The working conditions are horrible. That's why unions are necessary, and it's been the main driver of unionization over the centuries. Ancillary benefits don't drive unionization nearly as much as core horrible working conditions and bad pay.

The labor movement's utility in improving horrible working conditions was based on the fact that laborers were considered to be coerced into these conditions by the threat of starving to death (or the modern-developed-country equivalent of standard-of-living resource constraints). I don't know much about game development, but aren't the majority of the relevant skills for most roles quite transferable? If the working conditions are miserable enough that unions are necessary, what is keeping people from switching to a similar role in an industry without substandard conditions? Is it the broader problem that these roles aren't well-treated in any industry? (certainly not the case for developers, but that's just one role).

These aren't rhetorical questions trying to make a point, I'm genuinely curious.

There is no "similar" role. There's no other industry that is involved in making games. That's why it's the video game industry. That's what they do. If you leave that industry, you're not making games anymore. And that's what people want to do. And before you or anybody else argues, that isn't reason enough for shitty work hours, ridiculous amounts of crunch, complete lack of life balance, etc. to be acceptable. The same way it's not okay to pay teachers or nurses or firefighters so much less just because they might be fulfilling a passion in helping other people.

I'm not sure why one should need to leave the industry one wants to work in before one is afforded a job that doesn't guide one directly towards burnout within 5 years.

And even if these people leave, there's plenty of young blood who'll gladly work in these conditions because they want to make video games, so nothing changes.

The thing is that if you fire a teacher, they must find another job _as a teacher_ because they have no other skills because it isn't transferrable. As a game dev, programming is programming and if you can program a game you can program other things. You won't starve or even have a serious problem if you get laid off and need to change fields.

Programmers are not the only employees in game companies, nor even the majority or biggest plurality (the latter are probably graphic artists). Programmers are indeed the ones in the best position & probably why they are generally the best paid segment.

I already addressed this. Why are we okay with an entire industry having shitty work conditions, regardless of circumstances? Why should a game developer have to work 80-100 hour weeks for months on end just because he wants to make games? The issue of skills transference is just distracting from this issue.

> The issue of skills transference

The issue of skill transferance is that nobody is forcing them to work in such companies; it means they can leave and try to find another job.

That's what they do after a few years, but I'm not sure how that excuses it.

I don't understand why it's so hard to understand that these people don't want to work in other industries, they want to make games. And thus it makes sense for them to organize and try to improve the industry they want to be in rather than having to flee to another industry, which currently happens all too often after severe burnout.

If it's so bad that many people are being forced out, then clearly it meets the bar of unionization being helpful. I'd rather start organizing than quit the industry I love, as the worst that could happen is I get fired (and potentially get a big payout on a subsequent lawsuit), and if it's so bad that the alternative is to leave anyway, it's the same result.

But most involved in game making are not programmers.

> I don't know what it is about labor issues that makes some people so hysterical that they lose all ability at reading comprehension and pattern-match to their closest hobbyhorse rant. Go soapbox about irrelevant things somewhere else, adults are trying to talk.

Including stuff like this will get your account banned. Just please leave it out and comment civilly and substantively.

This was unnecessarily hostile and I'm sure is breaking HN rules of conduct if I'm not wrong. If you want to have a discussion, we can have a discussion, but if you're going to insult people and put them down for not sharing your views, maybe you should go back to Reddit.

Wow. Your bar for being insulted is _very_ low.

> makes some people so hysterical that they lose all ability at reading comprehension and pattern-match to their closest hobbyhorse rant. Go soapbox about irrelevant things somewhere else, adults are trying to talk

I come to HN to have insightful and interesting discussions with people. Nothing about this part of his comment, nor the tone of the rest of it, is productive, helpful, necessary, respectful or civil.