Thought I’d spread that holiday cheer. It will be interesting to see how Acti-Blizz responds, which is to say their response will likely be laughably predictable. I wager they’ll double down on the anti-union rhetoric, try some other sleazy methods of discouraging their employees from organizing, and generally look like clowns in the process. But maybe, just maybe, it will encourage more widespread organization in the industry, and maybe, just maybe, in an industry long overdue for a worker’s movement, video games will–gasp!–change, and maybe much of that change will originate with the development of Diablo 4.
Wouldn’t that be an interesting twist? Talk about hitting the IRL primal jackpot.
Remember, folks, corporations are not your friends.
The QA team at the Albany Blizzard studio (formerly Vicarious Visions) has voted 14-0 to unionize. There were 18 eligible to vote.
ATVI provided a statement
Reached for comment, an Activision Blizzard spokesperson provided the following statement to Polygon:
We are considering all options, with a focus on what is best for all employees and to provide the best games for our millions of players. We still believe our entire Albany team should have the right to vote. This is about fundamental fairness and rights for every member of the team.
ATVI tried to force a whole studio vote instead of just the QA team. The National Labor Relations board over ruled that and today the vote created the QA union.
I am not Free, but I can think of a few things off the top of my head.
QA is usually the lowest paid and least respected portion of the game dev team, sometimes not even considered part of the team. Low pay, low benefits, and especially poor job stability. Layoffs without warning are common. Professional development and advancement opportunities can be poor as well.
I think we all know just how important GOOD QA is though in game development. You want a great team with high product knowledge, excellent attention to detail, good methodology and process development, etc.
Low pay and poor treatment means high turnover and a lower quality overall QA team. Having good folks who stay in the job position benefits the game customers wanting higher quality software, faster bug resolutions, etc.
I am very happy for the Victorious Visions QA team and I hope it improves their working environment and compensation.
Sure thing! The video game industry is lousy with organization, and Acti-Blizz has a nasty history of union-busting (not to mention abusive workplace conditions, crunch, low pay for “non-essential” positions, massive layoffs in the wake of record profits and payouts, and so on). This victory, however minor, is a victory for organized labor in an industry (and at a company) that has aggressively sought to combat unionization.
Good news for labor is good news for all workers. Good news for workers usually translates into good news for others in an industry who want better pay, better working conditions, and more control over their jobs. That also–usually–translates into better commercial products, stuff made by people who actually enjoy their jobs and find fulfilment in their labor.
This is indeed good news. QA can have the lowest pay among the ranks, but I guess no one can deny that they’re the backbone of the studio. They are usually disposable because they don’t seem to worth much than frolics and mass statistics.
Well, at least Blizzard will learn something new but I don’t think you can teach new tricks to an old dog.
I imagine in the age of live service games they are more marginalized than ever before. But they’re the ones who make sure that you don’t have to thanos-snap your characters out of your game post-launch.
But it’s not. Many jobs require ludicrous qualifications and offer low pay. Educators, fire fighters, and many specialists in research and academia hold specialized degrees (in some cases, the highest degrees you can obtain) and aren’t paid a fraction, not a tenth, of what clowns like Kotick make.
And Kotick doesn’t have a Ph.D.
Point is, it’s not that simple. QA might not have sky-high entry requirements but that doesn’t mean they don’t perform a critical role (they do). They deserve better wages, better working conditions, and more control over their workplaces.
All good, till it comes time to pay them union dues and people freak out. Not only that, it’s no different than a gang (or any other ‘group’ word you wish to use), you better tow that line 100%. The second you don’t, then game over for you. Move on, you won’t get anywhere. Even then, still get stepped on. No joke. The Kool Aid is strong. Just remember, it’s all fun and games until you are no longer beneficial to them in any way, shape, or form. Unions are only good for the short term. Even then, watch your back.
“At will employment” in the US is exactly that. You can be fired for no reason and there are no worker protections in most of the US. Hence, Unions provide some method of protection from employers.
Can they reach a stage where the Union can be corrupt and a criminal organization in itself? Yes. That has happened before.
Until there are labor laws though that actually protect workers rights/fair working conditions, unions will still be needed.
No, unions are not angels. That isn’t their purpose. Just like employers aren’t either.
You use the tools at your disposal to fight for your members interests.
Funny thing, around here the employer organizations and companies are really scared of unions losing power, and being replaced by more labor laws. Laws can be very inflexible, all parts of the labor market, both employers, employees and government, should prefer unions and collective bargaining tbh.
From my experience and observations, unions are usually at best actively useless in solving any actual issues but are quick to protect those who screw up massively creating a work culture that disables any incentive to try. Companies aren’t going to be looking to fire someone who does a great job, is always on time, and gets along well with everyone. Theyre looking to get rid of those who perform below par consistently, are always late, and fights with everything with a pulse.
Im sure at one point unions served a good purpose. Like during the victorian era.
Many places are “at will,” even when they say they are not. In some cases, maybe even most, a union can provide a buffer or barrier, even if it’s just temporary, against that form of employment. I’m not saying that they don’t serve a purpose, they do. Sometimes the cure is worse than the disease.
True, some unions are corrupt (doesn’t necessarily mean mafia) and many more are not. I’m not talking about corruption, though that could have been the case without my knowledge, I’m talking about ‘agenda.’ If you don’t tow that line 100%, you are toast.
When your own union rep won’t touch you with a 10 foot pole, you know you are in trouble. I’ve seen it first hand and experienced it myself.
Very true. Why is that? Because those people tow that line and work the way they are told. Pisses me off that hard working decent people get the shaft because of agenda. Yeah, there are always troubles in the workplace, especially if there is favoritism and/or nepotism, but more often than not, the good employees stay employed and the bad ones are fired. I, myself, have fire my fare share of crappy employees that deserved to get the boot. I tell them, don’t file for unemployment, it will be contested.
My point is that gaining a Ph.D. in many fields is one of the most difficult things an individual can do. The intellectual, emotional, and financial toll it takes is severe, and the degree often represents the very highest academic and professional achievement one can achieve. Most Ph.D.s in, say, academia, do not, and will never, make a fraction of what Kotick makes.
Now, we–and I don’t just mean you and I, but the larger, more general “we”–can debate the finer points about why that’s the case, but I, for one, do not hold a CEO’s corporate accomplishments in the same esteem as the acquisition of a Ph.D. in, for example, art history. One of these is a remarkable intellectual accomplishment that few can match. The other is bonkers capitalism.
This is a massive generalization largely drawn from anti-union propaganda in popular media. Sure, there have been a few corrupt unions and union bosses, and sure, not all unions are perfect. That’s absolutely true. It’s less true these days where there is considerably more oversight on unions and far more legislation regulating and limiting the power of unions, but it’s still, to some extent, true.
It’s also absolutely true that there are far more corrupt CEOs, corporate board members, corporate flunkies, etc., etc.
In other words, unions have never been–and absolutely are not–the real problem.
I can appreciate the anecdotal evidence–or rather, I could if it didn’t reek of anti-union, pro-corporate sentiments plugged into personal “experience and observations”–but personal anecdotes are worth about as much as Monopoly money when we’re talking about the structure of labor in the video game industry.
The bottom line is this: Some QA testers have decided to unionize in a company that is notorious for low pay, terrible working conditions, and workplace abuse. That anyone would be raising an eyebrow and grumbling about possible union corruption is so laughably biased that it has no place in this discussion.
