layoffs?

[Gravedust]

This makes me really sad, I just printed off Rescue at Rivenroar today to be the first adventure I DM ever...

Good luck Dave and the others. Hopefully this economy turns around soon.

 

[Fifth Element]

Good business models avoid layoffs, as much as they can, as it shows a strong demand for their services and products, instead of a fluctuating demand for it.

Possibly, but you need to bear in mind WotC's specific business. Even if demand for 4E is constant over the next 10 years, they simply do not need the same number of man-hours to maintain the edition as they did to design it in the first place. Designing and developing a new edition is a huge investment and requires a lot of man-hours. Designing supplements for an existing edition is far less intensive.

 

[gribble]

What's the difference between using seasonal workers, and hiring/laying off staff, other than the words used?

It may seem like semantics, but there's actually a world of difference. It's generally much more cost efficient and predictable to use temporary workers who are hired for a specific project/duration. Well run businesses are all about predictability and repeatability.

It also creates much less ill will. If someone is given a 6 month contract, they will be assuming it won't be renewed or extended at the end of that period. If it is, they will be happy about that, but if it isn't they will just look for another contract - it's the life of contract/seasonal staff and they accept it (if they don't, then they should be looking for permanent work).

Permanent staff on the other hand expect (and let's not get into the debate about whether this expectation is valid or not), that once they're given a job it is theirs until they are no longer capable or willing to perform it. Consequently, when they're laid off there is a lot more ill-will towards the company and unease among the retained staff (the "who's next" syndrome).

Developing a new edition is done with a full-time staff, due to the commitment required (and probably also due to confidentiality concerns), while the supplement mill relies more on freelancers.

Sorry, but having been a contract worker I'm going to call BS on that one. Contract staff are subject to the same confidentiality agreements, and expected to have the same commitment to a project as permanent staff. In fact, it can be argued that contract staff hired for a specific project are often more committed, because it's specifically why they've been hired, and the only thing they're tasked with doing (as opposed to permanent staff, who - despite the best intentions - will always have other demands on their time from the company.

 

[Mokona]

anyone who knows how WOTC operates, do you know if it is their standard operating procedure to have employees sign some sort of non-compete agreement either as a part of their employment, or as a condition for a larger severance package?

In general it is my impression that non-compete agreements aren't likely or able to be enforced in a court of law. It would also be bad PR if Wizards of the Coast had layoffs and kept its former employees unemployed due to non-compete clauses. I wouldn't worry about it.

 

[Friadoc]

Possibly, but you need to bear in mind WotC's specific business. Even if demand for 4E is constant over the next 10 years, they simply do not need the same number of man-hours to maintain the edition as they did to design it in the first place. Designing and developing a new edition is a huge investment and requires a lot of man-hours. Designing supplements for an existing edition is far less intensive.

While I can see your point, that is also working on the assumption that all the work that is going on within Wizard's is just maintaining the edition, however we know that there is development of 4e Realms, 4e Eberron, and potentially something new beyond that. Plus, potentially, there might be a Modern Product with leverage for SciFi, unless they're abandoning those markets to focus on Star Wars Saga Edition.

My theory is that those related to the DDI area where planned further out with some of the more veteran folks in design and development being the product of some aspect of the economy. But, I am still of the opinion that layoffs are a quick and easy stop gap move, instead of a solid business plan or model, without it being obvious, from the start, that seasonal layoffs are part of the business model, as it is with season labor, such as wildfire fighters, construction, and so forth.

 

[Fifth Element]

It may seem like semantics, but there's actually a world of difference. It's generally much more cost efficient and predictable to use temporary workers who are hired for a specific project/duration. Well run businesses are all about predictability and repeatability.

It's certainly very different from the employee's part of view, but your overriding assumption here seems to be that these layoffs are unexpected. I doubt the WotC staff looked back at the layoffs after 3.0 and 3.5 and said, 'that won't happen this time'.

Permanent staff on the other hand expect (and let's not get into the debate about whether this expectation is valid or not), that once they're given a job it is theirs until they are no longer capable or willing to perform it.

Okay, we won't get into it. Though I'd suggest it's quite relevant to the discussion, and avoiding it avoids an important aspect of the discussion.

Consequently, when they're laid off there is a lot more ill-will towards the company and unease among the retained staff (the "who's next" syndrome).

Indeed. You seem to feel that WotC has not considered this. I find that unlikely. They most likely considered it, but decided on this business model anyway because it is only one consideration out of hundreds, if not thousands, of things.

Sorry, but having been a contract worker I'm going to call BS on that one. Contract staff are subject to the same confidentiality agreements, and expected to have the same commitment to a project as permanent staff.

Legally, yes. You've been a contract worker. Have you also been a manager? The management perspective is quite different from the staff/contractor perspective.

Maybe WotC can't attract the talent they want without offering full-time positions? Maybe the reaction is "I'm not moving to Seattle for one contract, even if it does last 12 months."

There are all kinds of reasons why this business model could be the best for WotC, before jumping to "it's not a well-run company".

 

[Fifth Element]

In general it is my impression that non-compete agreements aren't likely or able to be enforced in a court of law.

In understand this varies quite a bit by jurisdiction. Where I live, non-competes are enforceable. I know they're not in other locales.

 

[Friadoc]

In general it is my impression that non-compete agreements aren't likely or able to be enforced in a court of law. It would also be bad PR if Wizards of the Coast had layoffs and kept its former employees unemployed due to non-compete clauses. I wouldn't worry about it.

If they have non-compete agreements in place, I doubt they are valid under a layoff or similarly amicable separation of employment. In my experience, most non-compete clauses are in place to keep an employee from using an unfair advantage, or inappropriate business relationship, to jump ship from one company to an associate or partner company. Also, the only way that they have ever been valid is with contract employees, such as professional wrestlers, and in those cases the company pays them out the remainder of their contract and holds them to the end date of the contract.

So, with respect to those impacted by the recent WotC layoff, I doubt that there is an enforcible NCA in place or, as you said, that WotC would enforce it in such a negative fashion.

Odds are, working on assumption here, the folk who had to do the face-to-face on these layoffs probably hated doing it, felt badly, and did the best they could to take care of those folks that were separated from the company due to a fiscal decisions made beyond them.

 

[Fifth Element]

While I can see your point, that is also working on the assumption that all the work that is going on within Wizard's is just maintaining the edition, however we know that there is development of 4e Realms, 4e Eberron, and potentially something new beyond that. Plus, potentially, there might be a Modern Product with leverage for SciFi, unless they're abandoning those markets to focus on Star Wars Saga Edition.

Yes, that's a good point. I was thinking about 4E alone in my arguments. I'd suggest, though, that development of a setting for 4E is still less intensive than the core, since the system is already established and playtested.

 

[Friadoc]

In understand this varies quite a bit by jurisdiction. Where I live, non-competes are enforceable. I know they're not in other locales.

They are enforcible, to a point, in most places around here, but usually with respect to direct competition, as opposed to unfair leverage to keep someone from seeking general employment in the various industries.

i.e. A semiconductor company could keep an engineer from working for the competition, in the exact same, or closely related role, that is currently filled, however they could not keep them from a further afield position.

Most the times that they have failed, quite regularly, has been when the NCA's have been applied vindictively and without reasonable merit, as you cannot keep someone from working, simply because they decided that they wanted to leave a company, as it is massively unfair to workers, while simultaneously being over empowering an employer.