EA: The Human Story

[whyBish]

Yep.  Let's eliminate *all* labour and wage laws then, starting with minimum wage.  Well except maybe child labor if you argue they aren't competent to choose.
[right][snapback]60311[/snapback][/right]

Agreed.

Minimum wage is inefficient in a high unemployment environment. Person X may get a 'decent' wage, but person Y and Z don't get employed at all.

Also, no-one is forced to work for an employer. If wages are inefficiently low then you can start your own business. Obviously you wont be able to start your own business in a market with high barriers to entry, but there are plenty of things you can do with very little capital.

However, I didn't say *all* labour and wage laws are bad. See my post to Occhi re false advertising etc.

[whyBish]

I think you're downplaying the effect of kicking your programmers in the middle of a project. It's by no means small potatoes.
[right][snapback]60297[/snapback][/right]

Yes. Doing this is not smart at the project level, and does have costs, however EA manages multiple projects. They have at least the following options:
1) Ditch the project entirely. may be more profitable than paying overtime. Result C.B.U. loses job. E.A. demonstrates that developers are not bigger than the company => Discourages other C.B.U.s on other (and future) projects => Additional benefit in the final analysis.

2) Hire new set of workers with same provisions as old lot. result C.B.U. loses job etc as above. Again has the benefit of discouraging similar behaviour on other projects, but project will get delayed, and like you said significant re-hiring costs (on that project), but the operational cost remains the same

3) Give in to C.B.U. Higher operational costs. project becomes less profitable (but still profitable? who knows, depends on other market participants practices). Encourages similar actions on other projects.

So I suppose my point about the CBU is that for EA there is a multiplier factor there since they manage multiple projects. They could amortise the cost of a full rehire on that one project over all of their projects if they think it will discourage similar action.

For the discouragement factor not to be an issue, then some factor like the following needs to exist:
- Company (EA) only works on one (or few) projects. (Not in this case)
- The CBU extends not only accross the one project, or even one company, but across one industry. At this time this is not the case, as there is an excess of supply of labour (as referenced in the complaint itself)
- Morale affects productivity to a large extent (perhaps)
- Reputation affects sales to a large extent (doubtful)

[WarLocke]

Minimum wage is inefficient in a high unemployment environment.  Person X may get a 'decent' wage, but person Y and Z don't get employed at all.[right][snapback]60330[/snapback][/right]

Would you prefer that persons X, Y and Z all have jobs that don't pay enough for them to live off of?

I don't know how it is in other areas, but around here minimum wage is truly minimum - $5.15 an hour doesn't stretch far.

[jahcs]

And raising minimum wage is one of the quickest ways to create inflation. Catch 22.

[kandrathe]

And raising minimum wage is one of the quickest ways to create inflation.  Catch 22.
[right][snapback]60447[/snapback][/right]

Maybe inflation, but certainly unemployment. If it were done, then it needs to be enacted at a federal level and the minimum (living) wage should be calculated by county and based on the average cost of living (rent, groceries, gasoline), and then assuming the hard working individual is willing to put in at least a 40 hour week.

Evidence indicates that in those places where ordinances enact a living wage, that is does have a positive effect on urban poverty, however it also has a strong negative effect on employment. There are subsequently fewer, higher paying jobs. The result is that the ordinance tends to displace the urban poor, forcing them to seek lower wage jobs outside of oridinanced zone.

[jahcs]

Maybe inflation, but certainly unemployment.  If it were done, then it needs to be enacted at a federal level and the minimum (living) wage should be calculated by county and based on the average cost of living (rent, groceries, gasoline), and then assuming the hard working individual is willing to put in at least a 40 hour week. 

Evidence indicates that in those places where ordinances enact a living wage, that is does have a positive effect on urban poverty, however it also has a strong negative effect on employment.  There are subsequently fewer, higher paying jobs.  The result is that the ordinance tends to displace the urban poor, forcing them to seek lower wage jobs outside of oridinanced zone.
[right][snapback]60450[/snapback][/right]

Sounds a bit like socialism to me :) Even with my (half) wit comments I can't think of an adequate solution for the problem. Except to encourage the workforce to work and always be looking for ways to improve.

[Cryptic]

It just amazes me how corrupt and useless EA has become.

As a longtime gamer, my first exposure to Electronic Arts was as a kid - my best friend got a Commodore 64 for Christmas, 1982, and after we played through the Zorks, we discovered Electronic Arts.

For those who don't know, EA was at that time the very finest software maker in the world. There were Ultima and Wizardry and the Infocom titles, but EA from 1983-1985 was in a realm entirely its own. The games were revolutionary - Archon, Pinabll Construction Set, Racing Destruction Set, Murder on the Zinderneuf, Seven Cities of Gold, the Adventure Construction Set, Mail Order Monsters, MULE - and each was produced in a beautiful portfolio format, with a special capsule explaining the programmer's hopes and dreams in producing the title. They were "artists," not programmers, and the mission of the company was to promote them as creative individuals. Each game had thoughtful ads specifically tailored to advocate the game not just as the "next arcade thing," but as a springboard for ideas.

Critics responded to this thoughtful approach, and you can find reviews lauding the way racism is subtly addressed in Seven Cities, how MULE teaches principles of supply and demand, how ACS empowered adventure designers as never before, how Archon merged the cerebral with the visceral in a revolutionary fashion. As a kid, EA was the first company I advocated as something that I was proud of in the business world. I even made them the subject of my "big" 8th grade report.

Fast forward two decades, and all I associate EA now with is: a lack of innovation, slave driving, and crappy assembly line sports games where only the digits and the names ever seem to change.

What happened?
:ph34r:

[Quark]

Would you prefer that persons X, Y and Z all have jobs that don't pay enough for them to live off of?

I don't know how it is in other areas, but around here minimum wage is truly minimum - $5.15 an hour doesn't stretch far.

Minimum wage, in the overall scheme of things, is highly unused. The vast majority of jobs pay more than minimum wage, and it's supposed to be that way. Raising the minimum wage to a point where it actually affects the economy harms it more than it actually helps it. Artificially increasing the cost of the labor force will artificially decrease the demand for it ... an economy that is allowed to work itself out (be it through unions or just people/companies working together more or whatever) is much more effective at raising wages.

Minimum wage should only be used so that the young workforce (students) and people ignorant of the workforce (mainly immigrants) aren't overly exploited. I will agree, however, that it has probably been to long since the minimum wage has been raised.

[jahcs]

I will agree, however, that it has probably been to long since the minimum wage has been raised.
[right][snapback]60457[/snapback][/right]

Not in Washington State!

[TaMeOlta]

I prefer to be paid in gold pieces ....... :D Aaaargh !

[kandrathe]

Sounds a bit like socialism to me  :)  Even with my (half) wit comments I can't think of an adequate solution for the problem.  Except to encourage the workforce to work and always be looking for ways to improve.
[right][snapback]60453[/snapback][/right]

That's why I'm against it. :) Except for the protecting children and the infirm, I think the government should not be involved with wages.

[Occhidiangela]

That's why I'm against it.  :)  Except for the protecting children and the infirm, I think the government should not be involved with wages.
[right][snapback]60475[/snapback][/right]

I respectfully disagree. We have a department of labor for a good reason. You can't always trust people driven by a profit motive. Or do you want to go back to laize faire capitalism?

Occhi

[Doc]

I respectfully disagree.  We have a department of labor for a good reason.  You can't always trust people driven by a profit motive.  Or do you want to go back to laize faire capitalism?

Occhi
[right][snapback]60532[/snapback][/right]

For a moment, I throught that said "Lezbo fairie."

Darn, I was all ready with a tongue in cheek comment Occhi.

Did I just mention tongue in cheek and lezbo fairie in the same post?

I am a bad person.

[Chaerophon]

Artificially increasing the cost of the labor force will artificially decrease the demand for it ... an economy that is allowed to work itself out (be it through unions or just people/companies working together more or whatever) is much more effective at raising wages.

Keep believing in that myth. Economic science is like physics, except that in economics, you can never account for all of the variables. Given that the first law on which your little soundbyte depends is that 'there be no monopolies', I would say that if we applied your theory in practice, we would see the Wal-Mart's of the world driving wages to obscene new lows. Economic theory argues that monopolies cannot exist under laissez-faire because a competitor willing to lower profit margins in the interest of increased market share will always break them up. Economic practice demonstrates otherwise. Because of their dominant market share, refusal to allow workers to unionize and wholesale purchasing, they can lower prices to sub-cost levels for months at a time, driving competitors out of business. Once you're the only game in town, wage levels are whatever you want them to be. Take it or leave it. Hell, they'll employ debt-contracted Guatemalan slave labour (not wage-slavery, SLAVE LABOUR) in Mexico if they can get away with it. Not a myth, it is well-documented from academic sources. It's nice for legislation to fall on the side of the worker once in a while.

Minimum wage laws are a relatively small input as far as causes unemployment go. Those pushing to eliminate the minimum wage are not in it for the good of all - wages lower than the minimum are generally not enough to survive on, and if they really cared, they'd probably be paying a fair wage in the first place. Profit-margins among major corporations since the '70's have increased dramatically while average wage levels have actually fallen in real terms. Monopoly control allows firms to act as price setters on labour rather than price takers, and that is not what economic theory argues should be the case. The best economists, just like the best political scientists and philosophers, are the ones that realize the differences between theory and practice (James Tobin comes to mind). As the famous quote says (or something like this): "There has never once been an economist who had to worry about where he was going to get his next meal."

[jahcs]

That's partially why I was pointing more toward inflation than unemployment when dealing with minimum wage.

Every time minimum wage has gone up prices have gone up on goods and services also. They always will. Companies will preserve their profit margin, that's why they are in business. The cost of living will always go up when minimum wage goes up, usually by slightly more than wages. Catch 22.

Minimum wage is a band-aid. Saying that I haven't thought up any better ideas doesn't help much either. :) The best advice I can give is for workers to continue training and trying to get better positions and not expect things to just be handed to them.

[whyBish]

For a moment, I throught that said "Lezbo fairie."

I wonder how long it takes for senator Arnie to use that term? :P

[Occhidiangela]

I wonder how long it takes for senator Arnie to use that term?  :P
[right][snapback]60602[/snapback][/right]

If you refer to Ahnold, of Hollywood, body building, and Terminator fame, he is a Governor. As governor of California, he leads a state with, last I checked, the 20th or so largest GDP on the planet. (Not sure how those numbers have changed in the last few years.) Governor is to State as President is to Country. ;)

Occhi

[LavCat]

For a moment, I throught that said "Lezbo fairie."

Darn, I was all ready with a tongue in cheek comment Occhi.

Did I just mention tongue in cheek and lezbo fairie in the same post?

I am a bad person.
[right][snapback]60542[/snapback][/right]

I accede to your assertion.

However, as a lezbo of this community I find your post insulting and adding nothing to the content of an otherwise serious discussion.

[Occhidiangela]

I accede to your assertion.

However, as a lezbo of this community I find your post insulting and adding nothing to the content of an otherwise serious discussion.
[right][snapback]60734[/snapback][/right]

Do you tell 'redneck' jokes?

Occhi

PS: I have consulted Mr Foxworthy's various lists, and no, I do not seem to fit. I am glad he has a reference book out to help one verify yay or nay on inclusion into a stereotype.

[LavCat]

Do you tell 'redneck' jokes?

Occhi

PS:  I have consulted Mr Foxworthy's various lists, and no, I do not seem to fit. I am glad he has a reference book out to help one verify yay or nay on inclusion into a stereotype.
[right][snapback]60736[/snapback][/right]

Yes, since you ask, I confess I tell George Bush jokes. Does this have to do with a topic?