|
Post by welshhoppo on Mar 12, 2017 0:09:00 GMT
Well all it takes are a few. Then the rules apply to all of them and then you're looking at a decade of backlog. The money involved would probably cripple PP. There's probably also something to be said for PP making a 'good faith attempt' to comply with the law. My legal knowledge isn't from the US, but in my experience, there is often consideration as to whether the business in question believed in good faith (and under reasonable circumstances) that they were complying with the law. I don't know if this would qualify, but there's the potential that PP is seeking to demonstrate that any earlier non-compliance was entirely based on ignorance rather than deliberate noncompliance. True, but it might also go the other way and a court might be like "You tried to sneak of this by firing all your volunteers." And it may make it worse. But it would depend on the day IF it gets that far.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Mar 12, 2017 1:03:25 GMT
There's probably also something to be said for PP making a 'good faith attempt' to comply with the law. My legal knowledge isn't from the US, but in my experience, there is often consideration as to whether the business in question believed in good faith (and under reasonable circumstances) that they were complying with the law. I don't know if this would qualify, but there's the potential that PP is seeking to demonstrate that any earlier non-compliance was entirely based on ignorance rather than deliberate noncompliance. True, but it might also go the other way and a court might be like "You tried to sneak of this by firing all your volunteers." And it may make it worse. But it would depend on the day IF it gets that far. Absolutely. It depends on a lot of factors. I'm just saying that there's a rationale for them taking the actions they did. I find it much more acceptable than the logic behind some of their other changes.
|
|
|
Post by HeadHunter on Mar 12, 2017 3:11:17 GMT
If PG's are "employee's" then firing them now, doesn't change that they would be owed for the 15 years of backpay. All this does is ensure there will be some angry PG's who WILL sue to get that money. Not to mention, depending on their state of residence and how long they've been a PG, they might be able to file an unemployment claim. Personally I think the suit against WotC is ridiculous, the judgment was made by people who have no familiarity with the issues, and PP is wildly overreacting. But I don't think they're making anything better - they're just burning up all of the goodwill that's gotten them this far. Also, even if they are considered employees and must be paid by the company, they don't have to be salaried or given minimum hours. They would have to be paid at least the state minimum wage when working at events or conducting approved demos. That is to say, PP would decide their hours. It's not like it would be a full-time (or even part-time job). They'd be jobbers. They don't even have to be contract employees. and someone trying to game the system by doing 15 demos a week and asking to be paid for them all would soon find PP deciding how many they reasonably wish to approve.
|
|
joedj
Junior Strategist
Posts: 513
|
Post by joedj on Mar 12, 2017 16:50:26 GMT
I consider my personal 9yr? PG experience an internship. Unpaid, but with some perks. (No health insurance ) One perk being a 'title' and a T-shirt that provided a smidge more legitimacy in our store/venue [besides the fact that my knowledge is extensive, owning/playing all factions, and being a good enough player myself]. "Just talk to Doc (my nickname in store), he's our PP Pressganger." will become "Just talk to Doc, he's our Warmachine event organizer." Not too big a change in duties, but a change from has-a-connection-to-PP to independent-fan-o'-the-game. Another perk being some free models I could share out with my community/venue, increasing camaraderie. The continuance of which will depend on how PP rolls out their 'participation exclusives' and how costly for the venue those packages will be. Demos, being one of the more repetitive and perhaps least unique experiences for an experienced volunteer, may be uncompensated and may fall off in frequency. Potential 'ouch' to the formal path of recruiting new players. Journeyman leagues are popular though, and will probably continue to bring in new blood. Where store owners are not fans/enthusiastic for the game, former PGs will become 'gaming club organizers' to access the exclusives.
|
|
|
Post by bakemono on Mar 15, 2017 5:36:30 GMT
Heh. I just think the whole thing is kind of funny. Since a Press Ganger had to be associated with a store, i.e. a brick and mortar location, that means there must be at least as many stores as there were Press Gangers (probably more since not all locations had one). The silly justification is that it was too cumbersome to deal with the Press Gangers? How will dealing with the stores directly be any less so when the numbers are the same or greater? Moreover, Press Gangers had to know what they were doing, the stores do not. If they are going to lie they should at least come up with something plausible. Or they could just tell us the truth.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Mar 15, 2017 5:54:12 GMT
I consider my personal 9yr? PG experience an internship. Unpaid, but with some perks. (No health insurance ) One perk being a 'title' and a T-shirt that provided a smidge more legitimacy in our store/venue [besides the fact that my knowledge is extensive, owning/playing all factions, and being a good enough player myself]. "Just talk to Doc (my nickname in store), he's our PP Pressganger." will become "Just talk to Doc, he's our Warmachine event organizer." Not too big a change in duties, but a change from has-a-connection-to-PP to independent-fan-o'-the-game. Another perk being some free models I could share out with my community/venue, increasing camaraderie. The continuance of which will depend on how PP rolls out their 'participation exclusives' and how costly for the venue those packages will be. Demos, being one of the more repetitive and perhaps least unique experiences for an experienced volunteer, may be uncompensated and may fall off in frequency. Potential 'ouch' to the formal path of recruiting new players. Journeyman leagues are popular though, and will probably continue to bring in new blood. Where store owners are not fans/enthusiastic for the game, former PGs will become 'gaming club organizers' to access the exclusives. Thing is, the fact that you liken PGing to an internship is exactly why the lawsuit has validity. AFAIK (and again, my legal knowledge is not from the states) there are really quite strict rules as to what an intern can and cannot do - they can't, for instance, do any value-generating activities which would otherwise be assigned to an employee, except as incidental to the actual experiential learning element of the internship. They also have to meet some criteria (might vary state by state) as to having a certain amount of transferable learning opportunities. Of course, these regulations get broken all the time by employers, but (particularly in a large program like the press gang) all it takes is one 'pseudo-intern' to blow the whistle. Overall, the regulations aren't a BAD thing - businesses SHOULD have to pay for value-generating free labor, at least to a minimum standard. They just hurt when it comes to community-building programs like the Press Gang. If it wasn't for the other issues I have with PP at the moment (which I have said enough about in other threads) I'd be quite inclined to just forgive them the PG program entirely, and I'd be completely onboard with continuing to promote WM/H in the community regardless. As it stands, I'm...significantly less inclined to do this.
|
|
wishing
Junior Strategist
Posts: 353
|
Post by wishing on Mar 15, 2017 10:39:25 GMT
Overall, the regulations aren't a BAD thing - businesses SHOULD have to pay for value-generating free labor, at least to a minimum standard. They just hurt when it comes to community-building programs like the Press Gang. I think it's interesting. It seems to me that programs like the Press Gang are based on the principle that fans who really like the game want to promote it of their own accord and for their own personal interest (wanting to get more people to play with). The company that makes the game wants to encourage this as much as possible, so they offer to make these people "representatives", giving them official recognition and organising them. The idea behind the regulations is then that this is "exploitation". I do see the point - if people work for the company, they should be recognised as such. If the company spends resources to organise their "work force", then clearly they see them as a work force. But at the same time, the fans are clearly volunteers, even if they don't follow the legal definition of volunteers. They do it for their own pleasure, as a hobby, not because they are desperate and exploitable. The legal structures surrounding companies then seems like it will end up meaning that companies are not allowed to help their fans promote their product. The fans have to do so entirely of their own accord with no company support. Which I guess isn't so bad. If the fans love the game, they will help promote the game entirely on their own initiative. Which is the whole point of them volunteering.
|
|
|
Post by HeadHunter on Mar 15, 2017 18:24:01 GMT
I did demos for FRPG for years (the CCGs Rage and Legend of the Five Rings). I never felt "exploited" nor did I consider myself an employee of the company, any more than the leader of a fan club would be (well, I was essentially that, too...).
I didn't feel like I should be entitled to financial compensation. I knew the deal when I signed up to do it. I would conduct demos according to my own personal preference and schedule, and they provided me a nifty t-shirt, booster packs to hand out at demos, and points for some nice company merchandise. I sure didn't think I should get benefits like a health plan.
If I had a job that I went to only when I felt like it, I wouldn't expect a salary. At best, it's minimum wage for the actual hours worked. But if they told me up front that the compensation was going to be free cards and merch, and I still signed up... well, that's the agreement.
These people weren't contracted for cash pay, and most people who conduct demos don't ever expect it. Most people realize that the real benefit is creating a wider community of players. Yes, it generates value for the company - and the store. Should the store have to pay them, too? We have an FLGS in the area that has employed an "event coordinator" for MtG tournaments, but he's not asking WotC to pay him too. Simple fact is, these people don't work for the company!
If WotC is holding an event in a venue (not a store that's bid on it), then the only compensation judges can ask for is for the time worked. But in all my years playing L5R tournaments, I never once heard a judge demand to be paid for the day - because no one forced them to do so.
Demos that don't have some company backing are less likely to generate interest - that's just called "a guy at the store teaching people". And if players have to use their own resources and supplies to do so, fewer people will want to. Who'd want to pay out of their own pocket for the "privilege" of teaching others? Now, if a prospective player can score something for attending (a starter deck, a free mini, whatever) they're more likely to do so - experience has shown. Without company backing that's not going to happen often any more. But few companies, if any, are going to actually employ someone to go from store to store doing demos. It's just not going to happen.
This is just one more step toward the end of tabletop gaming.
|
|
wishing
Junior Strategist
Posts: 353
|
Post by wishing on Mar 15, 2017 20:50:12 GMT
I also am curious, for those who actually understand the legal arguments well, if anyone can explain what the arguments are for why it should be illegal for a company to accept the help of fans who want to volunteer their services without being employees.
Since participating in unpaid programs like the Press Gangers is 100% and utterly voluntary, how can it be considered exploitation?
There must be sound arguments for it if the court seems to be leaning in that direction, but the arguments seem hard to understand.
|
|
|
Post by Blargaliscious on Mar 15, 2017 22:56:44 GMT
I also am curious, for those who actually understand the legal arguments well, if anyone can explain what the arguments are for why it should be illegal for a company to accept the help of fans who want to volunteer their services without being employees. Since participating in unpaid programs like the Press Gangers is 100% and utterly voluntary, how can it be considered exploitation? There must be sound arguments for it if the court seems to be leaning in that direction, but the arguments seem hard to understand. The fans did not volunteer their services, they were paid with free product from the company. Had they not been paid at all, and if there was no tacit or explicit promise of compensation, then they would truly be volunteers.
While the "voluntary" argument looks like a reasonable out for WotC on the surface, keep in mind you going to your regular job and performing work is voluntary also. Nobody forces you to go to your job. You are not required to have a job and go to work, most of us feel that we have to because we have financial obligations that require us to earn money. Voluntary servitude is commonly referred to as "work" and if you work for a company you are commonly referred to as "an employee." Involuntary servitude is commonly referred to as "slavery."
I think a lot of us are confusing "working to earn money" as falling under employment law with "providing services for my hobby" as not. The lawsuit and the crux of the argument is not around why you performed the work, it is around the fact that people performed work that was not structured and regulated by themselves, it was structured and regulated by WotC. Further, the claimants did not do the work for free, payment was rendered in the form of free product that they knew they would be receiving. I'm no lawyer, nor am I an expert on the legal system, but that pretty much sounds like employment.
|
|
|
Post by welshhoppo on Mar 15, 2017 23:02:14 GMT
I think there is also the issue (I'm not good on American law, I studied British law) that companies cannot have volunteers. As far as I know, you can't have someone work for free and have then earn money for your company. It has to go to an employee.
|
|
|
Post by gunmageintraining on Mar 15, 2017 23:23:23 GMT
And yet unpaid internships exist, everywhere... Oft-times in political/governmental arenas, though I gather that they have exceptions to such laws.
It's a hard needle to thread I suppose, having volunteers and acknowledging them is actually the problem. If they simply ignored or never had a PG core, they'd be fine.
I though the WotC case was a bit more nuanced, weren't the judges actually assigned events as part of continued participation in the program? Opting to host an event and being assigned an event are two entirely different things.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Mar 15, 2017 23:36:55 GMT
And yet unpaid internships exist, everywhere... Oft-times in political/governmental arenas, though I gather that they have exceptions to such laws. It's a hard needle to thread I suppose, having volunteers and acknowledging them is actually the problem. If they simply ignored or never had a PG core, they'd be fine. I though the WotC case was a bit more nuanced, weren't the judges actually assigned events as part of continued participation in the program? Opting to host an event and being assigned an event are two entirely different things. Unpaid internships are subject to a whole host of legal restrictions as to what the intern can and cannot do. The internship is supposed to be, first and foremost, a learning opportunity for the intern. They are NOT supposed to be used to perform grunt work, and it's absolutely verboten in most places to use an intern as a replacement for a paid employee. Generally speaking, if a company is coming out significantly ahead on the cost-benefit analysis for having an intern, they're doing it wrong. The regulations get flouted with some regularity, of course, but that's the nature of the beast. Doesn't change the underlying logic behind them (which is sound,) and the fact that the PG program was regulated by PP, at PP's pleasure (in that PGers could be fired,) generated value for PP in the form of free promotion of their product, and involved non-negligible compensation...looks to me like they'd be in violation of the internship laws, and it's always going to be harder to get away with violations on a large scale than with an individual intern within a company (who often has good reason to avoid blowing the whistle on his employers.)
|
|
|
Post by HeadHunter on Mar 16, 2017 0:58:52 GMT
The fans did not volunteer their services, they were paid with free product from the company. Had they not been paid at all, and if there was no tacit or explicit promise of compensation, then they would truly be volunteers.
While the "voluntary" argument looks like a reasonable out for WotC on the surface, keep in mind you going to your regular job and performing work is voluntary also. The lawsuit and the crux of the argument is not around why you performed the work, it is around the fact that people performed work that was not structured and regulated by themselves, it was structured and regulated by WotC. Further, the claimants did not do the work for free, payment was rendered in the form of free product that they knew they would be receiving. I'm no lawyer, nor am I an expert on the legal system, but that pretty much sounds like employment.
And I'm no expert either, but that free product sounds like compensation. Yes, they volunteered no differently than we do when we get "real" jobs, knowing up front what compensation was offered. They accepted the "employment" knowing that their compensation was non-monetary. But there is a difference between voluntary demos and "voluntary" jobs that we have day-to-day. The significant difference being, as a Press Ganger, you are not required to perform demos on a regular schedule - you do them if and when you want to, at whatever frequency you wish to. This is not even contractual "employment", because it is a completely non-binding agreement. The closest comparison you could possibly draw is day laborers - you pick up work, you do the task or work however many hours you want, and you're compensated for those hours. You're not an "employee" of that company and are not entitled to any benefit other than the compensation agreed upon beforehand. It's terribly inaccurate to draw a comparison between running demos for a hobby game, and anything even remotely approaching an actual job.
|
|
|
Post by Blargaliscious on Mar 16, 2017 2:32:01 GMT
The fans did not volunteer their services, they were paid with free product from the company. Had they not been paid at all, and if there was no tacit or explicit promise of compensation, then they would truly be volunteers.
While the "voluntary" argument looks like a reasonable out for WotC on the surface, keep in mind you going to your regular job and performing work is voluntary also. The lawsuit and the crux of the argument is not around why you performed the work, it is around the fact that people performed work that was not structured and regulated by themselves, it was structured and regulated by WotC. Further, the claimants did not do the work for free, payment was rendered in the form of free product that they knew they would be receiving. I'm no lawyer, nor am I an expert on the legal system, but that pretty much sounds like employment.
And I'm no expert either, but that free product sounds like compensation. Yes, they volunteered no differently than we do when we get "real" jobs, knowing up front what compensation was offered. They accepted the "employment" knowing that their compensation was non-monetary. But there is a difference between voluntary demos and "voluntary" jobs that we have day-to-day. The significant difference being, as a Press Ganger, you are not required to perform demos on a regular schedule - you do them if and when you want to, at whatever frequency you wish to. c The closest comparison you could possibly draw is day laborers - you pick up work, you do the task or work however many hours you want, and you're compensated for those hours. You're not an "employee" of that company and are not entitled to any benefit other than the compensation agreed upon beforehand. It's terribly inaccurate to draw a comparison between running demos for a hobby game, and anything even remotely approaching an actual job. Regarding your first paragraph - I agree that MTG Judges effectively accepted employment at a pre-established pay rate that is non-monetary and, if converted into a cash equivalent might be below the minimum wage. You and I are pretty much in agreement. What this point brings up, though, is why the judges decided to file suit. What changed that made the judges decide to file suit? Did WotC change the rules, making being a judge an onerous endeavor? *Something* changed, pushing the judges to want to file suit. If nothing changed, then it might be a case of someone is looking for free money.
But there is a difference between voluntary demos and "voluntary" jobs that we have day-to-day. The significant difference being, as a Press Ganger, you are not required to perform demos on a regular schedule - you do them if and when you want to, at whatever frequency you wish to.
I don't think frequency and impetus to perform the work has any impact on whether a person is considered an employee or not. There are a lot of jobs performed by people on an ad hoc basis who are considered employees. From the description presented in the linked article the standards for defining what is considered employment are pretty simple, and frequency and impetus are not mentioned as qualifiers. This is a good thing, because if they were in the law then you are creating the potential for nefarious behavior by businesses and employees.
This is not even contractual "employment", because it is a completely non-binding agreement.
Contracts have no bearing in this. I am a salaried employee for a major company, and I don't work under a contract. Since there is no binding contract between me and my employer I can quit whenever I want and they can fire me whenever they want. Now, there is an agreement between me and my employer regarding how often I work, when I work, and how much I get paid. The MTG Judges are arguing in court that there was a tacit agreement between them and WotC regarding how often they worked (whenever they wanted to), when they worked (whenever there was a tournament that they wanted to work at), and how much they get paid (MTG product, which was apparently not enough).
The closest comparison you could possibly draw is day laborers - you pick up work, you do the task or work however many hours you want, and you're compensated for those hours. You're not an "employee" of that company and are not entitled to any benefit other than the compensation agreed upon beforehand.
Depends on the day laborer. If you are talking about the people that you bring in from temp agencies (be that for the day or for an indefinite period of time), then they are not your employees, they are employees of the temp agency. If you are talking about the people who stand in front of a Home Depot and wait to be hired by construction companies for the day, your example is a bit dubious because it is one that is considered illegal because both parties are more interested in transacting outside of labor, tax, and sometimes immigration law than they are in promoting a shared interest.
It's terribly inaccurate to draw a comparison between running demos for a hobby game, and anything even remotely approaching an actual job.
Unprecedented? Definitely. Unusual? Very much so. Inaccurate? That is for the judge to figure out.
If the trial judge agrees that it is inaccurate, then the MTG Judges lose their lawsuit. Based upon the linked article I read, the MTG Judges *might* have a point. If our deduction regarding Privateer Press disbanding the Press Gangers is accurate then they seem to think so also.
|
|