6 ms·

Ya, this should be considered an abuse of Union power. :/

tatertotz 12y ago
How is this an abuse of union power? He made an agreement with a union and then broke the agreement on his own volition. It's no different than signing a noncompete agreement in exchange for a job, and then violating it.
- opendais 12y ago
  Did you not read the part of how there was no vote? "The threat can be traced back to a contract drawn up by the AFM two years ago. That contract—which Wintory says wasn't voted on by AFM members—was universally rejected by game makers." If there was a vote, sure, I could see it being reasonable. Without a vote? Nope. To address your edit: Noncompetes are just as vile. "Hey, if you want to stay unemployed you don't have to sign this...just sayin'" Its the same principle. Its an abuse of power.
  - tatertotz 12y ago
    the contract was drawn up by the leadership that was elected by the AFM, was it not? Thats kind of how it works. And noncompetes are here to stay since most people refuse to reject them. If enough people at a given company got together and formed, oh I dunno, a UNION, and agreed not to sign that shit it would probably go away quickly.
    - opendais 12y ago
      At which point you are hostage to a UNION, that turns around and holds a $50,000 gun to your head if you break what is effectively a noncompete. Remind me again how the UNION is the solution to this particular problem? Unions solve some problems. However, this is an instance where the Union is a problem.
      - ramblerman 12y ago
        However the new contract came about, I'm assuming he signed it. Which kind of makes him accountable. He agreed to the new terms. Otherwise you're saying he is legally bound to any future contract they choose to draft, just by being a member. Something I highly doubt.
        opendais 12y ago
        "Sign this or you can't work with anyone you've worked with so far in your career after this point" doesn't sound reasonable to me, sorry. It is basically one way ticket to being unemployed for a period of time. Contract law works when the power distribution is relatively equal between the two parties. It isn't fair when a person's livelihood depends on signing the contract.

How is this an abuse of union power? He made an agreement with a union and then broke the agreement on his own volition. It's no different than signing a noncompete agreement in exchange for a job, and then violating it.

opendais 12y ago
Did you not read the part of how there was no vote? "The threat can be traced back to a contract drawn up by the AFM two years ago. That contract—which Wintory says wasn't voted on by AFM members—was universally rejected by game makers." If there was a vote, sure, I could see it being reasonable. Without a vote? Nope. To address your edit: Noncompetes are just as vile. "Hey, if you want to stay unemployed you don't have to sign this...just sayin'" Its the same principle. Its an abuse of power.
- tatertotz 12y ago
  the contract was drawn up by the leadership that was elected by the AFM, was it not? Thats kind of how it works. And noncompetes are here to stay since most people refuse to reject them. If enough people at a given company got together and formed, oh I dunno, a UNION, and agreed not to sign that shit it would probably go away quickly.
  - opendais 12y ago
    At which point you are hostage to a UNION, that turns around and holds a $50,000 gun to your head if you break what is effectively a noncompete. Remind me again how the UNION is the solution to this particular problem? Unions solve some problems. However, this is an instance where the Union is a problem.
    - ramblerman 12y ago
      However the new contract came about, I'm assuming he signed it. Which kind of makes him accountable. He agreed to the new terms. Otherwise you're saying he is legally bound to any future contract they choose to draft, just by being a member. Something I highly doubt.
      - opendais 12y ago
        "Sign this or you can't work with anyone you've worked with so far in your career after this point" doesn't sound reasonable to me, sorry. It is basically one way ticket to being unemployed for a period of time. Contract law works when the power distribution is relatively equal between the two parties. It isn't fair when a person's livelihood depends on signing the contract.