layoffs?

[JLowder]

Originally Posted by seankreynolds

What they do is find interesting, profitable young companies, buy them, squeeze as much money as they can out of them, crush everything that is unique and innovative about them, and then discard them when they're no longer profitable.

For anyone interested in more on this subject, read G. Wayne Miller's Toy Wars, a corporate history of Hasbro. It deals in particular with the acquisition of Kenner.

Originally Posted by seankreynolds

You can be fair and responsible in your treatment of your employees and fair and responsible to the financial interests of your investors.

Amen, brother. Few people in the industry make good money, and most hobby companies cannot generally afford to pay them a whole hell of a lot more than they do already. But the good companies--the smart companies--show staff and freelancers respect, let them know they are valued. You can do that in a lot of ways that cost the company little or no money. In return, the company gets more work and better work.

It's astounding how elusive that concept seems to be in some corners out in Renton.

Cheers,
Jim Lowder
www.jameslowder.com

[justanobody]

Originally Posted by jinnetics

Factory workers in China rebelling (AP)

Layoffs from Hasbro everywhere in the world it seems!

[Zinegata]

Originally Posted by seankreynolds

Far too many companies act this way, whether it's cutting benefits, shipping jobs to cheaper workers overseas, etc. ... it looks good on paper in the short term, but 1, 2, 5, or 10 years down the road you look at the ruins of your business and wonder why profits are still down and your employees have no loyalty.

Yep. Personally, I think the biggest problem nowadays is that many Board of Directors and other company owners simply don't even bother looking at how their businesses operate, they simply want X amount of money, and they think that by paying their executives and CEOs millions of dollars (most in the form of bonuses that will only be paid for reaching some revenue or profitability target) they'll get results.

What happens in reality is Enron.

Most businesses simply have their natural levels of profitability, growth, and success based on their product and the state of the market. You can't, for instance, expect D&D to become a mass-market product overnight. It's a niche product for a niche market. You'll make a few million out of it, but don't expect something in the hundred-million range (that's what video games are for).

Still, to be absolutely fair to WoTC and Hasbro, the whole DDI & Gleemax thing is a pretty big mess. And personally, I was one of the many voices raising concerns about the viability of the whole enterprise, and it greatly irked me that the response was basically "Shut up troll, Gleemax is really going great!"

So, while I think some people who did outstanding work didn't deserve to be fired (Solice, in particular, was about the sole voice from WoTC who made an effort to listen to people pointing out Gleemax's glaring problems), I can't really say that I'm surprised by the layoffs, nor can I be wholly sympathetic to all of the folks who lost their jobs.

Yes, people get laid off all the time because of bad decisions by top management. But there are also people who are rightly laid off because they frankly screwed up. This whole thing seems like a mix of both.

[Brix]

As a customer I departed from the Realms of WoTC long ago. As they don't show respect for their employees, and subsequently (again) not for their customers, who
* wish to get high quality stuff
* are often fans of certain designers (just take a look on skreyn's impact on FR, or Julia Martin)
But to be frank. IMO WotC does not need many quality people. Why? Easy. 4E is basically finished. Now you only need a few guys to take care of the system, and some other people who invent new names for the crunchy pc powers. A task which a 14 year old boy can fullfill.
The same with fluff. Look at the FR. No need for FR sholars anymore. And the web support for FR is also cut down to almost nonexistance, also from a quality point of view. Just think of the "sleepy hollow" headless Zhentarim rider! As Sean Reynolds already said, they start to do the same errors, because there is no one left to remember.
Personally I use PRPG, now and (maybe) forever. I try to buy all pre-4E FR stuff that is still around, and then I'm happy for the rest of my life.

[Talaeden_Denthiir]

This is REALLY sad. My sincerest condolences to all of you who have been laid off during this time of year during such a great finacial crisis for the nation.

Randy Buehler (VP of digital gaming)
Andrew Finch (director of digital games)
Stacy Longstreet (senior art director)
Julia Martin (editor)
William Meyers (creative manager, digital design)
Dave Noonan (game designer)
Jennifer Paige (online community manager)
Jennifer Powers (marketing)
Jonathan Tweet (game designer)

You will all be missed...

Johnathan, glad to see all is not lost at least for you. I hope the others fare as well and are able to fully enjoy the holidays with family and friends.

I don't know what happened in WotC, but I'm no longer working at a job that has 'layed-off' at least 5 people during the only 3+ years I was working there because they were, in fact, making too much money. Most of the people in charge also made poor decisions that didn't affect them in the least but always trickled down the blame and extra fruitless work to someone else below them. Add to that the fact that not only did one of the best employees get 'canned', but it was not soon after the death of her husband. And tragically, not too long after being let go, she passed away as well.

In my personal experience many companies that say they promote workers opinions do not and it's just not about the bottom line but the corporate execs hindquaters and I pray to God that WotC isn't one of them.

[avin]

Originally Posted by seankreynolds

While she could do such a thing, the quality of your products would suffer (much like how the quality of the D&D minis has gone downhill), and that would alienate your customers, and that eventually makes up for the "savings" of hiring cheaper workers. It's stupid and shortsighted.

That explains Dungeons of Dread and some horrible 4E artwork and reuse from 3.5 stuff...

[Jonny Nexus]

Originally Posted by mlund

The moment someone else (or something else) comes along who can perform your tasks more ably or at the same level of ability (and I include trustworthiness and experience as relevant components in my definition of ability) but for less money the company should make plans to move you to a different job or lay you off. That's how competition and innovation work.

That's not how it works in the UK.

Over here, there are two ways that someone can lose their job: sacking and redundancy.

Sacking is when you lose your job because you haven't been doing it properly. That can be anything from poor attendance to insubordination to gross incompetance. The employer has to follow due process, which typically (except for gross misconduct) means that they have to give you a verbal warning followed by a written warning. In this case, you're not entitled to any extra money (except, I guess, the money from your contract's notice period).

Redundancy is when the company lets you go because your job no longer exists. This typically happens when they are having to shed numbers because of (say) a slowdown in orders. In this case, you don't have to have done anything wrong. But you are entitled to more money - I think the statutory minimum is your notice period (typically a month) plus one weeks salary for each year that you've worked for them.

What a company can't do is make you redundant, and then immediately recruit someone to do exactly the same job that you were doing. In that case, you could sue them for wrongful dismissal (i.e. they've effectively sacked you, but without them going through any sort of disciplinary process, and quite possibly without you doing anything that actually merited being sacked).

[drothgery]

Originally Posted by seankreynolds

3) Changing their fiscal year to something other that Jan-Dec means that having these annual layoffs wouldn't happen 3 weeks before Christmas.

Changing their fisical year will not affect all the taxes and labor regulations that work off of the actual year.

[TheGM]

Originally Posted by Zinegata

Yep. Personally, I think the biggest problem nowadays is that many Board of Directors and other company owners simply don't even bother looking at how their businesses operate, they simply want X amount of money, and they think that by paying their executives and CEOs millions of dollars (most in the form of bonuses that will only be paid for reaching some revenue or profitability target) they'll get results.

What happens in reality is Enron.

Wow, your brush is a little broad there, no?
Sure, Enron happened, but it's such a memory for everyone because it doesn't happen all the time, not because it's the norm.

Truth be told, it's a global economy, and in a global economy production goes where it's cheapest. That's not gouging, that's business. It's been happening forever.

And executive/CEO salaries are out of line in some instances, but if a CEO screws up, people get layed off or the company goes under. If the janitor screws up, the bathroom is gross. HUGE difference. Nowadays if someone makes an accounting error the CEO can even go to jail. Dumb.

If they're taking bonuses when they're not meeting numbers and laying off employees, that pisses me off. You failed, no bonus, just like the rest of us. But in general, I won't begrudge them what they've worked for. And don't understand why anyone would. If you get a job offer with bonuses, it's not like you're going to say "oh no, no bonuses, I'm happier as a wage slave" or anything, why should they?

Don.

[xechnao]

Originally Posted by TheGM

Nowadays if someone makes an accounting error the CEO can even go to jail. Dumb.

Oh, there are thousands of ways for them to cover their [insert word]

[TheGM]

Originally Posted by xechnao

Oh, there are thousands of ways for them to cover their [insert word]

Yeah, there are some. But the fact that the US even has such a law is ridiculous. If there weren't ways to protect yourself, who would agree to be a CEO?

They're not all angels, just like no segment of the population is all angels. But they're not all opportunistic s either. My issue was with the breadth the brush was used, and the breadth it is used across society. Just because someone worked hard and landed a CEO position doesn't make them instantly vile. Most are good people dealing with complex problems, nothing more.

Don.

[xechnao]

Originally Posted by TheGM

Just because someone worked hard and landed a CEO position doesn't make them instantly vile.

Nope. But many people work hard. Not everyone has the same benefits. This makes certain people more, some times much more privileged that others. This situation draws bad feelings and I am sure you can understand it.

[TheGM]

Originally Posted by xechnao

Nope. But many people work hard. Not everyone has the same benefits. This makes certain people more, some times much more privileged that others. This situation draws bad feelings and I am sure you can understand it.

Understand it? Yeah. Have the same understanding as you do? Not likely. I'm into the whole "level of responsibility" thing. Haven't found the company that I'd want to be responsible for heading/destroying, so I'm not too worked up that the CEO makes X times more than me. Simply put, the counter person at McDonalds doesn't deserve the benefits that the CEO gets. It's all about level of impact. Sorry, it's true.

But we've sidetracked their thread enough...

Don.

[Mistwell]

Last month, U.S. employers cut 533K jobs, the most in 34 years. The last time this many people were laid off in a single month, it was the Ford administration I believe. The U.S. is also in the worst financial crisis since the 1930s.

Given those facts, I think too many people are naively assuming these layoffs are not the result of the general economy. You can make up excuses out of anger like "poorly run" and "greedy" and "didn't prepare" and "does this every year". But realistically, the U.S. is in a serious economic crises that was unexpected (it started on a specific date - when Lehman Brothers went under). Economic recessions have a direct, fast impact on hobby industries as people cut back on their purchases (and people have cut way back on their purchases in general, and that is provable).

The primary cause of these layoffs, or at least the extent of these layoffs, is probably due to circumstances entirely beyond the control of WOTC, and that is the sudden financial crises and recession. And when that happens, companies have to lay people off or else fall into the red. Which is exactly what thousands of companies did last month, to an extent unseen in 34 years. It's not a coincidence that all those companies did the same thing as WOTC. They are reacting to a real, tangible economic crises.

[Melba Toast]

Originally Posted by TheGM

Understand it? Yeah. Have the same understanding as you do? Not likely. I'm into the whole "level of responsibility" thing. Haven't found the company that I'd want to be responsible for heading/destroying, so I'm not too worked up that the CEO makes X times more than me. Simply put, the counter person at McDonalds doesn't deserve the benefits that the CEO gets. It's all about level of impact. Sorry, it's true.

Don.

Perhaps not... but I don't think the point is to compare CEOs to fry cooks.

Rather, the point, if I understand correctly, is that the CEOs and Executive Staff often lack the insight or the passion that the -CREATIVE STAFF- do, and that -CREATIVE STAFF- most often get the shaft.

In the current market economy, creativity is dramatically undervalued. Creatives are the people who innovate, the people who find new solutions. Historically, it has been the creative that has driven the economy as society's entrepreneurs and artisans. Unfortunately, creatives today rarely have the business acumen or the financial foundation to be self-employed or maintain control of their product. So they turn ownership over to exploiters, the businessman.

Of course, the best thing a government can do to stimulate the economy is to stop sending money to the major businesses and start putting more funding toward small-business grants, post-secondary and adult education for self-employment training.

But, of course, there's no lobby group for that.

(PS - Fry cooks get paid exceptionally well considering the required skill level)

[Psion]

Originally Posted by Mistwell

Last month, [url="http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5ioHc80xKMiATnqCpK0cDKJzk_nPQD94SOSRG0"]
Given those facts, I think too many people are naively assuming these layoffs are not the result of the general economy. You can make up excuses out of anger like "poorly run" and "greedy" and "didn't prepare" and "does this every year". But realistically, the U.S. is in a serious economic crises that was unexpected (it started on a specific date - when Lehman Brothers went under).

Sure. But just like predators claiming the sickly and weak from the herd, and certain vulnerable segments aside, economic downturn job losses impact the most poorly run companies first.

[xechnao]

Originally Posted by TheGM

Understand it? Yeah. Have the same understanding as you do? Not likely. I'm into the whole "level of responsibility" thing. Haven't found the company that I'd want to be responsible for heading/destroying, so I'm not too worked up that the CEO makes X times more than me. Simply put, the counter person at McDonalds doesn't deserve the benefits that the CEO gets. It's all about level of impact. Sorry, it's true.

But we've sidetracked their thread enough...

Don.

Oh I see the results all around. So can we say they have they done a good job?

So who has the responsability for the financial mess and the hit to the economy? Have they at the very, very least been punished? Not to speak about the lawyers they can afford these golden guys.

[firesnakearies]

Originally Posted by TheGM

Wow, your brush is a little broad there, no?
Sure, Enron happened, but it's such a memory for everyone because it doesn't happen all the time, not because it's the norm.

Or because they just don't get caught all the time.

I think people were shocked less about what unethical actions actually occurred, and more about the fact that the people involved managed to let themselves face accountability for it.


Call me a cynic, but I don't think there's any realistic push in the upper echelons of our economic/social system to "do less wrong", but just to "hide it better".



$

[Mistwell]

Originally Posted by Psion

Sure. But just like predators claiming the sickly and weak from the herd, and certain vulnerable segments aside, economic downturn job losses impact the most poorly run companies first.

Or the industries most vulnerable to a sudden and unexpected reduction in spending.

It's a hobby company. When people cut spending suddenly, hobbies are almost sure to be near the top of the list. Buying a new D&D book is always in the "discretionary spending" category for everyone except those who actually work in the industry.

I don't see how this has anything to do with how well or poorly WOTC is run. There is no good functioning business plan that assumes every month will be an economic crises unseen in our lifetimes that smacks your company particularly hard. Sometimes, life throws a company a serious curve ball, and the only realistic way to roll with it and stay above water is to lay people off. It looks to me like that is what happened here.

It's not like WOTC had no reserves to deal with a "normal" economic issue - they did, and you can see they are spending some of those reserves in severance checks to those they are laying off (something they are under no obligation to do). But to pretend there is an realistic business plan that could absorb a massive sudden hit this big without WOTC cutting spending is naive.

My guess is we have not even seen the last of the layoffs at WOTC, and another waive will hit again in a few months. This is not normal stuff they are having to deal with, and it's probably going to get worse. I'd rather WOTC do what is necessary to stay above water, then have them try and cling to every employee until they go belly up.

[Melba Toast]

Originally Posted by Mistwell

. There is no good functioning business plan that assumes every month will be an economic crises unseen in our lifetimes that smacks your company particularly hard.

I don't know. I think a lot of businesses are using the "economic crisis" as an excuse to cut the fat. I don't really think WotC have been, nor will they be, that adversely affected by a crisis that is primarily a concern to the financial industry, the luxury industry, housing and auto industries.

Role-playing has weathered 3 decades by appealing to a core demographic (young males) who, as a group, have never had much significant buying power. A lot of us have never even managed to hold down a steady job, nor do we particularly care if we lose the ones we have.

Anyway, the economic crisis is a bunch of b.s. It'll pass just as soon as the banks get their money. (I mean, honestly, do you really think the bank was just being stupid when they gave that $400,000 mortgage to the single mother of two based on her salary as a cashier at Walmart. They knew EXACTLY what they were doing!)