A New EA Spouse Controversy, Now At Rockstar San Diego

From Gamasutra.

The highlights:
-Employees have been in massive crunch since March, 2009 due to poor management and manipulation of deadlines.
-Raises are not keeping up with inflation.
-Promised bonuses and royalties are being purposefully withheld and benefits are being scaled back.
-Management is strong-arming staff into working obscene hours and has denied things like time off at Christmas.
-Even employees that are showing signs of depression are being guilted or threatened if they call in sick.

This letter is anonymous and very poorly written so take it with the skepticism that it deserves but judging from some of the comments, this seems to be real. Gamasutra is also not known for publishing random crap without validating it. If true, this is shameful from a company that has such a high-profile image and frankly, how could they not have expected this to happen at some point? Honestly, I can't imagine the thought of treating employees this way. Granted, I don't manage a large studio but given how long Red Dead Redemption (their only announced project) has been in development, if they're crunching like this, it appears this is a result of poor planning and bad leadership (something which I touched on in one of Elysium's story threads a while back.) Many developers have been saying for years that most of the current crop of Producers out there are inexperienced and don't know how to manage a project properly. If managed right from the start, crunch shouldn't be necessary at all or only at a minimum. If these guys have been crunching for almost a year, someone's head should roll. It appears as though their managers are using the bad economy and current shortage of jobs in the industry to treat their teams like crap because they know few will leave.

I've read articles talking before how the Houser brothers' lack of experience in the game development industry prior to tripping over backwards into good fortune with Rockstar has hurt the company before and why so many non-GTA Rockstar titles have only had niche appeal or been outright flops. Yet Take-Two has had to pay them millions to keep them on staff when they clearly don't seem to be able to provide proper project planning or in the case of Rockstar San Diego, put people in charge who know what they're doing. Given this development, I wonder what's going to happen to Rockstar San Diego after Red Dead Redemption ships because I can't see people lining up to apply there or indeed at any Rockstar studio if they know this is what they're walking into.

A lot of new industries have quality of life issues but most eventually manage to find a balance whereas the video game industry always has stories like this creeping up and as a whole, never seems to learn anything. I know that unlike many industries, the technology keeps advancing at such a rapid pace that it's hard to keep up (something which is the industry's own fault) but surely by now, a balance can be found no?

Wait, so let me get this straight. This is an open letter from a bunch of video game designers/programmers wives about how their SO's job is taking a lot of time, stressing them out, and they're not happy about their stressed SOs and want it to change?

Pardon my french, but cry me a f*cking river. Go tell that to ANY military spouse and prepare to get laughed at. Very, very laughed at. My wife lives in a reality where I can be sent around the world at the drop of a hate. In my current job, I can be called in to work locally at any hour, for any length of time. Does it suck? Absolutely. Is it needed? Absolutely. On top of all of that, I guarantee that I carry far more responsibility for far less pay than even a junior developer there is getting.

So, yea. Their hours may suck, but at least their job hazards list is limited to paper cuts, bad workstation ergonomics and long hours. Good grief, this stuff drives me nuts. Sorry for the rant.

/rant

That is unfortunate for both of you but I would argue that just because poor working conditions exist elsewhere doesn't justify it here, especially if it's for reasons of poor management. And in the case of military families, as much as I feel for the horrendous stress that must cause for those people, you know that's a possibility when you go into it. In game development, people know there can be long hours and crunch but if this letter is true, this goes way beyond that. In your industry (whatever that is), some of the annoying conditions you work under might be necessary but in this industry, it very much isn't. That these guys (possibly) make good money doesn't justify them having to work 100+ hour weeks for a year straight, in addition to having their benefits reduced, bonuses and Christmas vacations withheld and raises not keep up with inflation. I have no idea how much you make in your job but I think you'd be surprised how little even senior developers at some studios make. This isn't about them being in the games industry, this just shouldn't happen period.

Parallax Abstraction wrote:

That is unfortunate for both of you but I would argue that just because poor working conditions exist elsewhere doesn't justify it here. And in the case of military families, as much as I feel for the horrendous stress that must cause for those people, you know that's a possibility when you go into it. In game development, people know there can be long hours and crunch but if this letter is true, this goes way beyond that. In your industry (whatever that is), some of the annoying conditions you work under might be necessary but in this industry, it very much isn't. That these guys (possibly) make good money doesn't justify them having to work 100+ hour weeks for a year straight, in addition to having their benefits reduced, bonuses and Christmas vacations withheld and raises not keep up with inflation. I have no idea how much you make in your job but I think you'd be surprised how little even senior developers at some studios make. This isn't about them being in the games industry, this just shouldn't happen period.

So why not quit? Jeez, I know the job market isn't great right now but these people aren't working on the plantation. I could not imagine ever feeling so beholden to a job.

Also, +1 for perspective from AnimeJ. Please don't try to downplay the sacrifice military families have to deal with just because "you know that's a possibility when you go into it."

AnimeJ wrote:

Wait, so let me get this straight. This is an open letter from a bunch of video game designers/programmers wives about how their SO's job is taking a lot of time, stressing them out, and they're not happy about their stressed SOs and want it to change?

Pardon my french, but cry me a f*cking river. Go tell that to ANY military spouse and prepare to get laughed at. Very, very laughed at. My wife lives in a reality where I can be sent around the world at the drop of a hate. In my current job, I can be called in to work locally at any hour, for any length of time. Does it suck? Absolutely. Is it needed? Absolutely. On top of all of that, I guarantee that I carry far more responsibility for far less pay than even a junior developer there is getting.

So, yea. Their hours may suck, but at least their job hazards list is limited to paper cuts, bad workstation ergonomics and long hours. Good grief, this stuff drives me nuts. Sorry for the rant.

/rant

A good rant, but don't dismiss the effect on a relationship long hours can have.

Yes, you could be away from home unexpectedly for long periods of time, but I would think that seeing your SO for a couple of hours per day (probably only when they are sleeping) could be just as detrimental to a relationship.

Basically my point is that it's not apples to apples.

Also, Rockstar San Diego is based in California where the video game industry has largely undergone a massacre lately. Who is to say these people aren't looking for other jobs but you still have to put food on your table.

I'd extend that to the software industry as a whole.

The problem with California-based studios is that it's too damned expensive to live there. So they have to pay well. 2 and a half years ago when I graduated from college, California-based companies were paying ~70k per year for new grads with a BS in computer science. Chicago companies were offering much lower, averaging around 50k.

It's no surprise, then, to see that large production houses are moving their development to elsewhere in the US or overseas.

cube wrote:

The problem with California-based studios is that it's too damned expensive to live there. So they have to pay well. 2 and a half years ago when I graduated from college, California-based companies were paying ~70k per year for new grads with a BS in computer science. Chicago companies were offering much lower, averaging around 50k.

This is a good point as well. If Junior Programmers at RSD are making $75K/year, that would be a metric ton if they were living where I do but there, not so much. I constantly hear on podcasts and vidcasts from San Francisco how expensive it is there and how there are people making six figures that can only afford small apartments. That said, you do know what you're getting into when you are offered a salary to be hired somewhere. The problems outlined in the letter actually have nothing to do with baseline salaries, they have to do with working conditions, scaled back benefits, promised incentives being reneged on and people being negatively reviewed because of things like refusing to work over Christmas.

I'm actually really surprised we haven't heard of Rockstar opening a studio in Montreal. They do have one in Vancouver (which they acquired a few years back) and another in Toronto (which has only developed one game and now just seems to provide assistance to other studios) but given the crazy subsidies the Quebec government still offers newcomers, I'm really surprised they haven't expanded there.

Evo, I specifically said that I feel for the stress being in a military family must cause so if you're going to quote me on that point, please don't cherry pick my statements. That you know the risks of military life when you choose it doesn't mean you don't have a right to feel stress from it and I never said otherwise. I've never been there and I wouldn't wish that stress and worry on my worst enemy. That said, this also isn't the military we're talking about here.

Also, Rockstar San Diego is based in California where the video game industry has largely undergone a massacre lately. Who is to say these people aren't looking for other jobs but you still have to put food on your table. This also involves more than just hours. And since when does having the option to quit give a pass to an employer for treating you like crap? People shouldn't have to be faced with people stressed out beyond measure at their job or stressed out beyond measure because they can't pay their bills. For companies with the resources of Rockstar, they should be doing better by their staff, period. I've worked for companies where I had this kind of work environment and it wasn't nearly as easy as just quitting and finding something else when you had to live paycheque to paycheque. That there are always other people who have things worse than you doesn't automatically justify the environment you're in.

PA, if the conditions are really as bad as you're saying they are, then I'd have a hard time believing that Rockstar isn't violating federal labor laws. There are a ton of them out there, and I still feel that my point stands. They have a lot of protections that as a military member I don't; labor laws, overtime laws etc are pretty key. One of the biggest things that people don't know about is that just because you're salaried doesn't mean you can be forced to work endless hours. So, if they're really being forced to work 100+ hours a week, which as you know is the equivalent of nearly 5 days straight without stopping, they have a VERY valid basis for a lawsuit against Rock Star.

So, should they be doing their employees better? Absolutely. But it's also worth noting that they're legally required to. If any of these worked to death employees of Rock Star are making less than $75k a year, then they're owed overtime, period. And that adds up very quickly when you're working 60+ hours a week of overtime at 1/40th of your weekly wage when salaried.

CA Labor Law, (p)515.5[/url]](4) The employee's hourly rate of pay is not less than thirty-six
dollars ($36.00) or, if the employee is paid on a salaried basis, the
employee earns an annual salary of not less than seventy-five
thousand dollars ($75,000) for full-time employment, which is paid at
least once a month and in a monthly amount of not less than six
thousand two hundred fifty dollars ($6,250). The Division of Labor
Statistics and Research shall adjust both the hourly pay rate and the
salary level described in this paragraph on October 1 of each year
to be effective on January 1 of the following year by an amount equal
to the percentage increase in the California Consumer Price Index
for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers.

So if they're making as little as you say, then Rock Star is in a world of hurt should what you say be true. But if they're having issues making their bills, then there's something seriously wrong that needs fixing, and there's certainly legal recourse available. As to the schedule, I've done my share of 60-70 hour weeks during crunch periods when I was a programmer, which was my previous job in the military. I know what it's like, I know what they go through. I'm well acquainted with deadlines and the things you'll do to meet them. Even now, it's not unheard of for me to be at work 10 or 11 hours a day from time to time. Consistently? Not really. But over the summer there were several weeks where I'd be at work from 6am till 6pm.

As for what I get paid, that's not hard to find. Here's a link to the 2010 PDF on the Defence Finance Accounting Service. To save you some time, I'll math it out though:

Base Pay - 2583.90
Basic Allowance for Housing - 981.00
Basic Allowance for Subsistance - 323.87

That totals out to 3888.77 a month, before taxes. In general, I take home $2900 a month. The main reason behind that is because allowances are not taxable. Short version of all of that is that before taxes, I'm making 46665.24 a year. While it's not horrible, I'd love for you to find a middle manager, which is essentially what my duties and responsibilities boil down to making that little.

edit -

@AP: I totally get that. but crappy hours are crappy hours, no matter what industry you're in. Not seeing your loved ones can and will take a toll on you; it's stressful. However, I do think that it's a stress regardless of your industry, and not so much an apples to oranges comparison as you seem to be saying.

AnimeJ wrote:

crappy hours are crappy hours, no matter what industry you're in.

True...

Besides, there's always someone willing to work for less, if you're making videogames at 40, there's plenty of 20 year olds who will do your job for much less, because they don't have families and stuff. So, yeah, change industries? Or start your own company that pays well, or something.

AnimeJ wrote:

PA, if the conditions are really as bad as you're saying they are, then I'd have a hard time believing that Rockstar isn't violating federal labor laws. There are a ton of them out there, and I still feel that my point stands. They have a lot of protections that as a military member I don't; labor laws, overtime laws etc are pretty key. One of the biggest things that people don't know about is that just because you're salaried doesn't mean you can be forced to work endless hours. So, if they're really being forced to work 100+ hours a week, which as you know is the equivalent of nearly 5 days straight without stopping, they have a VERY valid basis for a lawsuit against Rock Star.

The letter states that they are considering legal action if management doesn't change conditions there. The thing is, while I don't disagree with you that there should be federal laws protecting them against this kind of thing, they must either not apply or conditions of their employment agreement must make them exempt (they might be contractors or at-will employees though I'm not sure how that works as we don't have that term in Canada) because this kind of thing is an epidemic throughout the games industry. EA Spouse was about this kind of thing happening at another large company and this is such a widespread problem that the IGDA has an entire division setup to deal with quality of life issues (that's brought up in the comments by Erin Hoffman who was the EA Spouse.) I don't know why these companies continue to get away with it but there must be something that's permitting it, otherwise I think we'd hear about big publishers getting slapped with lawsuits left and right no?

And I don't disagree that as someone in the military, you are probably not adequately compensated for the work you do in comparison to certain private sector jobs. I don't know that much about the structure of the US military but I know our service people here are largely treated like crap as well. I don't mean to sound like I'm downplaying your plight or to sound like I'm saying you don't deserve more because that's not what I think. I'm only looking at this issue on its own merits and as I said, just because there are people worse off than RSD developers doesn't negate their right to complain when being treated unfairly. I used to work a job for some asshat managers that required me to work 8-12 hours a say, 6 days a week for over 2.5 years just to get by. It almost killed me. On top of this, I was promised promotions that I later discovered they had no intention of giving me and only promised me to keep me from leaving. The problem was that because I was a contractor, there wasn't much I could do about it. I kept looking for other jobs but I also fought to improve the conditions where I was because my right to leave didn't negate the fact that they were treating me and others like crap for no good reason.

Mex wrote:

Besides, there's always someone willing to work for less, if you're making videogames at 40, there's plenty of 20 year olds who will do your job for much less, because they don't have families and stuff. So, yeah, change industries? Or start your own company that pays well, or something.

Again, a valid course of action but not so easy to do at the best of times and certainly not in this economy. Almost 2 years ago, I decided to go the route of starting my own company, largely because I had bad experiences at former employers and didn't like the loose ethics direction most were going in. Today I'm broke, living off borrowed money and desperate to find another job. Starting a game studio I imagine would be almost impossible today given the industry's volatility and how much venture capital has tightened up in the last year. It is almost never just as easy as packing up and finding something else and again, why does this make it OK for employers to be scumbags?

Yea, I'm well aware that I'm not compensated traditionally as well. There are, however plenty of other benefits though; healthcare chief among them for all that people give Tricare(the military's HMO). But at the end of the day, I have a great deal of job satisfaction in what I do, even when I can't tell anyone about it

My big deal in all of this is that instead of taking the issue head on, they're writing letters and making threats. If it's really honestly that bad, don't screw around. Don't whine and complain to the internet. Just go and get something done about it. File a complaint with the labor bureau. But don't write angry ranty letters to the internet(Chiggie, please don't stop writing your angry, ranty letters because they are totally cool) expecting things to change.

Well, this is one thing they're doing but who is to say it is all they're doing. If so, then yeah I think they could be better using their resources elsewhere. But trying to get the message out on the web site that the industry talks on the most is a good way to spread word of it and I think that's important to the process. The industry has to have it made publicly known that people are mad about this and that can be a very effective means of inciting change. I just wish they'd edited the letter better as I think its current state makes it harder for some to take them seriously.

Agreed. However, if they're doing other things about it, a well written press release will do far more good than this. As you point out, it makes it much harder to be taken seriously.

Pardon my french, but cry me a f*cking river. Go tell that to ANY military spouse and prepare to get laughed at. Very, very laughed at.

Apples to oranges, you and your wife went into the lifestyle KNOWING what the risks were, these people didn't. If we want to keep expanding, you live a very posh life compared to say, Afghan farmers or Cambodian plumbers. SOMEBODY always has a sh*ttier sob story. If the allegations are true, and it's not unheard of for game companies to be punishing manipulative bastards, then it's a real bad situation. Depending on where their based, labor laws may be totally in Rockstars favor, and they'll be smart enough to work the books the right way.

AnimeJ wrote:

PA, if the conditions are really as bad as you're saying they are, then I'd have a hard time believing that Rockstar isn't violating federal labor laws. There are a ton of them out there, and I still feel that my point stands. They have a lot of protections that as a military member I don't; labor laws, overtime laws etc are pretty key. One of the biggest things that people don't know about is that just because you're salaried doesn't mean you can be forced to work endless hours. So, if they're really being forced to work 100+ hours a week, which as you know is the equivalent of nearly 5 days straight without stopping, they have a VERY valid basis for a lawsuit against Rock Star.

Laws are different depending on where you are, but this is the technical field. I don't know where you're at, but in Washington they actually do have the right to make their exployees work like that. It's one of the reasons contract work is so popular - they can't do that to a temp. They are also exempt from paying overtime at all above a certain salary grade or hourly which works out to aproximately $46,000 a year (23-something an hour for 2000 hour years) gross. Compensating for OT with vacation time (that may or may not actually get taken) instead of pay is a common practice as well.

I'm not in a game shop, but 80 to 100 hours is pretty normal when I'm in crunch mode (which seems like all the time time this last six months). Luckily part of that is from home. Once this project is done I'll be back to a more standard 60 hours.

Why do I put up with this and actually consider myself lucky? I love my work, my boss, and I am compensated by things like a sane office environment, true flex-time, really good benefits, lots of training options and a stable company that isn't going to go away tomorrow or dump me on my arse.

edit: I do want to point out that I'm not necessarily agreeing with this policy on Rockstar's part. It sounds like the environment is so toxic even a punch-the-clock 40 hours would be torture. But don't just blame hours, and don't necessarily believe Rockstar isn't following the local rules for employers.

Wow, this started out contentious. Talk like you want, but I'm not sure comparing and contrasting this to a job in the military is going to move things forward. I'm actually not addressing either side in the conversation (and feel free to ignore me, I'm just some dude) I just want to see it move past two sides going back and forth about military spouses. Not enough thought is spent considering the families of those in the military, and that is something I think is a major failing, but comparing it to Game Design does nothing to move this conversation forward.

It seems to me that the game industry, like pretty much every other industry, hasn't figured out how to properly motivate and reward workers. This isn't just a failure of project management, though it is that, too. It's more a problem of knowing how to inspire creative and knowledge workers and give them some satisfaction and sense of accomplishment about their work. As momgamer said, if you're happy about what you do, have a sane environment and good benefits, you can and will work longer hours and still feel great about it.

This past week on Talk of the Nation, author Daniel Pink discussed his book "Drive - The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us". His thesis, backed by many years of psychological and sociological studies, is that monetary rewards are almost always the worst motivators. Instead of increasing productivity, a monetary "carrot" will generally cause someone to spend the absolute minimum effort required to get the job done. Also, the workers won't be satisfied with their job, because they really have no say in what they're doing, and no investment in the result.

Pink's solution? Treat people like people, not horses. Put away the carrots and sticks, and treat them like human beings. Give them the opportunity to have some autonomy and self direction, and they will go above and beyond what the job requires, work harder, and be happier about it.

The transcript of this Talk of the Nation is available at npr.org. You can listen to it there, too, if you're feeling more podcasty. I have a feeling if more U.S. tech industries treated their workers like Google does (just one example--there are others given in the talk), the U.S. would have more multi billion dollar tech companies, and a lot more happy tech workers.

IMAGE(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4043/4259372366_c5c96abd64_o.jpg)

momgamer wrote:
AnimeJ wrote:

PA, if the conditions are really as bad as you're saying they are, then I'd have a hard time believing that Rockstar isn't violating federal labor laws. There are a ton of them out there, and I still feel that my point stands. They have a lot of protections that as a military member I don't; labor laws, overtime laws etc are pretty key. One of the biggest things that people don't know about is that just because you're salaried doesn't mean you can be forced to work endless hours. So, if they're really being forced to work 100+ hours a week, which as you know is the equivalent of nearly 5 days straight without stopping, they have a VERY valid basis for a lawsuit against Rock Star.

Laws are different depending on where you are, but this is the technical field. I don't know where you're at, but in Washington they actually do have the right to make their exployees work like that. It's one of the reasons contract work is so popular - they can't do that to a temp. They are also exempt from paying overtime at all above a certain salary grade or hourly which works out to aproximately $46,000 a year (23-something an hour for 2000 hour years) gross. Compensating for OT with vacation time (that may or may not actually get taken) instead of pay is a common practice as well.

I'm not in a game shop, but 80 to 100 hours is pretty normal when I'm in crunch mode (which seems like all the time time this last six months). Luckily part of that is from home. Once this project is done I'll be back to a more standard 60 hours.

Why do I put up with this and actually consider myself lucky? I love my work, my boss, and I am compensated by things like a sane office environment, true flex-time, really good benefits, lots of training options and a stable company that isn't going to go away tomorrow or dump me on my arse.

edit: I do want to point out that I'm not necessarily agreeing with this policy on Rockstar's part. It sounds like the environment is so toxic even a punch-the-clock 40 hours would be torture. But don't just blame hours, and don't necessarily believe Rockstar isn't following the local rules for employers.

Check your labor laws. If you're not above a certain salary, you qualify for OT. Federal law puts that at the equivalent of $455 a week, but as I mentioned prior, California puts it at $75k a year. If you're making less than that, you are NOT considered exempt from overtime. Job titles, etc do not automatically make you exempt.

MaverickDago wrote:
Pardon my french, but cry me a f*cking river. Go tell that to ANY military spouse and prepare to get laughed at. Very, very laughed at.

Apples to oranges, you and your wife went into the lifestyle KNOWING what the risks were, these people didn't. If we want to keep expanding, you live a very posh life compared to say, Afghan farmers or Cambodian plumbers. SOMEBODY always has a sh*ttier sob story. If the allegations are true, and it's not unheard of for game companies to be punishing manipulative bastards, then it's a real bad situation. Depending on where their based, labor laws may be totally in Rockstars favor, and they'll be smart enough to work the books the right way.

Again, it's not apples to oranges. I absolutely came into this knowing what it would be like. I did give my wife full disclosure when we got married two years ago. However, the stereotype of the game design field has been long hours at crunch time for a decade or more. In fact, it's been the stereotype for the IT field at large for the same duration. I know I fully expected it when I was in college for Comp Sci. In other words, if you're not doing research into your chosen line of work, you have no one to blame but yourself for your ignorance.

demonbox wrote:

Wow, this started out contentious. Talk like you want, but I'm not sure comparing and contrasting this to a job in the military is going to move things forward. I'm actually not addressing either side in the conversation (and feel free to ignore me, I'm just some dude) I just want to see it move past two sides going back and forth about military spouses. Not enough thought is spent considering the families of those in the military, and that is something I think is a major failing, but comparing it to Game Design does nothing to move this conversation forward.

I made the comparison strictly because just about every other line of work has recourse. In this instance, even if they are getting paid enough to not be overtime exempt, no employer can legally enforce a 100+ hour work week. Even if they were to put that in your contract, you could EASILY have it dismissed as unconscionable in court. However, in this case, as PA pointed out earlier, these guys are most likely not being compensated to that level. This is a very, very basic FLSA case, yet instead of doing that, you have a bunch of wives issuing letters and whining. If the article in question was 'Rock Star employees file FLSA case to get their due' you'd find a much, much different response out of me, I assure you.

MacBrave wrote:

IMAGE(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4043/4259372366_c5c96abd64_o.jpg)

Awesome comic, but you missed the part where I said that I love my job, even with it's horrible hours, low pay and stress.

edit - An interesting point of note in all of this. The exemptions I've been talking about for Computer Professionals is strictly limited to software. Anyone working with hardware, such as server architecture etc does not qualify under exempt status and must always be paid overtime.

As much as they went out of their way to break out God's Own Purple Thesaurus, that piece is an affront to the English language. It's very difficult to read. They're trying to sound lofty but only talking in circles.

If it's even real...

Parallax Abstraction wrote:

Well, this is one thing they're doing but who is to say it is all they're doing. If so, then yeah I think they could be better using their resources elsewhere. But trying to get the message out on the web site that the industry talks on the most is a good way to spread word of it and I think that's important to the process. The industry has to have it made publicly known that people are mad about this and that can be a very effective means of inciting change. I just wish they'd edited the letter better as I think its current state makes it harder for some to take them seriously.

The other benefit of getting this sort of info into the public is that it makes the job of recruiters a lot harder. Finding experienced game developers is often very difficult, particularly in some very specific areas (graphics programmers & technical artists, for example), and if you studio has a bad work life reputation, it's even harder. Being unable to hire key people is really bad for a studio, so I think it's pretty reasonable to strike back in this manner if the conditions are really this bad.

While not universal, this is called "being employed in America" lately. How do you think work keeps getting done? People are laid off and "productivity goes up". That's code for -- well -- this.

It's a vicious cycle that will blow up on many a company if the economy ever gets back on track, but the fact that employees are still showing up means they can get away with it for now. Companies are taking advantage of the fact that there's currently no where else to go.

Maybe I'm just tired from my 12 hour day and being woken up by my cellphone calling me back in for another issue.

I'm sorry, but I think the military comparison is totally off. It's not that I think that soldiers risk a lot more and don't get paid enough. But that's not the point. There may be jobs with unfavourable conditions, but that doesn't make them a benchmark for everything. That's like me saying: Hey, if you don't like it in the US army, move to North Korea or something and see how fun much you can have there!

I also highly disagree with the "It's always been like this, so you should quit/not have joined to begin with!" notion. How handy would be it be if let's say people in the car industry still had the same working conditions they had in 1925?

The gaming industry is still quite young, so it shouldn't come as a surprise there still is quite an amount of mismanagement and things to be learned. No doubt, there will always be some sort of crunchtime required at some point during a project, be it a game or business software), but anything beyond two or three weeks will outweigh the shortterm benefits one might get from 12+ hours of work today. Yeah, are aware of that. But you'd be surprised how many still seem to think that 30% more worktime translates to 30% more productivity.

It does not necessarily have to be that way. I've heard good things from some people who work at Ubisoft Montreal, I know Crytek is treating their employees quite well and is also paying more than most studios do over here. The costs are higher, but that also enables them to hire experienced developers and/or people with an academic background.

The real solution to this kind of stuff is a Union. But there seems to be a fairly libertarian streak among most tech workers so I doubt one will ever take hold. Even if it did... This is pretty much the way of the world right now; company's can demand pretty much anything and force people to do it -- especially in an area like California where, I think, we (L.A.) are at 12% unemployment and I'm guessing San Diego is close to Los Angeles numbers.

Could be worse, they could be trying to scratch out a living working as a freelance writer in a world that thinks written content should either be free or that $15 a blog post is a living wage.

AnimeJ wrote:

My wife lives in a reality where I can be sent around the world at the drop of a hate.

Spunior wrote:

I'm sorry, but I think the military comparison is totally off. It's not that I think that soldiers risk a lot more and don't get paid enough. But that's not the point. There may be jobs with unfavourable conditions, but that doesn't make them a benchmark for everything. That's like me saying: Hey, if you don't like it in the US army, move to North Korea or something and see how fun much you can have there!

I use it as a comparison for two reasons, both of which I've detailed, but will do so again because it appears you missed it.

1. Know the job you're getting into. I spent several years as a programmer, albeit for the military, but the industry is the same, regardless of who employs you. There are still crunches. There are still times when you'll have to put in hours. If you haven't done some research into what the industry is like, or asked at your interview, that is entirely on you. In that regard, the military is the PERFECT comparison.
2. If conditions are truly as bad as they're saying, then do something meaningful about it. Again, the military is the perfect point of comparison because we don't have those options. I have no recourse for 80 or 100 hour weeks because I agreed to them. I will never get overtime for it, again, because it's part of what I agreed to. In most cases, people in those jobs ARE legally entitled to overtime compensation and better working conditions.

As I've mentioned before, they most definitely have legal recourse. FLSA gives them a great deal of protection from inhumane working conditions, which I wholly agree that if this is even close to reality, most definitely is. If they're frequently working 100+ hour weeks, then get something done about it. Talk with a lawyer, do something meaningful. This? This is not meaningful.

You're belaboring the point, AnimeJ. I think you've established your views clearly, so it's time to move on.

It's sad to see people criticizing workers simply for the fact that they are trying to improve their working conditions. And "my working conditions are worse" isn't a reason for them not to improve theirs.

larrymadill wrote:

The real solution to this kind of stuff is a Union.

It usually is.

Pardon my french, but cry me a f*cking river

I think most of my other points have already been said but if you hear about someone who is pushed to depression by their job being threatened and strong-armed into working even harder, and this is your response, I don't know what to say to you.