Going into the Game Developers Conference this week, you could foresee some of the hot topics that would be consuming the world’s largest gathering of game makers: stuff like real-time raytraced graphics, fantastical blockchain-based business schemes, and how to design games for augmented reality. But another surprising issue has overtaken many of the discussions in the Moscone Center hallways this week: that of unionization.
Labor organizing isn’t a new idea in the game industry—the first time I personally wrote about the issue was in Electronic Gaming Monthly more than a decade ago. There seems to be more momentum for the idea among the grassroots developers on hand at the conference this year, though, thanks in large part to an organized movement called Game Workers Unite. The organization, which isn’t a union itself, formed over private Facebook groups and Discord chats in recent weeks and has practically blanketed the Moscone Center with brochures and zines encouraging developers to band together against exploitative working conditions, uncertain project-based job security, and excessive, life-consuming crunch time.
“We are currently forming an anonymous and horizontal organization of people dedicated to advocating for workers’ rights and the crafting of a unionized games industry,” GWU writes on its website. “We represent all workers in game development and we seek to increase the visibility of our cause through community building, sharing resources, and direct action. We seek to bring hope to and empower those suffering in this industry.”
The head of at least one organization that already represents game developers seems ambivalent at best about a union’s ability to alleviate that suffering. Jen MacLean, who was named executive director of the International Game Developers Association in September, pushed back a bit against the unionization effort in multiple interviews at the conference.
“One of the problems is that if somebody leaves there are a hundred people lined up to take their place,” MacLean told USGamer about what she sees as the root of difficult working conditions at some publishers. “The reason that a smaller studio is laying people off is not the reason EA is shutting down Visceral, and a union is not going to help the smaller studio that says, ‘You know what, we only have money for payroll for three more months.’”
“To assume that suddenly if you unionize, everything will be great, I don’t think that is a reasonable assumption,” MacLean followed up in an interview with Kotaku, where she also warned of potential “unforeseen consequences” that could come with organizing.
Coming together
The issue came to a bit of a head at a contentious but respectful roundtable discussion MacLean led Wednesday, titled “Union Now? Pros, Cons, and Consequences of Unionization.” Hundreds of developers flocked to the standing-room only session to highlight the issues they’d want a union to address and the ways they felt organizing could help.
One developer shared a story of working excessive, mandatory “crunch time” hours for nine months and being rewarded only with a week of paid time off. Many others pointed to a need for more stability and career security amid the regular cycle of hirings and firings that surround most larger, project-based studios. Others felt unions could help protect marginalized developers, help enforce overtime and moonlighting laws, or give them an outlet for complaints other than a human resources department that may be more sympathetic to the company than the employee.
MacLean, who generally came across as receptive to the crowd’s ideas, still expressed concerns about a developers’ union essentially having to “sign off” on new projects or new hires. Unions won’t do anything to ameliorate the exploding costs of launching a major new game, she argued, or prevent studios from being forced to shut down if those games fail to sell (MacLean’s tenure as CEO of Curt Schilling’s failed 38 Studios venture may have informed that position somewhat).
But other attendees argued that, while a union couldn’t save a project or company that was fated to fail, it could help soften the landing for the workers affected. “What I’m hearing here is that unions focus leverage,” IATSE union representative Steve Kaplan said. “That’s what unions do… If you’re not at the table you’re essentially on the menu. If the company needs to make a cut or make a change, you’re in consideration unless they have to come and ask you first.”
With the issues and concerns laid out and discussion of organizing increasingly out in the open among developers, the mechanics of actually putting an effective game-industry union together is still an open question. Under US law, individual studios could organize separately if a majority of the employees force a vote on the issue. Such studios would need to be strong enough to withstand pressure from resistant publishers, though (and, potentially, from gamers angry about any impact on their favorite games’ production schedule). The game industry could instead emulate the job-based, cross-company guild structure prevalent in Hollywood, but the diffuse nature of job responsibilities and work locations could make that more difficult.
The real question for now, though, is whether this new burst of unionization activity and momentum will last beyond this week. If interested developers can keep the conversation going once they leave the relatively tight-knit confines of the Game Developers Conference, then this might be the time when a game developer’s union finally gets off the ground. If not, the effort could fizzle as so many in the industry have before it.
source:-arstechnica
