In general, tech needs to move to more co-op, employee-&customer-owned, organized labor shops with labor on the board of directors. Mandatory arbitration for any area is BS because for-profit arbitrators are paid to be pseudo-"unbiased" while most often ruling in favor of who pays the bills.
I bet game developers would be the best positioned of all developers to unionize because the wages are so low already that it's hard for management to bring in scabs.
As I understand it the costs of arbitration are usually split between the plaintiff and defendant. However, your point may still be valid because the corporations are often repeat players who wield more influence.
On the other hand, if an arbitration was biased then the plaintiff could petition a court to disregard it and allow a regular suit to proceed. So arbitrators really do need to be unbiased.
Nothing is stopping anyone in Silicon Valley from starting a gaming company that is co-op, employee-&customer-owned, organized labor shops with labor on the board of directors. There are a lot of labor-friendly folks here. Why not pool resources to start one?
Arbitration keeps the court system less full. It has a purpose that everyone ignores. How about solving the underlying problem that brought about arbitration: courts being saddled by too many frivolous lawsuits?
I spent a week or so on site as a contractor (well technically a contractor for a company with a contract).. I certainly didn't leave thinking "hey these guys have it great".
I still keep thinking about their company policy: employees were expected to play their game every day. Can you imagine if McDonalds said they expected staff to eat at least one meal every day in-store?
Reminds me of when I worked at a smaller telecom company who had a crazy VP. He would approach random employees, ask them who their long distance carrier was, and if it wasn't the company, he'd fire them on the spot. "Why are you working for us if you don't believe in us?"
I have worked at a McDonald's and at least when I worked there, workers got something like $5 credit per eight hour shift back in the 1980's. Most people used it to eat a meal but sometimes we would trade credit with KFC or Pizza Hut workers for variety.
I have also worked in games on smaller teams and considered it a responsibility to play the game to make sure that everything I could influence worked well (or I changed it so that it did) or that I could evaluate other parts of the game versus user expectation/current state of the art. Maybe things are different on larger teams/projects.
There's a lot wrong with Riot but dog fooding the game never struck me as that odd. If you work on gmail you should probably use gmail often. If you work on an iOS you should probably spend time using an iPhone.
That's called dogfooding - how can you expect your entertainment product to be any fun if your own workers aren't having any fun playing it?
Leave aside for a second that it doesn't scale into large companies - for the product people and engineers working directly on the product, it doesn't seem like such an unreasonable expectation. If you come from the school of thought of "I'm a professional, I clock in at 9 and clock out at 5, here strictly for the paycheck, strict separation of life and work" then OK, it's not a fit for you. Thankfully, not every company has to be a fit for everybody.
Using the company's product is a perfectly reasonable request, either "on the clock" for exempt employees or contractors or as part of the job description for non-exempt.
I've interviewed with Riot a couple of times and it's always been an interesting experience. The first time I interviewed the recruiter basically hung up on me in the phone screen after 20 minutes because I hadn't played League of Legends.
Being in the US, which from an outsiders perspective appears to have little in the way of employee rights, what risk do these workers face of simply being fired and replaced by the company?
That would be illegal. US workers have right to discuss workplace conditions and can't be fired for trying to start a union. Also this is in California which has further worker protrections on top of that.
It's not "forced arbitration", it's "contractual arbitration" which means both sides agree to it. Employment contracts are freely negotiable, including a contractual arbitration clause.
That may be true for the executive team, and a 'rockstar' developer or two, But I'm finding it hard to believe that a QA person, or mid-level project manager, or the receptionist has any ability to negotiate their employment contract. Especially when rent is due at the end of the month, and little Bobby needs new shoes.
I think its similar to the arguments saying forced arbitration is fine for cell phone contracts, because you can choose to not do business with that company, when EVERY cell phone provider now has them...
I find that argument to be fairly naive. In theory there are lots of things that can be negotiated but are rarely done so, especially in an industry with a high abundance of eager workers. Having a small clause in their contract that voids their ability to take legal action against the company is something that I find to be worth protesting against.
Companies larger than a certain size should be required to use a standard template for employment contracts. It is acceptable and normal to negotiate over compensation, including salary, bonus rates/amounts, vacation days, etc., subject to legal minimums. It should not be acceptable to negotiate over terms like contractual arbitration, non-competition/non-solicitation, etc. - there should be a regulatory standard for every employment contract.
[+] [-] bayareanative|6 years ago|reply
In general, tech needs to move to more co-op, employee-&customer-owned, organized labor shops with labor on the board of directors. Mandatory arbitration for any area is BS because for-profit arbitrators are paid to be pseudo-"unbiased" while most often ruling in favor of who pays the bills.
[+] [-] brighter2morrow|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bdowling|6 years ago|reply
On the other hand, if an arbitration was biased then the plaintiff could petition a court to disregard it and allow a regular suit to proceed. So arbitrators really do need to be unbiased.
[+] [-] offshore1243|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] terryschiavo22|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Cmon2019|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] stephenr|6 years ago|reply
I still keep thinking about their company policy: employees were expected to play their game every day. Can you imagine if McDonalds said they expected staff to eat at least one meal every day in-store?
[+] [-] legohead|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] stevenwoo|6 years ago|reply
I have also worked in games on smaller teams and considered it a responsibility to play the game to make sure that everything I could influence worked well (or I changed it so that it did) or that I could evaluate other parts of the game versus user expectation/current state of the art. Maybe things are different on larger teams/projects.
[+] [-] jayd16|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jjeaff|6 years ago|reply
If the latter, then that's a good, and perfectly reasonable expectation. If the former, nope.
[+] [-] solatic|6 years ago|reply
Leave aside for a second that it doesn't scale into large companies - for the product people and engineers working directly on the product, it doesn't seem like such an unreasonable expectation. If you come from the school of thought of "I'm a professional, I clock in at 9 and clock out at 5, here strictly for the paycheck, strict separation of life and work" then OK, it's not a fit for you. Thankfully, not every company has to be a fit for everybody.
[+] [-] anbop|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Impossible|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] novia|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tortarga|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] brighter2morrow|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Haga|6 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] joshuaheard|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] briffle|6 years ago|reply
I think its similar to the arguments saying forced arbitration is fine for cell phone contracts, because you can choose to not do business with that company, when EVERY cell phone provider now has them...
[+] [-] aquova|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] andylei|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] solatic|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sovnade|6 years ago|reply