?

Log in

No account? Create an account
EA: The Human Story - ea_spouse — LiveJournal [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
ea_spouse

[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

EA: The Human Story [Nov. 10th, 2004|12:01 am]
ea_spouse
My significant other works for Electronic Arts, and I'm what you might call a disgruntled spouse.

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.
linkReply

Comments:
From: (Anonymous)
2004-11-13 01:06 am (UTC)

EA operates on a culture of guilt...

I worked at EA (for nine months) and can confirm that this story is absolutely true. I worked in the entertainment industry as an artist for over 12 years (7 years creating video games and 5 years working on movies) and was brought into EA with many enticing promises, such as bonuses and stock options. However, I could not make it through one year to cash-in on any of these "rewards". The work environment was one where those that worked the insane hours of uncompensated overtime either hated doing it or began hating those who wouldn't work it. Not coming in on a weekend was often perceived as a lack of supporting the team and became an instant excuse to be trashed in a performance review, which subsequently resulted in a zero bonus. Remember, these bonuses were mainly used as "carrots" to keep the crew working towards a "reward", which could literally be withheld for almost any reason. If a producer or manager didn't like you nor understood your need for a life outside of work, then all those hours of unpaid overtime would amount to purely time lost without any compensation. Moreover, many managers and leads were single guys in their mid-twenties, who had little or no management experience, let alone the knowledge to effectively complete a project on time other than by slave-driving those under them. Even when an artist's given tasks were completed, he still had to come in whenever the rest of the team was there, to playtest the game and search for game bugs. The prevailing attitude was that weekends were something that EA gave as a gift to it's employees at it's discretion. In my specific case, because of my prior experience, I knew to leave at the end of the day when my work was done. After all, I felt I had paid my dues of working insane hours as a young man. But never have I experienced the kind of abuse "by design" that I saw at EA. Ultimately, I left EA and am now happily working elsewhere. EA thrives on bringing in young talent. Persons who are straight out of school; excited just to be working at a brand name company like EA, creating video games for a living. If this was also your dream...beware!
(Reply) (Thread)
From: ravidrath
2004-11-13 01:18 am (UTC)

Re: EA operates on a culture of guilt...

This is the first time I've seen the problem of guilt addressed.

The problem is that there is always the feelings of guilt over this. I know people that would work late when they didn't have to out of guilt for leaving those that still had work to do. While the sentiment and spirit of team unity here is excellent, as it often at game companies, this is only adding to the problem. In fact, I've had game company managers bring up guilt and try to exploit these feelings to keep me at my desk longer. Of course, I know that any team friends of mine would want me to leave when I was done with my work.

This brings up another issue, the "sympathetic crunch." On my first game, the programmers were way behind and had to crunch extensively, but art was effectively done with all of their work. Management "asked" them to stay and crunch alongside the programmers "to show their support," but no doubt hoping to get more work out of them. This was the dumbest example of "butts in seats" management I had seen, as the company was effectively asking the artists to dink around on the 'Net for a few hours, eat a free dinner, and go home angry.

So, remember - if some people are crunching and you don't need to, go home. If they are really good team mates or friends, they will want you to go home.

-Peter
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: luckykaa
2004-11-13 08:18 am (UTC)

Re: EA operates on a culture of guilt...

Yup. I'll just add my £0.012 about guilt.

I was urged to work late simply because everyone else was (I was on track). And that it seemed "a little sad" that I'd be going home when everyone else was burning the midnight oil.

I still held my ground (except I put in an extra hour as a concession), but I did feel very uncomfortable at work for a couple of weeks afterwards.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: (Anonymous)
2004-11-13 01:29 am (UTC)

Re: EA operates on a culture of guilt...

This is the bottom line. This is the foundation of their motivational anthem.

DFWMIFV and counting...
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: (Anonymous)
2004-11-13 01:38 am (UTC)

Re: EA operates on a culture of guilt...

"DFWMIFV"

LOL. Knowing what that stands for is the sign of a true EA employee.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: wilywombat
2004-11-13 03:34 am (UTC)

Re: EA operates on a culture of guilt...

ROFL! I was so proud when I got mine. Actually, I still am. I loved that company for a long time. Things really got bad in the last 4 years or so. Before that I was lucky to be with some really wonderful people.
As for the guilt thing, its very real. Its very much like Cult programming. Once you realize that the catch phrases all start to lose their power.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: malaya_zemlya
2004-11-13 06:07 am (UTC)

Re: EA operates on a culture of guilt...

Oh shit. Haven't seen _that_ abbreviation in years.
Never got to that point. Looks like it was a right decision after all...

And yeah, the observation about guilt trips is very very true. At that time it was just some managers who practiced them but looks like the style has spread :(
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: ravidrath
2004-11-14 04:44 pm (UTC)

Re: EA operates on a culture of guilt...

...Okay, someone's gonna have to explain to acronym to me. :)

-Peter
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: (Anonymous)
2004-11-16 06:39 am (UTC)

Re: EA operates on a culture of guilt...

Don't Fuck With Me I'm Fully Vested is what DFWMIFV stands for.

I got there. Got my sabbatical too. Glad I got out not too long after. It was starting to really go this way badly at the end. Plus you can only work on the same damn game year after year after year for so long.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)