EA's bright and shiny new corporate trademark is "Challenge Everything." Where this applies is not exactly clear. Churning out one licensed football game after another doesn't sound like challenging much of anything to me; it sounds like a money farm. To any EA executive that happens to read this, I have a good challenge for you: how about safe and sane labor practices for the people on whose backs you walk for your millions?
I am retaining some anonymity here because I have no illusions about what the consequences would be for my family if I was explicit. However, I also feel no impetus to shy away from sharing our story, because I know that it is too common to stick out among those of the thousands of engineers, artists, and designers that EA employs.
Our adventures with Electronic Arts began less than a year ago. The small game studio that my partner worked for collapsed as a result of foul play on the part of a big publisher -- another common story. Electronic Arts offered a job, the salary was right and the benefits were good, so my SO took it. I remember that they asked him in one of the interviews: "how do you feel about working long hours?" It's just a part of the game industry -- few studios can avoid a crunch as deadlines loom, so we thought nothing of it. When asked for specifics about what "working long hours" meant, the interviewers coughed and glossed on to the next question; now we know why.
Within weeks production had accelerated into a 'mild' crunch: eight hours six days a week. Not bad. Months remained until any real crunch would start, and the team was told that this "pre-crunch" was to prevent a big crunch toward the end; at this point any other need for a crunch seemed unlikely, as the project was dead on schedule. I don't know how many of the developers bought EA's explanation for the extended hours; we were new and naive so we did. The producers even set a deadline; they gave a specific date for the end of the crunch, which was still months away from the title's shipping date, so it seemed safe. That date came and went. And went, and went. When the next news came it was not about a reprieve; it was another acceleration: twelve hours six days a week, 9am to 10pm.
Weeks passed. Again the producers had given a termination date on this crunch that again they failed. Throughout this period the project remained on schedule. The long hours started to take its toll on the team; people grew irritable and some started to get ill. People dropped out in droves for a couple of days at a time, but then the team seemed to reach equilibrium again and they plowed ahead. The managers stopped even talking about a day when the hours would go back to normal.
Now, it seems, is the "real" crunch, the one that the producers of this title so wisely prepared their team for by running them into the ground ahead of time. The current mandatory hours are 9am to 10pm -- seven days a week -- with the occasional Saturday evening off for good behavior (at 6:30pm). This averages out to an eighty-five hour work week. Complaints that these once more extended hours combined with the team's existing fatigue would result in a greater number of mistakes made and an even greater amount of wasted energy were ignored.
The stress is taking its toll. After a certain number of hours spent working the eyes start to lose focus; after a certain number of weeks with only one day off fatigue starts to accrue and accumulate exponentially. There is a reason why there are two days in a weekend -- bad things happen to one's physical, emotional, and mental health if these days are cut short. The team is rapidly beginning to introduce as many flaws as they are removing.
And the kicker: for the honor of this treatment EA salaried employees receive a) no overtime; b) no compensation time! ('comp' time is the equalization of time off for overtime -- any hours spent during a crunch accrue into days off after the product has shipped); c) no additional sick or vacation leave. The time just goes away. Additionally, EA recently announced that, although in the past they have offered essentially a type of comp time in the form of a few weeks off at the end of a project, they no longer wish to do this, and employees shouldn't expect it. Further, since the production of various games is scattered, there was a concern on the part of the employees that developers would leave one crunch only to join another. EA's response was that they would attempt to minimize this, but would make no guarantees. This is unthinkable; they are pushing the team to individual physical health limits, and literally giving them nothing for it. Comp time is a staple in this industry, but EA as a corporation wishes to "minimize" this reprieve. One would think that the proper way to minimize comp time is to avoid crunch, but this brutal crunch has been on for months, and nary a whisper about any compensation leave, nor indeed of any end of this treatment.
This crunch also differs from crunch time in a smaller studio in that it was not an emergency effort to save a project from failure. Every step of the way, the project remained on schedule. Crunching neither accelerated this nor slowed it down; its effect on the actual product was not measurable. The extended hours were deliberate and planned; the management knew what they were doing as they did it. The love of my life comes home late at night complaining of a headache that will not go away and a chronically upset stomach, and my happy supportive smile is running out.
No one works in the game industry unless they love what they do. No one on that team is interested in producing an inferior product. My heart bleeds for this team precisely BECAUSE they are brilliant, talented individuals out to create something great. They are and were more than willing to work hard for the success of the title. But that good will has only been met with abuse. Amazingly, Electronic Arts was listed #91 on Fortune magazine's "100 Best Companies to Work For" in 2003.
EA's attitude toward this -- which is actually a part of company policy, it now appears -- has been (in an anonymous quotation that I've heard repeated by multiple managers), "If they don't like it, they can work someplace else." Put up or shut up and leave: this is the core of EA's Human Resources policy. The concept of ethics or compassion or even intelligence with regard to getting the most out of one's workforce never enters the equation: if they don't want to sacrifice their lives and their health and their talent so that a multibillion dollar corporation can continue its Godzilla-stomp through the game industry, they can work someplace else.
But can they?
The EA Mambo, paired with other giants such as Vivendi, Sony, and Microsoft, is rapidly either crushing or absorbing the vast majority of the business in game development. A few standalone studios that made their fortunes in previous eras -- Blizzard, Bioware, and Id come to mind -- manage to still survive, but 2004 saw the collapse of dozens of small game studios, no longer able to acquire contracts in the face of rapid and massive consolidation of game publishing companies. This is an epidemic hardly unfamiliar to anyone working in the industry. Though, of course, it is always the option of talent to go outside the industry, perhaps venturing into the booming commercial software development arena. (Read my tired attempt at sarcasm.)
To put some of this in perspective, I myself consider some figures. If EA truly believes that it needs to push its employees this hard -- I actually believe that they don't, and that it is a skewed operations perspective alone that results in the severity of their crunching, coupled with a certain expected amount of the inefficiency involved in running an enterprise as large as theirs -- the solution therefore should be to hire more engineers, or artists, or designers, as the case may be. Never should it be an option to punish one's workforce with ninety hour weeks; in any other industry the company in question would find itself sued out of business so fast its stock wouldn't even have time to tank. In its first weekend, Madden 2005 grossed $65 million. EA's annual revenue is approximately $2.5 billion. This company is not strapped for cash; their labor practices are inexcusable.
The interesting thing about this is an assumption that most of the employees seem to be operating under. Whenever the subject of hours come up, inevitably, it seems, someone mentions 'exemption'. They refer to a California law that supposedly exempts businesses from having to pay overtime to certain 'specialty' employees, including software programmers. This is Senate Bill 88. However, Senate Bill 88 specifically does not apply to the entertainment industry -- television, motion picture, and theater industries are specifically mentioned. Further, even in software, there is a pay minimum on the exemption: those exempt must be paid at least $90,000 annually. I can assure you that the majority of EA employees are in fact not in this pay bracket; ergo, these practices are not only unethical, they are illegal.
I look at our situation and I ask 'us': why do you stay? And the answer is that in all likelihood we won't; and in all likelihood if we had known that this would be the result of working for EA, we would have stayed far away in the first place. But all along the way there were deceptions, there were promises, there were assurances -- there was a big fancy office building with an expensive fish tank -- all of which in the end look like an elaborate scheme to keep a crop of employees on the project just long enough to get it shipped. And then if they need to, they hire in a new batch, fresh and ready to hear more promises that will not be kept; EA's turnover rate in engineering is approximately 50%. This is how EA works. So now we know, now we can move on, right? That seems to be what happens to everyone else. But it's not enough. Because in the end, regardless of what happens with our particular situation, this kind of "business" isn't right, and people need to know about it, which is why I write this today.
If I could get EA CEO Larry Probst on the phone, there are a few things I would ask him. "What's your salary?" would be merely a point of curiosity. The main thing I want to know is, Larry: you do realize what you're doing to your people, right? And you do realize that they ARE people, with physical limits, emotional lives, and families, right? Voices and talents and senses of humor and all that? That when you keep our husbands and wives and children in the office for ninety hours a week, sending them home exhausted and numb and frustrated with their lives, it's not just them you're hurting, but everyone around them, everyone who loves them? When you make your profit calculations and your cost analyses, you know that a great measure of that cost is being paid in raw human dignity, right?
Right?
===
This article is offered under the Creative Commons deed. Please feel free to redistribute/link.
← Ctrl ← Alt
Ctrl → Alt →
November 11 2004, 00:04:13 UTC 16 years ago
All of this is quite familiar to those in the industry, but few places do anything about it. And comp time and profit sharing are being eroded, especially as smaller developers get taken over by publishers.
interesting
Anonymous
November 11 2004, 00:04:40 UTC 16 years ago
I spoke to my manager once and his opinion is very strong that there should NOT be any overtime needed. He pointed out how everyone always goes, "Oh, that's just how the industry is," which was the thinking I had as well until he pointed that out. It does NOT have to be that way. Overtime should not be needed if the planning is done well ahead of time and no changes are made after it's approved. The people I work closely with do not push me to do overtime at all and would much prefer I didn't. But since that's how it's been, people still do it. So far I'm going onto my 2nd week of 12-hour days...
There have been other things I've noticed or been told about that I find it so strange that the company would actually do it. I think that people in QA get the short end of the stick, they're expected to work insane hours for such little pay (and no one respects them which is damn sad 'cause without them, there'd be no game!). Though some leads are more laid back and will allow people to take time off if they really need it, some are more strict about it and tell you to deal with it. I think that it does come down to a person-to-person basis as well. The people that I've worked with are more to the laid back end of the spectrum and question the decisions that fly around, but I've heard other stories from around the studio.
The money thing I also don't understand. They seem to waste money on such small things yet become anal when it comes to raises or head count... I'm sure there are some laws that gaming companies, and even visual fx houses, are going around and/or breaking. But no one wants to step up to do something about it. I guess a lot of us are desperate to keep our jobs? I know I'd rather be working here than most of the other companies around town from hearing other horror stories. It's such a small community here and everyong knows everyone else. You rub off the wrong way with one person, word's gonna spread.
I think that the whole industry will have to change their mind set, or else something like unions will step in. Don't know if unions will be a good thing or not, I've heard both. But something will probably happen eventually if things don't change.
Re: interesting
Anonymous
November 11 2004, 02:07:45 UTC 16 years ago
I live in BC and work for another game company (not EA) and lately I've been "required" to work 12 hour shifts for this project.
This is retarded and not necessary. Even though I'll put in the extra hours if my part of the project is late or I have to debug some problem, but doing this for weeks at time is just f***ing stupid. Maybe we should unionize, after all unions form themselves when management becomes abusive.
Re: interesting
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: interesting
Anonymous
16 years ago
change in laws because of EA
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: change in laws because of EA
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: change in laws because of EA
Anonymous
16 years ago
EA Spouse
Anonymous
November 11 2004, 00:17:21 UTC 16 years ago
Re: EA Spouse
Anonymous
November 11 2004, 00:24:43 UTC 16 years ago
Is anyone higher up seeing this? I hope so. You guys need to learn that you can't treat your workers (or their families) like crap, and expect us to enjoy it.
Re: EA Spouse
16 years ago
No royalties?
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: No royalties?
16 years ago
Re: No royalties? - Depends on who's got the calculator that day!
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: No royalties? - Depends on who's got the calculator that day!
16 years ago
Re: No royalties? - Depends on who's got the calculator that day!
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: No royalties? - Depends on who's got the calculator that day!
Anonymous
16 years ago
We are NOT alone!
Anonymous
November 11 2004, 00:19:39 UTC 16 years ago
Employees "forced" to work long hours is not uncommon. It's happened here. Sometimes the norm...sometimes with annoying repetition. This is mostly due to poor lack of planning and organization within the management structure (which would, apparently, rather schmooze and count the money than run an effective environment). Sometimes it's down to mistaken scheduling or even pathetic (and downright unprofessional) "project improvisation" (because the managers down really know what the hell they're doing...but isn't that always the case).
Concerned employees who "dare" to speak the truth in the hopes of improving morale and *GASP!* product quality, have faced everything from being ignored to being threatened with firing (hell...once or twice the threat has been carried out).
Professionals in ANY market are going to experience the usual headaches...I realise that. But the current treatment of creative individuals (programmers and artists alike) in this industry is appalling. Many of my peers (some even within the halls of EA) and I agree that our current position, may be our last in the game industry. THAT'S HOW BAD IT IS.
Form a union? I'd be for it, frankly. I'm tired of how poorly I (and my peers) are being treated. Would it ruin things? Probably not. Unions may have made Hollywood a complicated process to newcomers...but it's not impossible. Some of us know how that process works firsthand, and let me say...it works out well.
EMPLOYEES: Here's my only problem with all this talk about forming a video game workers' union...the video game workers. We're like oar rowers in Ben Hur, complete with whips cracking away. Anytime anyone mentions such a thing here...everyone gets nervous and looks for management "spies"...just in case. FOLKS! We're the NERVE CENTER...the BACKBONE of what makes this industry work. Talk all you like...it won't change anything. It only takes some huevos to DO IT! I'll be right up there at the front of the line, but I cannot, and will not, do it on my own. There has to be a concensus...so starting thinking SERIOUSLY about this! NOW!
EMPLOYERS: Here's a little "PRO TIP" for you...TREAT YOUR ARTISTS AND YOUR PROGRAMMERS WITH RESPECT! This isn't just about money. We came into the game industry with the understanding that we would be sacrificing our valuable time on this planet (time that could be spent for ourselves, our families, and our own creative needs and projects) for YOU. Do us a favor...understand that we are not third-world country child laborers (although, the number of outsourcing companies overseas is growing at a plague-like rate). We are not burger-flippers...we (all of us) are thinking, feeling human beings who want to feel good about what we do. And we would like to do it for employers who know how to treat these creative teams with respect. Otherwise, what's the point? YES...there is a massive pool of people just waiting to get into the market. But you know what? It's like any natural resource...and your ill treatment will deplete the supply.
THIS FORUM IS PROOF OF IT!
Re: We are NOT alone!
Anonymous
November 11 2004, 22:12:43 UTC 16 years ago
Re: We are NOT alone!
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: We are NOT alone!
16 years ago
November 11 2004, 00:21:59 UTC 16 years ago
I knew EA sucked. I mean, I really did. But there's a vast ocean of difference between knowing something is bad and knowing exactly HOW bad. That's downright unconscionable.
I just got into the industry - literally 3 months ago - and am undergoing training to be a designer at a wee little developer called Papaya Studio. My position is currently the general jack-of-all-trades writer/press person/et cetera, but I'm being coached and trained by other designers as often as they can be spared. I'm really dammed proud of this place, and honestly speaking, I love my job. I was taken in with no experience at all - just my college degree (in ENGLISH, I should add - not something like CS!) - and am being trained by talented and experienced designers and staff. One of the reasons I like it here so much is that there's a great blend of really experienced industry professionals and young greenhorns like myself - our president has really gone out of her way to take in newbies (despite the risk of high turnover) and inject some life into the industry in a way that won't sap the newcomers of all their strength and leave them jaded husks. Woo for not being a jaded husk! And as I hear it, other developers like Gearbox are doing the same.
That bragging aside, I just want to tell you that 1) there is hope, and 2) I'm behind you 100%. I'll send out the feelers, touch on those who are deeply concerned about the path the industry is taken, and hopefully, if unionization occurs (thank Jeebus if this DOES happen), try to help everyone adjust. I think EA's time is running out - I HOPE it is - and people are quickly wising to their game.
Thanks again for your post. I know more than a few people who will find it more than a little bit intriguing, and I will be sending it out to them with due speed. Hang in there ::pat on shoulder::
November 11 2004, 00:41:50 UTC 16 years ago
16 years ago
16 years ago
16 years ago
How'd you swing that?
16 years ago
Re: How'd you swing that?
16 years ago
Re: How'd you swing that?
16 years ago
Re: How'd you swing that?
16 years ago
whatever
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: whatever
16 years ago
Hmmm
Anonymous
November 11 2004, 00:22:51 UTC 16 years ago
Re: Hmmm
November 11 2004, 04:08:21 UTC 16 years ago
Re: Hmmm
16 years ago
Problem, solution.
Anonymous
November 11 2004, 00:26:02 UTC 16 years ago
Re: Problem, solution.
Anonymous
November 11 2004, 00:33:40 UTC 16 years ago
Re: Problem, solution.
16 years ago
Re: Problem, solution.
Anonymous
16 years ago
Tiburon
Anonymous
16 years ago
lawsuit
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: Problem, solution.
16 years ago
Hours
Anonymous
November 11 2004, 00:45:31 UTC 16 years ago
Sony was getting a very bad reputation, like EA.
They finally did a good job of revamping their structure,
so that it is not as bad at Sony as it used to be.
But a lot of the other visual effects houses still
work the 6 and 7 day weeks and outragious hours...
So beware what you wish for, when you look at switching
from games to movies, web, or tv. They all have pretty
hellish hours. So if you have a job at a company that
treats you well, and you have your weekends off,
consider yourself lucky, and don't complain about
your low pay, etc... You usually have a choice.
Work 40 hours a week at some call center, or work
at a creative job, and deal with the long hours...
A lot of people want to work on games and movies,
but once they get into the industry, they realize
how hard it really is, in terms of hours, etc...
Re: Hours
Anonymous
November 11 2004, 00:56:04 UTC 16 years ago
Other software companies (non-game ones, and a handful of smaller gaming companies) are able to create products that don't require 70 or 80 hour work weeks.
Re: Hours
Anonymous
16 years ago
November 11 2004, 00:47:04 UTC 16 years ago
Anonymous
November 11 2004, 10:10:16 UTC 16 years ago
That goes for the UK industry as well, although we don't seem to have it quite so bad, it still takes the piss.
I am also an EA spouse
Anonymous
November 11 2004, 01:08:12 UTC 16 years ago
Then EA came along, the paycheck got bigger. The flexable schedule went out of the window. The the first milestone crunch came 3 weeks of working 7 days a week. Only after the workforce became to exhausted to go on were they grudginly given a day off (sunday, but on call so they could be pulled back inside). They did that for so many mile stones, that it looked like one big crunch.
EA really needs to look at how much money they spend on rehiring new employees and get a clue. They need to take the big bucks that they spend on getting new employees up to speed and use it to make the lives of their existing employees more reasonable. Those employees need time to cool down and to recharge their creative batteries. Most companies realize that tired employees are much LESS productive than rested ones.
I am completely sick of what EA is doing to my Spouse. I just wish that we didn't have to go through the uncertainity of finding a new job to get out of this BS. The ugly thing is they do this to all of their employees, from project management down though the QA testers (one of my friends is a QA testers and has worse hours than my Spouse).
I really do wish the employees of EA would unionize, but in this era of union busting i just don't see it happening there. EA will continue to exploit their workforce until someone either legislates a resolution to the issue or lots of employees and ex employees sue for back pay.
Re: I am also an EA spouse
Anonymous
November 12 2004, 09:29:42 UTC 16 years ago
Re: I am also an EA spouse
16 years ago
Re: I am also an EA spouse - got it wrong - got it right
Anonymous
16 years ago
EA
Anonymous
November 11 2004, 01:08:46 UTC 16 years ago
Re: EA
Anonymous
November 11 2004, 03:20:57 UTC 16 years ago
Re: EA
Anonymous
16 years ago
Fuckers.
November 11 2004, 01:09:10 UTC 16 years ago
Wonderful post btw, very well written and definatly makes me continue to enjoy my 36k a year programming job where I work at most 2-3 weeks a year over 40 hours.
I'll never work for EA, thank you.
Anonymous
November 11 2004, 01:11:14 UTC 16 years ago
I was recently fired from EA because I refused to work the insane long hours.
November 11 2004, 01:13:31 UTC 16 years ago
So I typed WAY to much to fit in a comment... So I added it to my own livejournal click here to read the full story:
http://www.livejournal.com/users/joestraitiff </a>
-Joe Straitiff
formerly Software Engineer III
of EA formerly Maxis
Get a lawyer!
Anonymous
November 11 2004, 02:43:45 UTC 16 years ago
> > Todd Heyman
> > Telephone: (800) 287-8119
Re: I was recently fired from EA because I refused to work the insane long hours.
16 years ago
wombat!
Anonymous
16 years ago
Re: wombat!
16 years ago
Poor project management?
Anonymous
November 11 2004, 01:36:36 UTC 16 years ago
Game companies will grow up over time. The quality of all parts of game development is realtively low in the game industry - planning, management, and programming. We're left with a legacy of people who've been too busy to learn new technologies, disciplines, and methods. These are the people who are now leading the teams of today, passing on their bad habits of the past, and using ad-hoc development processes because they don't know any better or don't understand how new methodologies could possibly work (for example, pair programming is usually too scary).
As time passes, everyone will get better at what they do and game development will be streamlined so that it is possible to work regular hours for longer, and produce decent games.
If you want to make a difference in your company, instead of forming a union I recommend requesting additional time and money for additional education adn workshops - especially for management. Try and talk everyone into learning about development discipline. Plant the seeds of improved processes and give your bosses phone number to good management consultants.
Speaking of which -- any testimonials for development discipline? Or for management consulting?
Re: Poor project management?
Anonymous
November 11 2004, 02:16:57 UTC 16 years ago
Re: Poor project management?
16 years ago
← Ctrl ← Alt
Ctrl → Alt →