WotC Being Sued By Magic: the Gathering Judges

Wizards of the Coast, which, as you likely know, produces the enormous collectible card game Magic: The Gathering (as well as RPGs like D&D) is on the end of a class action lawsuit filed by a small group of M:tG judges (Adam Shaw, Peter Golightly, Justin Turner, and Joshua Stansfield). The suit alleges that WotC failed to pay minimum wage, provide meal or rest breaks, reimburse business expenses, maintain accurate payroll records, and more. M:tG judges are volunteers, but the filing appears to allege that the degree of supervision and control exercised by WotC was enough to create an employer-employee relationship instead. The M:tG judges are demanding a jury trial.

Click on the image for the full 23-page document
​

 

[GX.Sigma]

I agree that MtG judges do enough work to deserve at least minimum wage, but they literally volunteered for this job knowing that they wouldn't be paid. Easy solution: If you want to be paid for your work, don't volunteer to do it for free. This is why I chose not to become a Magic judge when I was 17, and also why I chose not to take volunteer jobs that would "look good on my resume" after I graduated college.

I'm not a legal expert, but it seems to me a strike would be more appropriate.

 

[Maxperson]

More likely, WOTC and other companies will require stores wanting to hold tournaments to qualify store employees as approved judges. Solves the problem since the judges are now paid store employees and will relieve WOTC of any employer status relative to the judges. And convention judges would have to volunteer through the charitable convention rather then WOTC. Goodbye paid air fare and other perks.

Maybe so, but WotC is still holding oversight over the judges and requiring them to do specific things. It would be one thing if the store itself wanted such a certification, but as long as WotC is going to demand judges hold to certain certified standards, the law may view things differently than you suggest.

 

[LordEntrails]

In my experience, some convention tournaments and games are run with such a corporate bent as to be undesirable, painful to participate in, and feel like work. The people in charge act like unpleasant bosses, first conducting job interviews and then nitpicking over rules. Quite often in these scenarios, it feels like a hostile work environment. Therefore, I empathize with people who feel constrained to act like unpleasant employees, especially if they are not being properly compensated.

These were not entered in as a means to pay the bills and support oneself. These are optional activities that people went out of their way to get to participate in. Remember, these judges had all sorts of hoops to jump through in order to be able to participate.

Sure, maybe they aren't volunteers, maybe they should have been treated better. Maybe they are employees. The lawyers can figure that out, this board is really not the place to debate such things as few if any of us are lawyers. What is worth discussing (in this forum), IMO, are a couple of things; 1) implications of this lawsuit on the gaming (esp. MtG) community, 2) the moral aspects of such a lawsuit.

In regards to #1. I've got nothing new to add, not until this plays out some more.

With #2, I still don't see any reason to change my opinion that these judges are morally wrong. They willingly engaged time and time again in optional activities that their is no reasonable expectation that they had any financial need in which to do so. And now, after having done so repeatable over many years they have decided they were treated unfairly. And rather than be mature and take some responsibility for their own decisions (which admittedly may have put them in unfair situations in the past). They have sought legal action.

So, anyone care to propose a moral reasoning why legal action is justified?

 

[LordEntrails]

I'm not a legal expert, but it seems to me a strike would be more appropriate.

Exactly!

 

[Dog Moon]

I agree that MtG judges do enough work to deserve at least minimum wage, but they literally volunteered for this job knowing that they wouldn't be paid. Easy solution: If you want to be paid for your work, don't volunteer to do it for free. This is why I chose not to become a Magic judge when I was 17, and also why I chose not to take volunteer jobs that would "look good on my resume" after I graduated college.

I'm not a legal expert, but it seems to me a strike would be more appropriate.

This had been my thought as well. And unless they somehow signed like a 10-year long contract, after the first unhappy time they should have just said to themselves "Well, that wasn't worth it; time for something else". And if they didn't do that, well then apparently it was worth it to them so they shouldn't be complaining now since it was their choice!

 

[Cody C. Lewis]

After reading through some of the posts... I see a few people have mentioned that the laws were in place to protect volunteers from being abused.

While I still believe WotC can scrape together enough money to pay these guys at least minimum wage (what a slap in the face that would be for the future of events-- no swag, food, etc for just minimum wage) I will say this.

Just because something has been put into law, doesn't mean anything when looking at something morally. Seriously. Laws are made up by people who, while put into office by the general pop, do not always, 100% of the time, put great laws in place.

Laws have NOTHING to do with morals.
Prohibition
Slaves were legally considered property
You can't spit on a sidewalk
Etc etc

(please, not changing subject to any of these, just pointing out that laws are made by the few to govern the many, and some are great, and some are horrendous).

Again, I am leaning more towards the judges on this, but to question whether if what they are doing is actually moral, is completely fair. They DID agree to their discussed compensation and now they are asking for more than what was agreed on. Laws or not.

I can absolutely see the argument that they could have walked away at anytime.

 

[happyhermit]

Oh goodness gracious. These laws are here for completely rational reasons, and they curtail employers' abuses of a 'volunteer' relationship. Yes, I am completely positive many judges are perfectly happy with the current arrangement. That doesn't actually make it okay for WotC to treat them as anything other than employees under the law.

I am not ignoring your comment on my post, I just realized this might not be the best forum for discussing why such laws exist and why they are not necessarily rational or right. Suffice it to say; I am sure we can all agree that many laws exist and have existed in the past that are unethical and just plain wrong, and that legality is in no way is equated with morality.

I really shouldn't have responded to the thread in the first place in retrospect, I just let my distaste for these types of unethical actions under the guise of the "legality" get the better of me.

 

[MechaPilot]

They DID agree to their discussed compensation and now they are asking for more than what was agreed on.

That sounds an awful lot like asking for a raise to me, and I don't think that anyone has ever questioned the morality of asking for a raise.

 

[LordEntrails]

That sounds an awful lot like asking for a raise to me, and I don't think that anyone has ever questioned the morality of asking for a raise.

Uh, this is nothing like asking for a raise. When was the last time that you asked for a raise retroactively?

Had they asked for a raise for FUTURE engagements, I don't think anyone would be complaining. In fact that's probably a good way at looking at the boycott type of suggestions myself and others have suggested would have been the moral approach.

The are not asking for a raise, they are asking for compensation for "work" they did years ago, and that they continued to do time and time again under conditions that they are NOW saying was unfair.

 

[Maxperson]

The big mistake made by the judges in this lawsuit is being talked into a class action. The only one who makes any money in a class action are the attorneys. The class and class representatives get relatively little, with the class getting shafted, really. I spent 4 years with a law firm that did wage and hour class and PAGA actions.