I decided to put through a submission for a panel for GDC 2009. The panel was going to be called “Unions and the Games Industry?“, and would involve a moderated discussion of whether unions have any roles to play in the industry. The cool bit was that I had lined up someone very senior at IGDA, and two more veterans of the industry: a long-time designer and a CEO of a games developer (I withhold their names out of respect for their privacy).
The submission got rejected, unfortunately, but I’m going to share the proposal outline with everyone. Let me know what you think. Was it too controversial? Was it interesting enough?
Session Focus
Until now, there have been few public discussions on whether unions have a place (if any) in the games industry. The topic is brought up now and again in various, albeit brief news flashes (http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20050322/hyman_pfv.htm) (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/5202236.stm). It is now time for this discussion to be explored more formally within a panel of peers.
“Union” is one of those words that have a strong polarizing effect on people in the industry. Game developers are either strongly for it, or against it. Some think it will solve all of the industry’s woes, others believe it won’t help in any way, and others yet think that unions would stifle creativity and impede the industry’s continued growth.
Our panel will convene to discuss the pros and cons of a union specific to the games industry and the various issues surrounding it. In this discussion, the taboo label on unions will be ripped off. The panelists will engage in a frank, honest, and fruitful discussion amongst themselves and with the audience.
The aim of the session is not to advocate for or against unions in particular, but to provide one of the first public forums on unions for the games industry.
The following topics will be explored:
- Does the industry need a union for developers? Why, or why not?
- What issues would such a union address? What disadvantages would it introduce?
- Can these same issues be addressed better through non-union means?
- What about alternative models such as guilds in the movie industry? Does the game industry need its own unique solution?
The panelists have not been firmly established yet (it is challenging to get people to discuss this subject), but the proposed composition would be:
- Myself moderating discussion and asking questions to panelists:
- <SENIOR IGDA PERSON> (who has confirmed his interest in participating), who is quite neutral on the matter.
- One or two veteran developers, who have had interactions with employers either on quality of life issues and/or union issues. <NAME REMOVED>, veteran game designer, has confirmed his interest in participating. One more TBC.
- An employer or head of a game developing company, to get a different perspective on the issue. <NAME REMOVED> has confirmed his interest in participating.
- If possible, a representative of a union relatively associated to the games industry (such as BECTU in the UK, or IATSE in North America). TBC.
Attendee Takeaway
Attendees will learn the various pros and cons of a union in the context of the games industry. They will learn that unions are no longer a taboo, but a subject that can be discussed amongst peers rationally and openly. Those interested in unions will know what avenues they can pursue and the people they can talk to with similar interests. Finally, those interested in alternatives to unions will also discover new possibilities of recourse. The greatest takeaway will be continued discussion and exploration of this subject.
Related Posts
No related posts were found, so here's a consolation prize: Dev Diary 31: Small Update.
October 12th, 2008 - 4:38 pm
[...] potential technologies, and more general games industry stuff. In particular I’d point you to this post on a GDC talk/round-table on unions in the games industry that sadly won’t come to pass. [...]
October 29th, 2008 - 2:00 pm
So you had someone from IGDA, but no-one from the unions that are currently trying to persuade the games industry that they should have a union (preferably theirs)? Who cares about having some “industry veterans” talking 2nd-hand about the unions; I’d want to hear the unions themselves. With somewhere in the region of several thousand “industry veterans” at the conference already, sticking some on a panel seems unnecessary to me.
But, since they’ve so far not been completely convincing at acting honestly and openly on the topic, I’d question why on earth this should be a panel session? I can probably name a dozen people who’d be at GDC who could cry BS on a lot of things that that panel would say, but if they’re stuck in an audience, their voices are muffled.
Surely, if the point is to get “discussion” out into the “industry at large”, then it absolutely has to be a roundtable. You can’t go around controlling/filtering the conversation (the primary purpose of a panel as opposed to a roundtable) and simultaneously claim to be an open discusison, IMHO.
I’d also be concerned about how you manage to keep it relevant to anyone except USA residents, given the differences in anti-union laws and employment in EU, for instance? In particular, I woudl suggest you need at least one EU Employment Law expert to sit there and point out what employee rights are “standard” by law in the EU; it makes an interesting reference point in the conversation about unions.
October 29th, 2008 - 2:02 pm
…NB: but I wholeheartedly support the initiative to get open conversations going on the topic – well done for trying!
(I was just throwing out problems I could see that might explain the rejection)
October 30th, 2008 - 6:11 pm
Thanks for the comments Adam. I appreciate your honest feedback on this.
I actually spent a long time weighing the roundtable vs. panel issue. I went with the panel in the end because I felt it had more of a chance of the session getting accepted. The subject being controversial and my lack of public speaking experience hurt the submission and having the confirmed support of an IGDA exec lent the panel more weight.
Ideally I would have liked both (and perhaps I should have submitted for both). I do agree, the roundtable is absolutely the best venue for an open discussion. The panel would have been more exploratory and aimed to balance the various viewpoints, but a roundtable is where productive talks would have occured.
Once I went with the panel, I had to make sure employees were represented, hence the “industry veterans”. And I did reserve a slot for a union person (although I hadn’t filled it by the submission deadline, probably another mistake); I wanted to target a successful union in another industry, like the WGA. Perhaps you could point me to one of those unions “that are currently trying to persuade the games industry”. I only know of BECTU (and maybe IATSE at a real stretch).
The country specific issues will always be there. It’s actually one of the major barriers for an industry union since our workforce isn’t as concentrated into region (like the movie industry for example). And one can’t even lump the EU countries into one since they all have different labor laws. But yes, an EU employment law expert would also have been useful.
June 11th, 2009 - 2:53 pm
Here are my concerns:
1. A union needs to avoid the mistakes made by the auto industry so as not to repeat them. The auto unions are partly to blame for the fall of american car makers and I wouldn’t want to see good, honest game companies fall because of a union walkout.
2. A union shouldn’t create a private society that prohibits those wanting to get into the industry. Having ‘industry veterans’ direct the union might cause an even tighter closed society instead of one that helps guide and support.
3. What is the true purpose of the union? What problem(s) is it trying to solve? This mission statement needs to be clearly defined or it could serve only to support greed.
4. Will the union provide guidance for novice and veteran developers to transition over to console game development?
5. I’ve often wondered if ‘agents’ or ‘coaches’ are the better avenue. Hollywood actors/directors/producers/etc have them. Sports athletes have them. True, they also have the Actor’s Guild in Hollywood. My big concern would be securing continuous work when game companies have RIFs during a depressed economy.