WotC D&D Hiring New Game Designer Months After Firing Many

The job pays from $86-145k and is for an experienced game designer—presumably much like one of those they let go a few months ago!

228 Senior Game Designer jobs in United States

Today's top 228 Senior Game Designer jobs in United States. Leverage your professional network, and get hired. New Senior Game Designer jobs added daily.

www.linkedin.com

Notably, one of those let go in December in Hasbro’s company-wide cost-cutting cull of over 1,000 jobs was D&D designer Dan Dillon. Dillon posted on Twitter—“Well. There it is. D&D is hiring a game designer, 8 months later. Was it worth it, you soulless f*****g cowards? Did you save enough money?”

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

@Snarf Zagyg , you seem to have a good way with understand and then explaining actual law to use lay folk. Generally with layoffs it's because the position isn't needed. If they are advertising for that position less than a year later, could that be a case of wrongful termination for the designer they laid off?

Generally, no.

When it comes to "mass layoffs" there is a federal law (29 USC et seq.) called WARN, and a law in California that is more onerous but not applicable given my understanding that this not in California. There are various requirements to WARN, but this is mostly a notice requirement.

Then you have to go into two separate issues-

On the federal side, there isn't a cause for wrongful termination in general. You need to tie it into a cause of action (for example, Title VII, as a termination on the basis of a protected category, like race).

Each state has different laws. Many states have no wrongful termination claim at all, and you have to tie it into a specific cause of action (say. worker's compensation retaliation). Some states do have public policy exceptions to at-will employment.

IIRC, Montana is the only state that is not at-will and an employer has to justify (just cause) a termination.

 

[DrJawaPhD]

Generally with layoffs it's because the position isn't needed. If they are advertising for that position less than a year later, could that be a case of wrongful termination for the designer they laid off?

The layoffs were ~9 months ago? That's a long time, plenty of time for a position to legitimately not be needed and then for new work to come around and require the position again. Working in California for a company that is overly conservative about preventing employment lawsuits, I've always heard 6 months as the rule of thumb for minimum timeframe between layoff to re-opening the same position to ensure zero chance of being sued.

I'm definitely not saying I trust WotC to be honest about the necessity of their layoffs, but at the surface level there is nothing unusual going on here.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

@Blue

I should add that while the events themselves do not create a cause of action (that I am aware of), I am familiar with similar activities providing evidence that supported a lawsuit.

Specifically, a large layoff occurred. Some time afterwards, there were a lot of rehires for the same positions. When an ADEA suit was brought (age discrimination), it was quickly settled for a lot of money because the layoffs hit the oldest workers, and the new hires for the same positions were ... not similarly situated.

 

[mamba]

Seems like the same 10-15 people all the time. Wouldn’t count that as ‘most.’

seems to be the same five people jumping in to defend WotC each time as well....

 

[mamba]

many investors would see mass layoffs as a weakness in a potential investment. For one, it's an obvious move to reduce operating costs. As a deeper look, it reveals that you have no faith in the kernel of your product and source of growth.

Those same investors should definitely also be aware that Hasbro is struggling and cannot just continue the way it has... there are plenty of times where stocks rise after layoffs or mergers (which generally also result in layoffs), many investors are not looking all that far ahead

 

[mamba]

Not fair to WotC, but as a component of Hasbro, that's part of the cost. There are many benefits, but there are costs as well.

at this point I am not so sure that there actually are any benefits left

 

[bedir than]

at this point I am not so sure that there actually are any benefits left

Getting paid two-three times what Paizo does
Very good non-wage benefits
Working on a brand that traditionally helps people towards the video game industry for even better wages
Working in Renton! The City of Dragons

 

[mamba]

Getting paid two-three times what Paizo does
Very good non-wage benefits
Working on a brand that traditionally helps people towards the video game industry for even better wages
Working in Renton! The City of Dragons

and how is any of that because of Hasbro rather than because of WotC?

 

[Dire Bare]

and how is any of that because of Hasbro rather than because of WotC?

Huh? WotC is a part of Hasbro. Your question makes no sense.

 

[mamba]

Huh? WotC is a part of Hasbro. Your question makes no sense.

yes it does, as posted:

Not fair to WotC, but as a component of Hasbro, that's part of the cost. There are many benefits, but there are costs as well.

So the question is what benefits Hasbro offers to WotC. Pretty sure we have some idea about the costs of being a subsidiary, I am not seeing any benefits at this point however, and everything @bedir than listed applies equally to an independent WotC imo