On that basis, employees may want to tackle issues like: * Treatment by managers/management * Workplace culture * Physical working conditions * Workforce size vs. "squeezing" of existing employees * Advancement opportunities within the company/organization * Professional standards and so on. Finally, remember that a gaming development house has a lot of employees other than developers per se: QA, art, production, administrative etc. > Nowadays people mostly crunch ... or because they are paid OT. If people make a good salary, they don't work overtime because they don't need to. There must be some kind of psychological pressure in that direction. Overwork should be avoided. - who have joint interests and may wish to discuss things, take decisions, and act collect
- pandaman 7y ago
  I am not discussing whatever reasons you envisioned for unionization of our industry from the outside. I am just noting where the unionization effort is actually coming from. Pardon my cynicism, but I don't believe the big union care about anything other than payment, which drives their fees. Otherwise, as I said, they would had been pushing in retail with, at least, same effort as they do in the games industry. >If people make a good salary, they don't work overtime because they don't need to. Sure, they don't need to but, nevertheless, they like their fat bonuses.

einpoklum 7y ago

> So, of course, any union would love to represent game developers for a share of their income You're talking about the large, collaborationist unions we know in the US - e.g. those in the AFL-CIO - where "the union" is an external entity to "the unionizing workers"; and often with the bureaucratic motivations you describe. I specifically mentioned that's not the kind of unionization I advise. Also, payment is just one of many issues in a workplace. The basic need for a union is that the company's owners have the mechanisms for thinking, discussing, deciding acting collectively and concertedly, but its employees do not. That's what a union should be. On that basis, employees may want to tackle issues like: * Treatment by managers/management * Workplace culture * Physical working conditions * Workforce size vs. "squeezing" of existing employees * Advancement opportunities within the company/organization * Professional standards and so on. Finally, remember that a gaming development house has a lot of employees other than developers per se: QA, art, production, administrative etc. > Nowadays people mostly crunch ... or because they are paid OT. If people make a good salary, they don't work overtime because they don't need to. There must be some kind of psychological pressure in that direction. Overwork should be avoided. - who have joint interests and may wish to discuss things, take decisions, and act collect

pandaman 7y ago
I am not discussing whatever reasons you envisioned for unionization of our industry from the outside. I am just noting where the unionization effort is actually coming from. Pardon my cynicism, but I don't believe the big union care about anything other than payment, which drives their fees. Otherwise, as I said, they would had been pushing in retail with, at least, same effort as they do in the games industry. >If people make a good salary, they don't work overtime because they don't need to. Sure, they don't need to but, nevertheless, they like their fat bonuses.