- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
Archive link: http://archive.today/Z5F3X
With one strike already underway, SAG-AFTRA announced Friday that it will seek authorization for a second strike against the major video game companies.
The union has a separate contract with the major video game makers, including Activision and Electronic Arts. The contract was originally due to expire last Nov. 7, but was extended for a year to allow for further discussions. The talks are due to resume on Sept. 26.
In a statement, SAG-AFTRA’s president, Fran Drescher, blasted the video game companies for their “greed and disrespect.”
SAG-AFTRA went on strike against the video game companies in October 2016. The strike lasted 11 months.
This time around, the union is seeking rest periods and safety protections, in addition to the wage increases and AI provisions. The union wants an on-set medic for video games, similar to current provisions in TV and film, and a prohibition against stunts during self-taped auditions.
Ballots are due at 5 p.m. PT on Sept. 25. The union will also hold informational meetings for affected members during the voting period.
You must log in or # to comment.
I hope this really hapoens. I’ve heard that video game development is a toxic jndustry to be in, from underpaid developers to strict dealines to meet. I really hope they will unionize!
[1/3]
I’ve been a gamedev at a couple AAA studios for almost 5 years now. I can say it’s a bit of a mixed bag, and very much depends on the studio.
The studios I’ve worked at have treated me well. I started out working at EA, which - for all its faults when it comes to gamers - does treat their staff very nicely.
We had free snacks in the office, flexible schedules, a generous remote work policy pre-pandemic (one of the best engineers on our team was permanently in Chicago, another was permanently in Oregon), and leadership that would listen to our complaints and respond honestly. We had weekly board game lunches and D&D sessions on the clock, and a comfy place to play all the latest games whenever we wanted.
Deadlines were reasonable, and the choice was always to cut before crunching. Crunch was on the table, but only as a last resort - I only crunched once in the 3 years I worked on that game, and it was for a single weekend when we had live players running into issues. My pay was on par with a traditional tech job. I went from $15/hour at my college job to $25/hour as an intern to $100k/year as a junior. Within 3 years I was making $140k/year, plus stock options and a 30% yearly bonus.
My one complaint is that EA unceremoniously pulled the plug on us. We had started a beta period and player response was… middling. We thought we could rescue the project, but we needed another 6 months to make it happen to avoid crunching. Leadership pitched the idea… corpo execs said “You aren’t getting that additional time; we’re killing the project.” We got shut down and all 150 devs were sent to the unemployment line.
EA’s severance package was very generous, though, and even when they were firing us they went above and beyond what they legally were “supposed” to do. I wound up with my yearly bonus, half a years’ worth of salary, plus 2 months of being “technically employed” but being paid to look for another job - so plenty of runway (plus unused sick time + vacation on top of that).
While it always sucks being laid off, and it sucks that the project we spent years on got the axe overnight… they really could’ve been far worse. Some of my former coworkers decided to do their own thing and it seems to have worked out for them, as they were able to get publisher funding well within the “runway” EA gave us.
[2/3]
Other studios are more, eh. Devs stick together and are honest with one another about the state of different studios. I was in the pipeline to get hired at one studio when multiple people explicitly told me that it wasn’t a place that treats their workers well, so I backed out.
I got hired somewhere at the recommendation of a former mentor, who has been in the industry for 30 years and whose judgement I trusted. I don’t want to speak as to where I work now, but I can say that he was right and that the place I’m at has been an ocean of calm amidst the chaos that’s the rest of the industry right now.
You hear horror stories from co-workers in the office. A friend of mine was ex-Blizzard and told me all about what was happening there well before it became a national news story. There are places which will work you to the bone and crunch you until you can’t stand it anymore.
Some people love that stuff. I don’t. But you get paid extremely well if you work for a place that works you hard. I could’ve made triple my salary at one of the places I was in the pipeline for, plus sponsorship for moving to the EU. I just would have to basically dedicate my entire life to that company, and I don’t think I had it in me… but I can see why people would.
[3/3]
As far as unionizing goes - it’s a mixed bag. I myself am very pro-union; I was a Teamster for years (Local 495). And many gamedevs are left-leaning (but not all! I knew some MAGA/QAnon guys). This in turn makes them supportive of unions on paper.
But when conversations stopped being theoretical and started being, “No, really, why wouldn’t you?”, the holdouts tend to think:
-
Union leadership is corrupt/greedy, and they don’t want to give union leaders money for “nothing” (as they see it)
-
Being in a union means everyone would need to be bound to strict regulations - keeping exact track of time worked, having exact lunch breaks, documenting everything. As-is in the game industry, the “standard” at most places is hands-off, take lunch whenever, stay at lunch however long you want, clock in/out whenever, nobody questions you as long as your work is getting done. People like this and don’t want to risk losing it.
-
Being in a union threatens close relationships with management. I can say that when I was a Teamster, management was outright adversarial and conversations with them weren’t fun. In the game industry, management is quite literally my friends and people I chill out with. There’s a very, very blurry line between “friends” and “bosses” - some bosses are horrible, to be sure, but the general vibe is casual.
-
There’s a lot of benefits in the office like free snacks, free swag, a place to chill out and play games at work, etc. People are afraid that this would count as “compensation” and thus being unionized would mean that you’d have to pay for snacks or swag or whatever - or that it could be taken away as retaliation from management.
-
Retaliation is a thing. It’s illegal. US government doesn’t care. Corpos get a slap on the wrist because of plausible deniability. EA has been downsizing recently and they “coincidentally” cut the contract with a QA team that just unionized. Hmm. That sort of stuff has a chilling effect - EA has no qualms shutting down studios. Why rock the boat and risk being locked out?
There are counterarguments for each of those points. Benefits can be made contractual, union leadership isn’t necessarily corrupt (although I did dislike the leadership of my Teamster local - for being too close to management and too soft). Etc. But it is an uphill battle if people are generally already happy where they work - and the jobs are plentiful enough that people can be comfortable moving studios until they find somewhere that lets them vibe.
We’ll see what happens if the market continues to tighten.
I can see a place like Blizzard unionizing, just from the horror stories I’ve heard. Maybe Epic as well. But it’s a lot harder to make a union happen in today’s day and age.
100k as a junior? Money does really work differently in the US. I earned 5.5 euro an hour without any benefits in Berlin.
US software devs are generally paid a lot more than other countries. Keep in mind we still have to pay for our own health insurance/medical bills, but I don’t know how Germany handles their healthcare and the bills won’t matter for everyone.
In Germany health insurance starts on a certain amount of around 200 euro a month, which you always have to pay, even if unemployed, and then progressively gets more as you earn more. For a normal income 350 would be pretty normal, but your employer pays it in your name. You can also get private insurance if you want something fancier, however the quality is always high any way.
If you’re unemployed or are ill you can get welfare though, and they’ll pay it for you.
What does it look like for you?
Health insurance is largely a benefit. It’s largely cost-prohibitive to do otherwise, and I believe coverage can often be better from your employer than what’s available on the open market.
You still pay for employer-provided coverage, but with your employer covering some portion of the cost. I think my out-of-pocket insurance is ~$300/mo as well, but most insurances will also come with a low-deductable plan that is sometimes, but not always, cheaper depending on how you use your insurance. Insurance only covers some part of a medical bill, and the lower price covers less. There’s a ton of caveats on all of that though.
If you’re unemployed, there are options. You can just go to the hospital without coverage, and apply for income-based relief once you have the bill. You can’t apply before you go though, and you may or may not have your costs covered. Not paying at all of course impacts your credit, but like 90% (number pulled from my ass) of the US has medical debt, and I’ve had landlords for instance straight up tell me that ignore medical debt on the credit report.
There’s some kinda public insurance available. I think it’s largely for retired folks? Idk, I’ve never heard of anyone actually able to use it. You also keep your employers coverage for about a year after you leave, but you have to pay for it still.
-
