Grand Master Satele Shan On Strike?

[TX_Angel]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triangle_Shirtwaist_Factory_fire

 

Yes, except you think it is a reply to what I said, but it isn't...

 

Unions served a purpose once, back when stuff like that was legal. Today it isn't, the law has caught up with such things.

 

I fully support workers banding together to lobby for even more such laws such as unlocked exits and fire suppression systems, and companies should follow such laws.

 

But the idea that a bunch of people who make t-shirts can band together and demand more money is silly. Want proof? How many t-shirts are still made in America? Exactly...

[TX_Angel]

Again that is the whole point of the union is power in numbers.

 

Sure, but in our global marketplace that has become rather hard to have... Ford is investing how much to build cars in Mexico? Sure, sure, it is "just small cars"... for now... If Ford tried to move it all at once, customers, the media, and politicians would revolt, so they do the "frog in water" thing and do it a bit at a time.

 

I don't actually know how strong their union is but a few years back when the writer's guild went on strike the quality of several major television shows suffered and some even went on hiatus until it was resolved.

 

That is a bit different, most of those shows are filmed in CA and owned or produced by companies with tight Hollywood ties... EA doesn't have any of that and couldn't care less.

 

Voice actors may not be as localized as part of the hollywood system I don't really know, but if you look at game credits you can see the same people appearing over and over for a reason. I doubt there is an abundance of talented people floating around who all want to be voice actors.

 

They appear over and over because they are cheap. If they stopped being cheap, there would be voice actors in Eastern Europe or Mexico or Texas or some other place...

 

If the next Mass Effect has a different actress for FemShep I know that community of fans will not be happy.

 

Mass Effect 4 won't have Sheppard in it, her story is done.

 

What about the programmers and graphic artists? Should they get a cut as well? No, of course not, because 99% of them are too easy to replace. Voice Actors generally have the same problem.

 

The lady who voices Bart Simpson can get 10s of millions of dollars because she really IS irreplaceable... but that is the example, she is the "Tom Cruise" of voice work, most don't have that power...

[TX_Angel]

Good VA work can make a game Legendary - Mass Effect is a good story, but when I think of why I love it, its the characters, and the VA work that powers them.

 

That is true, but do you honestly think that NO ONE ELSE ON EARTH could have done the voices?

 

No one?

 

You like them because you know them, had they been different, but otherwise qualified people, you would be none the wiser...

 

Very few people in this world are really irreplaceable...

[IanArgent]

I want stats about this asap. I did not provide any either, but i wonder if you know where one could see those stats?

 

I must have forgotten my sarcasm tag again.

[robertthebard]

Well, unions have a 56% approval rate compared to 36% disapproval, so they aren't all that disliked.

 

But anyways, in this case they're not striking over the upfront pay, it's mainly over the complete absence of residuals from the games. A voice actor's work on cartoons or other projects generally includes residuals and they're fighting to get the video game industry to follow suit.

 

Jobs in their field are usually 'feast or famine' where they may be stuck going for stretches of time without a gig and thus without any upfront paychecks coming in, so having some form of residual payments from when they do get work (and they've done that work well and it's been successful) is an important part of the business model to them.

 

You know, I worked construction for years and nobody paid me when we were snowed out for a couple of weeks. I did have a boss that would pay me two hours for showing up on rain days, but even he didn't pay me when we didn't work for a week at a time due to weather. Occupational hazard.

[robertthebard]

I hope you realize most musicians don't have record labels and are selling CDs out of the back of a car and playing in small bars trying to make more money. The same is true for all types of artists. For the 1% that become very well known and wealthy there are thousands of other people who struggle every day for a variety of reasons and voice acting is no different.

 

This is relevant to the topic how, exactly? The people on strike are both represented, and the ones mentioned in the article are well known too. They start off listing Jennifer Hale, are you telling me she's doing her voice work from inside of her car?

 

Knowing the hourly rate really tells you nothing cause they could spend all month auditioning trying to get parts and then end up spending 15 minutes doing one line for a commercial and making a couple hundred bucks. I mean in 4 hours you could record the dialogue for an entire game and then you start the process all over again.

 

Except that someone had posted that the hourly rate was somehow a big secret that couldn't be disclosed? They could also make a million dollars from a similar spot.

 

Unions don't exist to protect the well known people and the celebrities because they are famous enough to get by on their own. The only reason Jennifer Hale is mentioned is because she is one of the most famous voice actors and the strike wouldn't get publicized the same way if they had one of the hundred unknown actors doing work.

 

Unions represent all of their members, since all of their members pay dues to belong to the Union, and therefore famous or just getting started, you are getting the same "protection". So the Union decided that a 9% pay increase wasn't good enough, and decided to go on strike. Guess what. Those little known "starving artists" that are member of said Union, that you claim are being protected? They can't work. The Union isn't going to be paying them either. So this strike actually hurts them more than protects them.

[Rolodome]

Yes, except you think it is a reply to what I said, but it isn't...

 

Unions served a purpose once, back when stuff like that was legal. Today it isn't, the law has caught up with such things.

 

I fully support workers banding together to lobby for even more such laws such as unlocked exits and fire suppression systems, and companies should follow such laws.

 

But the idea that a bunch of people who make t-shirts can band together and demand more money is silly. Want proof? How many t-shirts are still made in America? Exactly...

I figured maybe you don't actually understand the history of unions and bad working conditions. Because you seem to be talking as if work is this magical thing that you just find and sign up for and everything else is hunky-dory.

 

Don't listen to me, some random guy on the internet. Go to the link I posted in the thread and listen to Steve Blum, a veteran of the industry, talking about voice strain and damage.

 

Sure, no one is "forcing" them to do that job, but then, no one was "forcing" those people to work at the triangle shirtwaist factory either. It doesn't change the fact that the working conditions were hazardous to their health.

 

I'm getting really tired of this strawmanning BS where people keep trying to make this 100% about money.

[Tsillah]

When people are underpaid, especially compared to the profits companies make, they have a right to want part of that. They worked for it and it's not paid well but in between acting jobs it's a filler.

 

Greedy companies don't care about the people who work for them. That's the most important reason in my view why unions are still very much important to have. As a single person your voice is small and can be silenced easily. As a group you have the strength to stand up to an industry.

 

Just because these companies are not doing something illegal, doesn't mean it's ok. It's not ok and this is just one example. I fully support this action. People treating each other fairly is more important to me than whether or not my video game or tv series is delayed.

[Soul_of_Flames]

I thought this stupid strike was over last year.

 

I'm sorry, they do good work but they do not deserve back-end compensation. At least, not before the actual game's development team gets theirs.

 

Without the games themselves, this VAs would be out of a job.

 

All they do is sit in a recording booth in chunks of 4-hour sessions, talking into a mic. Yeah, they are good at it, but so what? It's noting in comparison to the countless hours (on and off the clock) that the dev team puts in just to make the content these actors are voicing.

 

Voice actors don't deserve any back-end compensation until the same (if not greater) compensation is given to the developers.

[robertthebard]

When people are underpaid, especially compared to the profits companies make, they have a right to want part of that. They worked for it and it's not paid well but in between acting jobs it's a filler.

 

Greedy companies don't care about the people who work for them. That's the most important reason in my view why unions are still very much important to have. As a single person your voice is small and can be silenced easily. As a group you have the strength to stand up to an industry.

 

Just because these companies are not doing something illegal, doesn't mean it's ok. It's not ok and this is just one example. I fully support this action. People treating each other fairly is more important to me than whether or not my video game or tv series is delayed.

 

You sign a contract for your pay rate. The time to say "This isn't enough" is before you sign it, not after. Signing the contract means that you think the rate is fair.

 

Should a cashier at McDonald's be eligible for profit sharing, since they handle all the money coming in? Didn't they accept a job at a certain hourly rate/salary? Coming back after the fact and saying "you're making trillions, I want my cut" isn't "being fair", it's being greedy.

[DarthDymond]

You know, I worked construction for years and nobody paid me when we were snowed out for a couple of weeks. I did have a boss that would pay me two hours for showing up on rain days, but even he didn't pay me when we didn't work for a week at a time due to weather. Occupational hazard.

Except with the voice actors, they're trying to get video games to parallel what the rest of the voice acting industry already does - when a voice actor works on a new cartoon or dubs an anime, they do get residuals, that's how they're able to make a career out of it.

 

To parallel your construction case, it would be like if working construction jobs to build office buildings, residential homes and commercial storefronts already did provide an income for workers during inclement weather days, but jobs building warehouses did not. In that situation one wouldn't be surprised to see construction workers saying "we're not going to take any more of these warehouse jobs unless they start offering the same protections that office building, residential, and storefront jobs already do."

 

They're trying to get EA and the others to meet the voice actors' industry standard, not break some radical new ground.

Edited October 23, 2016 by DarthDymond

[Tsillah]

You sign a contract for your pay rate. The time to say "This isn't enough" is before you sign it, not after. Signing the contract means that you think the rate is fair.

 

Should a cashier at McDonald's be eligible for profit sharing, since they handle all the money coming in? Didn't they accept a job at a certain hourly rate/salary? Coming back after the fact and saying "you're making trillions, I want my cut" isn't "being fair", it's being greedy.

 

You speak of legalities I speak of morality.

 

I do believe the guys on top who rake in the big bucks while making others work for a pittance is shameful. The fact that they have lobbies that control people in government that allows the policies for employment as they are does not make that ok.

 

I can't believe you pick the side of the people who suck the rest of the world try for their personal benefit. They have the power and they are the greedy ones. People who have to work 2 or more jobs trying to make ends meet are not greedy for asking for more money when they do the actual work that needs to be done.

 

Less than 1% of the world's population owns more than 50% of the total wealth on this planet. That is greed. Not people who work hard and still have to wonder if they can pay their next month's rent or even afford to go on a holiday from time to time.

 

But let's be honest, this is not going to be a good discussion for this forum. I support them, you don't. Let's get back to SWTOR itself before this ends up a nasty political fight.

[robertthebard]

You speak of legalities I speak of morality.

 

I do believe the guys on top who rake in the big bucks while making others work for a pittance is shameful. The fact that they have lobbies that control people in government that allows the policies for employment as they are does not make that ok.

 

I can't believe you pick the side of the people who suck the rest of the world try for their personal benefit. They have the power and they are the greedy ones. People who have to work 2 or more jobs trying to make ends meet are not greedy for asking for more money when they do the actual work that needs to be done.

 

Less than 1% of the world's population owns more than 50% of the total wealth on this planet. That is greed. Not people who work hard and still have to wonder if they can pay their next month's rent or even afford to go on a holiday from time to time.

 

But let's be honest, this is not going to be a good discussion for this forum. I support them, you don't. Let's get back to SWTOR itself before this ends up a nasty political fight.

 

Yeah, this could get really bad political, I agree.

 

So, I'll just touch on the morality comment: If I contract you to perform a service for x amount of money, and you perform said service and I pay you x, then there is nothing immoral about it. I offered, you accepted, and got paid.

[Rolodome]

I thought this stupid strike was over last year.

 

I'm sorry, they do good work but they do not deserve back-end compensation. At least, not before the actual game's development team gets theirs.

 

Without the games themselves, this VAs would be out of a job.

 

All they do is sit in a recording booth in chunks of 4-hour sessions, talking into a mic. Yeah, they are good at it, but so what? It's noting in comparison to the countless hours (on and off the clock) that the dev team puts in just to make the content these actors are voicing.

 

Voice actors don't deserve any back-end compensation until the same (if not greater) compensation is given to the developers.

God, this two wrongs make a right **** is mind-blowing to me. If developers think they aren't getting compensated right, then they can make their own strike. That doesn't invalidate the strike that VAs are going on.

 

You should also keep in mind that some types of game employees stay on for a long time. There can be room for upward mobility in their career, job security in reputation if they worked for a long time at a big name company. Sometimes companies will give health benefits to long-term employees. There's vacation days, sick days.

 

Super temp contract work like the type of VO most of these guys are doing gets none of that because it's super temporary work. The closest thing to job security is building a good portfolio, so that future work is more likely. There's no guarantee of when the next paycheck will come. No compensation for injury (that I know of).

 

I doubt most of the people bringing up developers even are one, or know one in the industry. It's just this two wrongs make a right argument, so that we can say the strike is somehow wrong and bad "because I saw tom cruise get 30 million for one movie."

 

I really think what a lot of the opposition boils down to is this bitterness toward, and jealousy of, performance art because a few famous people make millions of dollars and hardly have to work for it compared to the guy doing the 9-5 slog for 40 years. But people need to understand that those famous people who make millions are the tiny tiny tiny minority of performers.

 

If the developers didn't make these games, the VAs would either find other voice work (in movies, for instance). Or they would pursue other things. The working conditions and compensation matter though, because the work does exist and it's an important part of the industry.

[Stradlin]

Does it ever give Americans a pause how even going to strike appears a privilege available only for those who are pretty well off? Actors, NHL players, screen writers, NBA players.. You need to be rich, famous or in entertainment industry to have an union with any leverage;o

 

 

Might be blessing in disguise for TOR really. Game sure as heck could use some focus on anything but story for a few years. I'm sure they got pretty lucky with timing though; next expansion is doubtless more or less recorded. By the time they need Jennifer Hale again, she has already gotten her private jet fund up and running.

 

In general, it is pretty unfortunate and peculiar to see video games flirting with TV/Movie narrative rather than focusing on their - own- ways of telling stories. It'd seriously do very good for the industry to go few years without VA, heh.

Edited October 24, 2016 by Stradlin

[Soul_of_Flames]

God, this two wrongs make a right **** is mind-blowing to me. If developers think they aren't getting compensated right, then they can make their own strike. That doesn't invalidate the strike that VAs are going on...

I think you took what I said the wrong way.

 

Firstly, you're gonna have to explain to me this "two wrongs make a right" thing you're going on about. What two wrongs? And what is being made right?

 

I'm not speaking on behalf of the developers. Nor am I saying that the VA strike is invalid. I'm saying that if anyone deserves back-end compensation from a successful product, it should be, first and foremost, the development team. It's not about job security, it's about initiative. They should be compensated for a job well done rather than some slap-dash project that was tossed together.

 

Regardless of what the VAs say, the game is still the game. If the VAs want to leave, fine. They can get any Joe Schmo off the street to record lines in the booth. Will they be as good as a more professional actor? Probably not, but it doesn't matter because they aren't actually impacting the game itself. (IE you can play the game on mute, and it wouldn't matter either way who was voicing the characters).

 

Basically, in a nutshell, I'm trying to say this: If the publishing company was willing to give back-end compensation to a single group of people involved with the game's production, that group of people should not be the voice actors.

[TX_Angel]

Except with the voice actors, they're trying to get video games to parallel what the rest of the voice acting industry already does - when a voice actor works on a new cartoon or dubs an anime, they do get residuals, that's how they're able to make a career out of it.

 

Perhaps... but the question becomes, why would the game companies agree to this? Are voice actors so rare as to be hard to find?

 

I don't fault the voice actors for asking, but when the answer is no, "stomping their feet" and saying "then we'll strike and not work", only works if they are the only source of voice work on Earth...

 

To parallel your construction case, it would be like if working construction jobs to build office buildings, residential homes and commercial storefronts already did provide an income for workers during inclement weather days, but jobs building warehouses did not. In that situation one wouldn't be surprised to see construction workers saying "we're not going to take any more of these warehouse jobs unless they start offering the same protections that office building, residential, and storefront jobs already do."

 

And if they don't, will people who want to build warehouses be unable to find workers? If so, the workers have power. If not, they don't.

[TX_Angel]

You speak of legalities I speak of morality.

 

Fair enough, but why exactly does EA care about your personal sense of morality?

 

Let me put this another way... Assuming that your view of morals should be "everyone's view of morals" is in itself immoral. Figure that quandary out!

 

I do believe the guys on top who rake in the big bucks while making others work for a pittance is shameful. The fact that they have lobbies that control people in government that allows the policies for employment as they are does not make that ok.

 

You are free to start your own game company and pay more, make lots of money, then lobby the government to change the laws the way you see fit.

 

What you're really asking is that other people change their behavior to suit your sense of "right and wrong"

 

People who have to work 2 or more jobs trying to make ends meet are not greedy for asking for more money when they do the actual work that needs to be done.

 

They can ask all they like, if they are easy to replace, then the answer is likely to be no.

 

Less than 1% of the world's population owns more than 50% of the total wealth on this planet. That is greed.

 

"Greed, for a lack of a better word, is good..."

 

Without Greed, you wouldn't have modern civilization, you wouldn't have poor people walking around better off than many Kings of old... The poor are generally better off today than the middle class of just a few generations ago.

[TX_Angel]

I really think what a lot of the opposition boils down to is this bitterness toward, and jealousy of, performance art because a few famous people make millions of dollars and hardly have to work for it compared to the guy doing the 9-5 slog for 40 years. But people need to understand that those famous people who make millions are the tiny tiny tiny minority of performers.

 

That might be YOUR opposition, but I doubt it is the majority...

 

I couldn't care less either way, but I do try and put myself in the shoes of each side. I totally get where the actors are coming from, they are trying to improve their lot in life, good for them.

 

On the flip side, the CEO of EA has to ask, "are these the only people who can voice our games? can we find others?" If there are others outside the guild who can do it, what reason would he have to agree to the guild's demands? He can take his ball and go play somewhere else.

 

Which might actually do the voice actors some good, it would let them find work that pays more... or they could end up not finding it and have to do something else. EA, then would have to find someone else to do the job.

[dazzblitz]

That is true, but do you honestly think that NO ONE ELSE ON EARTH could have done the voices?

 

No one?

 

You like them because you know them, had they been different, but otherwise qualified people, you would be none the wiser...

 

Very few people in this world are really irreplaceable...

 

I feel like you missed the point they were making. Sure, someone else could of done the Job, if they had done it from the start. I believe they were talking about what would of happened if they switched Voice Actors between, say Mass Effect 2 and 3.

 

Brandon Keener will be and forever be to me and a lot of people, Garrus Vakarian. My favorite Character in the games and the first Love interest me and all my friends (yes not some, but literally all my friends who played Mass Effect) when we played Fem Shep. He Made the character. Even when I here him in other games or shows, I dont think "oh, that's Brandon Keener", Like I do with Johnny Yong Bosch, Crispin Feeman, or others. I think "Oh, that's Garrus" Had they gone and Changed his voice from the 3rd game, cause of a strike like this, you can bet your *** that More people would of been upset about that than the 3 color Endings we got.

Edited October 24, 2016 by dazzblitz

[DarthDymond]

Perhaps... but the question becomes, why would the game companies agree to this? Are voice actors so rare as to be hard to find?

 

I don't fault the voice actors for asking, but when the answer is no, "stomping their feet" and saying "then we'll strike and not work", only works if they are the only source of voice work on Earth...

 

 

 

And if they don't, will people who want to build warehouses be unable to find workers? If so, the workers have power. If not, they don't.

It also works if the company realizes it is going to make more money giving in to their demands (or negotiating for some middle ground) than they will be if they go with alternatives. If using non-union actors lowers their sales by more than the residuals would cost, or the talent search process to find acceptable replacements ends up being more expensive than the residuals would be, then it's in the company's interests to give in, partially or completely.

 

You do realize that strikes, even strikes by unskilled and semi-skilled labor, do work plenty of times right? It's not theoretical, it's actual historical fact - and like those, this one could go either way.

 

Voice Acting in particular isn't some skill that just anyone can pick up a job and do as well as anyone else - and SAG-AFRTA is a union of around 160,000 workers. You're right that this whole thing is a power struggle, but you seem extremely skeptical about the union's chances - I think you're overestimating just how easily replaced these actors (and heck, labor in general) actually are.

 

So yes, the company's should and will ask if (1) they actually can replace all the union actors and (2) it is ultimately more cost-effective to do so; but the answer to those questions may very well be "no" in this case given the circumstances.

Edited October 24, 2016 by DarthDymond

[robertthebard]

It also works if the company realizes it is going to make more money giving in to their demands (or negotiating for some middle ground) than they will be if they go with alternatives. If using non-union actors lowers their sales by more than the residuals would cost, or the talent search process to find acceptable replacements ends up being more expensive than the residuals would be, then it's in the company's interests to give in, partially or completely.

 

You do realize that strikes, even strikes by unskilled and semi-skilled labor, do work plenty of times right? It's not theoretical, it's actual historical fact - and like those, this one could go either way.

 

Voice Acting in particular isn't some skill that just anyone can pick up a job and do as well as anyone else - and SAG-AFRTA is a union of around 160,000 workers. You're right that this whole thing is a power struggle, but you seem extremely skeptical about the union's chances - I think you're overestimating just how easily replaced these actors (and heck, labor in general) actually are.

 

So yes, the company's should and will ask if (1) they actually can replace all the union actors and (2) it is ultimately more cost-effective to do so; but the answer to those questions may very well be "no" in this case given the circumstances.

 

In the past it's worked with labor unions because of the guys with bats that would literally break people's legs for trying to cross the picket line. There's no shortage of people that believe they're not making enough money at their chosen profession, and are willing to do whatever it takes to get that raise. Just look at the US Congress: They will have a midnight vote to get a raise, and they can pass that raise easier than anything that will ultimately benefit the people they're supposed to be there to represent.

[DarthDymond]

In the past it's worked with labor unions because of the guys with bats that would literally break people's legs for trying to cross the picket line. There's no shortage of people that believe they're not making enough money at their chosen profession, and are willing to do whatever it takes to get that raise. Just look at the US Congress: They will have a midnight vote to get a raise, and they can pass that raise easier than anything that will ultimately benefit the people they're supposed to be there to represent.

Yeah right, like all those broken kneecaps in the Verizon / CWA strike from April - May, that was a really violent time in our nation's history six months ago.

[robertthebard]

Yeah right, like all those broken kneecaps in the Verizon / CWA strike from April - May, that was a really violent time in our nation's history six months ago.

 

So it didn't happen this time, so it never happened? I'm curious, how many people tried to cross that picket line?

 

What about all the people that have to go on Welfare because their union decides that an x percentage pay increase isn't enough, even if they thought they were already doing ok?

 

Let's look at this another way:

 

How much does a plumber make when you flush the toilet? How much does a carpenter make when you enter your home? How much does that guy that installed the bearings in a jet's engine get paid every time that bearing turns? Each and every one of these examples has a Union. How long until they start thinking they're entitled to residuals from their work? Are you going to have to install a coin slot on your toilet in order to use it?

 

Yep, those are absolutely the most ridiculous examples I could think of. However, since none of these guys/gals are making upwards of 800 dollars for 4 hours work, I'd guess they'd feel like they were in a better position to demand those residuals than someone that is making upwards of 800 dollars for 4 hours. Like I said earlier, they make more in 4 hours than I make a month since I became disabled. Yet somehow, I manage to maintain three game subs, and keep all my bills paid.

 

If I got three of those gigs a month, not likely since I'm not good with voices, I could literally live 3 times better than I do now. Hey, steak is back on the menu, and so is getting a new (read different) car, since mine is currently held together with bailing wire and bubble gum. So yeah, excuse me if I'm finding it hard to dredge up some sympathy for people that are doing quite well for themselves, but it's not "enough". Especially after they rejected a 9% pay increase.

[Rolodome]

So it didn't happen this time, so it never happened? I'm curious, how many people tried to cross that picket line?

 

What about all the people that have to go on Welfare because their union decides that an x percentage pay increase isn't enough, even if they thought they were already doing ok?

 

Let's look at this another way:

 

How much does a plumber make when you flush the toilet? How much does a carpenter make when you enter your home? How much does that guy that installed the bearings in a jet's engine get paid every time that bearing turns? Each and every one of these examples has a Union. How long until they start thinking they're entitled to residuals from their work? Are you going to have to install a coin slot on your toilet in order to use it?

 

Yep, those are absolutely the most ridiculous examples I could think of. However, since none of these guys/gals are making upwards of 800 dollars for 4 hours work, I'd guess they'd feel like they were in a better position to demand those residuals than someone that is making upwards of 800 dollars for 4 hours. Like I said earlier, they make more in 4 hours than I make a month since I became disabled. Yet somehow, I manage to maintain three game subs, and keep all my bills paid.

 

If I got three of those gigs a month, not likely since I'm not good with voices, I could literally live 3 times better than I do now. Hey, steak is back on the menu, and so is getting a new (read different) car, since mine is currently held together with bailing wire and bubble gum. So yeah, excuse me if I'm finding it hard to dredge up some sympathy for people that are doing quite well for themselves, but it's not "enough". Especially after they rejected a 9% pay increase.

Have you listened to the thing where Steve Blum talks about people who have suffered permanent voice damage and/or needed surgery because of the working conditions?

 

I'm not saying there aren't worse jobs, but if you were a mechanic and your job involved heavy risk to the safety of your hands such that you can't be a mechanic anymore because a tinkering session broke both of them, I don't think you'd be happy about that.