Now this guy is a dck...

[The Chubu]

http://www.develop-online.net/news/4...y-studio-heads

Just read that thing. Its the living embodiment of all the wrong things that go with companies, they fcking mix up the cold truth that they exist for making money with these kind of grand-vision-great-leap-forward-must-take-one-for-the-team sht.

Either you bend over to the man or you're a bad/unpassionate/lazy/wuss developer. That's the message.

And yes, clearly working many hours in a hospital saving lives of people has completely the same importance as shipping a videogame in the grand scheme of things. Why didn't i noticed it? I know! I must be a unpassionate person! Fck that. People is fcking passionate about their lives, not your fcking deadlines and revenue reports.

[PhazeDelta1]

Rein and Jacobson also said they do not offer most workers overtime pay, although the Epic VP explained that employees at the studio were paid well in bonuses.

Nothing wrong with getting a reach around for extra $ in quarterly bonuses.

[The Chubu]

Originally Posted by PhazeDelta1

Nothing wrong with getting a reach around for extra $ in quarterly bonuses.

The money isn't the problem, the whole "unpassionate" thing is the problem.

Is not that you're exchanging money for work hours, is that you're exchanging your professionalism for work hours. You can't possibly have some more important things to do, so you must be a bad developer. It's a glorification of a crappy attitude, you bend over? Man, you must be passionate about this stuff! You should all learn from this guy, he stays up to 11pm and doesn't says anything about it!

You teach people to not to argue, to not to complain, to just sht the fck up, and thats BS. The dude who's over stressed over working gets a pat in the back, thinking everybody else should be ashamed of themselves for being lazy bastards whereas the ppl who really know what they want to be doing get all downplayed, like it's matter of how good you are at this rather than just having priorities.

[lucidus]

Yeah .. Gears of War & Infinity blade are critical to the world!

[IPlayNaked]

I'm at a loss for the complaint here. When you take certain jobs, and some of you will get this when you grow up, overtime is part of the package. Yeah, you don't get some extra amount that says "overtime" in your check, but the overtime pay is definitely there, it's just part of the job.

Being in IT for instance. Unless you're doing some help desk stuff, you're on call, often. If there's a problem with the network, server, whatever, you better damn well be in the server room figuring it out.

And you don't get any "extra" pay for that...But you willingly do it, because it's part of the job. Same for crunch time in game development. It's part of the job. The developers knew when they signed up that when a game is getting close to release, they're going to be putting in long hours to get it done. And I imagine most of them are perfectly happy with that, they are still in the jobs after all.

The point is, overtime comes with certain jobs. You know it going in, you negotiate a salary that covers your willingness to be available. And if you didn't do that, well, maybe you'll know next time that you need to. If they're not paying you what you want for the hours you're working, you just don't take the job.

[dchalf10]

Originally Posted by IPlayNaked

Here's how it works you corporate drone.

If you are on a salary it is pre-determined how many unpaid hours you may have to work as necessitated by the work load. Also in cases where it is unspecified such as "you are expected to work a reasonable amount of overtime" it is then dictated by law just how many hours that ambiguity translates to; such as a set amount, or a % of regularly scheduled work hours

No employer can legally make workers work more than the specified amount of overtime, and if that was not the case here then I doubt you would have the reports coming out of people not being paid for as much as 6 months to a years worth of full time workload

[(.)(.)]

It's not like game developing is a 9-5 job, you'd be a fool to expect otherwise going into the bizzzzz. Long hours is part of the package.

[Foamy4]

Originally Posted by IPlayNaked

I'm at a loss for the complaint here. When you take certain jobs, and some of you will get this when you grow up, overtime is part of the package. Yeah, you don't get some extra amount that says "overtime" in your check, but the overtime pay is definitely there, it's just part of the job.

Being in IT for instance. Unless you're doing some help desk stuff, you're on call, often. If there's a problem with the network, server, whatever, you better damn well be in the server room figuring it out.

And you don't get any "extra" pay for that...But you willingly do it, because it's part of the job. Same for crunch time in game development. It's part of the job. The developers knew when they signed up that when a game is getting close to release, they're going to be putting in long hours to get it done. And I imagine most of them are perfectly happy with that, they are still in the jobs after all.

The point is, overtime comes with certain jobs. You know it going in, you negotiate a salary that covers your willingness to be available. And if you didn't do that, well, maybe you'll know next time that you need to. If they're not paying you what you want for the hours you're working, you just don't take the job.

If I don't get paid for overtime/compensation somehow I'm gonna sue the crap out of the company with help from my union. We have laws on those areas. I'm willing to do overtime but they sure as hell pay me for it.

[Ade 1]

Originally Posted by Foamy4

If I don't get paid for overtime/compensation somehow I'm gonna sue the crap out of the company with help from my union. We have laws on those areas. I'm willing to do overtime but they sure as hell pay me for it.

God I hate Unions.

[dchalf10]

Originally Posted by Ade 1

God I hate Unions.

God bless unions.

[lucidus]

Originally Posted by Ade 1

God I hate Unions.

Originally Posted by dchalf10

God bless unions.

Let's start a betting pool!

[Year]

Originally Posted by IPlayNaked

If they're not paying you what you want for the hours you're working, you just don't take the job.

hello 47, Diana here.. got a new job for ya, you interested?



the perfect job.

[ScoobyDooby]

If this article comes as a surprise to anyone out there that works in the real world, then I have to say you must be a naive nelly to think otherwise. This is the cut-throat dog eat dog world we live in.. if you're not willing to put in the extra hours they will just find someone else who is willing to do it.. considering how many people are out of work out there, some people would happily bend over backward and work harder.. many people already do that and get paid $hit for it anyway.. why not at least do something you love if you're gonna work your ass to the bone right?

Edit: almost forgot to also mention, F*CK Epic for turning into a huge sellout and sell their soul to the consoles only to turn into a typical sequel factory.. all engine, no creativity.

[nm+]

Small problem: Studies have shown that productivity declines over 40 hours if done on a regular basis, meaning that extra hours lead to little or no increase in production.

[Speed Weed]

When my kids were at university, I put in a fortnight's hours every week in a really crap job just to be able to give them a hand occasionally.

[elkosith]

In my school, each year at least we get 3 extra work days on weekends to do some school activities (bazaar, field trip, graduation ceremony, etc) without getting paid. However, if by any chance we can't come to teach (sick or whatever), they cut our salary. The cut is quite big.

We teachers can't complaint about it because it is written in the work agreement.

[dchalf10]

Originally Posted by elkosith

In my school, each year at least we get 3 extra work days on weekends to do some school activities (bazaar, field trip, graduation ceremony, etc) without getting paid. However, if by any chance we can't come to teach (sick or whatever), they cut our salary. The cut is quite big.

We teachers can't complaint about it because it is written in the work agreement.

Dude...move to AUS, teachers get about 10 weeks paid leave a year for school holidays, they get like 30 paid sick days, massive long service leave and massive superannuation...like 12% of their income ( it is not deducted from your income, the 12%approx superannuation is in addition to their pay ( so their pay rate is higher than before superannuation was introduced PLUS 12% super... )

Plus once you have a contract as a part time/full time teacher, that means you are a teacher for life ( unless you chose not to ) meaning that if you get fired, the education department has to provide you with a new job.

Also every single year teachers get a pay rise.

Also you get paid in grades depending on your length of time as a teacher but you also get paid depending on your level of post undergraduate studies...

So if you go into teaching with honours, masters, PHD in eduction, you will get paid more than other full time teachers with uni degrees in education etc....and it goes up each year.

So a teacher with a secondary teaching degree ( undergrad ) will get X amount + say 5% per year more for 5 years.

As a masters teacher ( in education ) you will get X+10% + 10% per year for 5 years.



#Figures are guest-imations:

Basis: GF ( of 6 years ) mother is a principle, she has a masters and she is in control of all employment, pay, management and has been for 20 years.

[Dustpuppy]

"If they want to do a little at the start and lots at the end, then that’s their choice"

This speaks to incompetent managers not flexible managers. It's fine to do little coding, and lots of planning at the start. However, overall management should be aiming for steady progress. You don't let your employee's make the choice to half ass it for half your project.

[BLEH!]

Employment laws in the states seem to be woefully behind the rest of the Western world in some areas...

[IPlayNaked]

Originally Posted by BLEH!

Employment laws in the states seem to be woefully behind the rest of the Western world in some areas...

I would argue your employment laws are the ones behind. I happen to thoroughly enjoy my state's employment laws.

Originally Posted by Dustpuppy

"If they want to do a little at the start and lots at the end, then that’s their choice"

This speaks to incompetent managers not flexible managers. It's fine to do little coding, and lots of planning at the start. However, overall management should be aiming for steady progress. You don't let your employee's make the choice to half ass it for half your project.

It's really incompetent both, but none of them are half assing it. Games are a different thing from building houses, or roads, or other big projects with deadlines. Even movies are different. The problem with games is, given an infinite amount of time, they would add an infinite amount of features. These guys, for the most part, think their job is pretty cool, and they enjoy making games, so they try to cram every feature that sounds good into it in the beginning. If that's allowed to continue, the game will never get released.

So, management lets the guys have their fun, they add their features, change this, tweak this...And then, when it approaches release, they hunker down, remove the pieces of the game that are cool, but time-consuming, difficult, or impractical. Yeah, everyone works hard during that time..

But you're making ****ing video games man. Millions of nerds want that job. If you don't want to do crunch time, someone else will.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VShmtsLhkQg

Describes exactly what I mean. The developers spend the beginning in the "open" state of mind, coming up with ideas, but not getting a lot done.

[JohnMaclane]

Originally Posted by IPlayNaked

I would argue your employment laws are the ones behind. I happen to thoroughly enjoy my state's employment laws.

How would you argue that they are behind?

Having limited to no protection means being backwards.

Having protection and enforcement means being up to date.

[IPlayNaked]

Originally Posted by JohnMaclane

How would you argue that they are behind?

Having limited to no protection means being backwards.

Having protection and enforcement means being up to date.

Not everything is about being "protected"

There are two sides to this transaction. There's an employer, and there's an employee. When a job is accepted, a contract is created between them. I do not like that some third party believes they can dictate the terms of my contract with my employer. I further believe that if my employer does not wish to employ me, for any reasons, that is well within their rights to do so. I have no claim on their money. I cannot force them to employ me.

Just as they cannot force me to stay. It's a two way street. If you believe that employees should not be forced into certain situations or actions, then you should also believe that employers receive similar treatment.

Further, I do not know all of your laws, just as you don't know mine. One of the protections I enjoy is that a union cannot dominate a job. Joining the union cannot be a prerequisite for taking a job here. There is no forced enrollment. Do you enjoy the same protection?

My point is, my protections relate to protecting the agreement between the employer and the employee, whatever agreement that is.

[dchalf10]

Originally Posted by IPlayNaked

Not everything is about being "protected"

There are two sides to this transaction. There's an employer, and there's an employee. When a job is accepted, a contract is created between them. I do not like that some third party believes they can dictate the terms of my contract with my employer. I further believe that if my employer does not wish to employ me, for any reasons, that is well within their rights to do so. I have no claim on their money. I cannot force them to employ me.

Just as they cannot force me to stay. It's a two way street. If you believe that employees should not be forced into certain situations or actions, then you should also believe that employers receive similar treatment.

Further, I do not know all of your laws, just as you don't know mine. One of the protections I enjoy is that a union cannot dominate a job. Joining the union cannot be a prerequisite for taking a job here. There is no forced enrollment. Do you enjoy the same protection?

And the award for corporate appoligist of the year goes to... *drum roll*


As stated above which you seem to have missed

Even overtime hours are subkect to government regulations. For you to attempt to justify excessive unpaid work is dispicable.

[JohnMaclane]

Originally Posted by IPlayNaked

Not everything is about being "protected"

There are two sides to this transaction. There's an employer, and there's an employee. When a job is accepted, a contract is created between them. I do not like that some third party believes they can dictate the terms of my contract with my employer. I further believe that if my employer does not wish to employ me, for any reasons, that is well within their rights to do so. I have no claim on their money. I cannot force them to employ me.

Just as they cannot force me to stay. It's a two way street. If you believe that employees should not be forced into certain situations or actions, then you should also believe that employers receive similar treatment.

Further, I do not know all of your laws, just as you don't know mine. One of the protections I enjoy is that a union cannot dominate a job. Joining the union cannot be a prerequisite for taking a job here. There is no forced enrollment. Do you enjoy the same protection?

My point is, my protections relate to protecting the agreement between the employer and the employee, whatever agreement that is.

I do not want to fight or anything but I find your post filled with strikingly american paranoia of anything not-capitalist.

Contracts by definition are upheld by the law, the law of which as we all know is supreme. The government already in any country regulates contracts; example contracts cannot be made in bad faith, or under duress or a gazillion other pieces of legislation.

That is why your whole first paragraph makes no sense. You're wrong the government does dictate how and on what terms you make contracts. So much so that the US has a labour law, just its not as strong as lets say Germany.

IF we let employers have free reign like you're saying, it would be 1850 again. Employers in industrialised systems have too much leverage and its common sense that without protection employees would be used and abused. You yourself enjoy some degree of protection, if there wasn't believe me the conditions would be much worse.

Why do you automatically think that just because I come from Europe we have some communist led regime which forces employees into a union. Its nothing of the sort, the law in my country is that anyone with 7 or more workers in the same place of employment can form a union if they want with membership being voluntary. A workplace can have multiple unions however collective agreements (the reason why workers join unions) are usually negotiated with the largest union.

You cannot however fire at will here; 'they are to be a good and justifiable reasons' with the act going into real detail on what constitutes a good and justifiable reason. Firing for economic reasons is allowed but comes with guarantees that if the company is re-hiring preference is given to ex-employees.

Nothing crazy as you can see.

Whats up with mikedoggg and dcalf

[CronoGraal]

Originally Posted by BLEH!

Employment laws in the states seem to be woefully behind the rest of the Western world in some areas...

They're behind in many things my friend.