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
​

 

[Obryn]

See, that is completely illogical, even if their legal team allowed them to know that some legality was being broken that doesn't change the ethics. Following the law does not mean making the ethical decision, often the opposite has been true.

So... not paying judges is more ethical than paying them?

No deception or broken promises, strange definition of a con. You know what sounds more like a con.

I volunteer to do something for you.
I establish an ongoing relationship.
I sue you for not paying me.

But... the law says... whatever, the laws an ass.

The deception is in calling an employee a volunteer, and preying on their enthusiasm to recruit free labor. (Oh, sorry, paid in printed cardboard which has no value outside a speculative, unregulated market.)

I'm not claiming any promises were broken. I think you'll see that I'm saying exactly the opposite. The key is that WotC made an intentional cost-saving decision not to pay their employees - and that those employees didn't realize that they were, in fact, employees until later. That's taking advantage of fans' goodwill, and I can't see that as ethical in the least.

The ethical and legal wrong took place well before the judges decided to file suit for their mistreatment.

 

[Umbran]

Given that most large companies typically overreact to legal concerns, it all makes me wonder if a lawsuit like this could force WotC's lawyers to clamp down on unpaid playtesting

Unlikely. At least, not unpaid playesting like the open playtest for 5e.

For example: "It is toughier to become a judge than getting a basic job, the requirements are hard, especially if you want to progress in the hierarchy. But you don't have anyn contract with WotC, if at any point you express an opinion that WotC disapproves you may be terminated of your judge certification."

There were no requirements for entering the large scale D&D playtests, and no hierarchy, no certification. And, there's no remuneration, either - not even in the form of cards, and no requirements beyond, "We will have a survey you can fill out at X date." I do't expect any court could call these employees.

 

[Koloth]

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.

I don't see this as being much different then the following: Company Alpha contracts with Welding Shop Beta to produce gizmos. As part of the contract, Alpha requires all weldors working on gizmos to hold Certification Gamma. The Weldors hold the Certifications but are employees of Beta which in turn has a contract with Alpha. Fairly common industry practice.

One thing that will likely have to change if the plaintiffs prevail is that WOTC will have to have a very formal process for awarding certifications and an equally formal process for revoking them. No more loss of certification for just posting something WOTC objects to since the certifications will now have a real money earnings value attached to them.

 

[MoonSong]

So... not paying judges is more ethical than paying them?


The deception is in calling an employee a volunteer, and preying on their enthusiasm to recruit free labor. (Oh, sorry, paid in printed cardboard which has no value outside a speculative, unregulated market.)

I'm not claiming any promises were broken. I think you'll see that I'm saying exactly the opposite. The key is that WotC made an intentional cost-saving decision not to pay their employees - and that those employees didn't realize that they were, in fact, employees until later. That's taking advantage of fans' goodwill, and I can't see that as ethical in the least.

The ethical and legal wrong took place well before the judges decided to file suit for their mistreatment.

Yes, basically this. And this is still selling the judges short. They do a lot more than just judging and teaching other judges. They are also salespeople. They proselytize, they evangelize. I met a boy in high school, he was a certified judge -he couldn't have been more than 14 when he took it- he showed a lot of love for the game and basically introduced me to the game. I'm very casual at it -the environment is a bit of a "boys only club" with all the crass and vulgarity it comes with-, but if not for him I wouldn't even play.

And this will set a precedent that could really help other people that are take advantage off. heard of the NCAA? how these student-athletes lead dangerous and arduous lives for the sole benefit of the Organization? Aren't these times when jobs are hard to find while companies knowingly replace employees with volunteers that are employees in all but name and wage? how is that the moral side?

 

[MoonSong]

IANAL (and one can weigh in on this), but it's my understanding that the law trumps a contract anytime. So even if you agree to do something under a certain set of circumstances, if those circumstances are illegal, it doesn't matter if you agreed to it or not - you are still subject to the law.

Yes, that is basically why I don't think I could or should join DMsGuild. Laws.

 

[tomBitonti]

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

I did once on a contract, where the hourly rate was very out of balance with the work that I was doing.

But generally, isn't this exactly the case of gender bias in compensation? I know of one specific case: A lady friend of a friend was awarded back pay for gender based wage disparity. Folks asking for back pay increases doesn't seem uncommon.

Thx!
TomB

 

[tomBitonti]

Something I wonder about: A compensation which has nominal value (say, less than $50) is one thing. An award of $500 to $1000 worth of MTG cards is quite another. As is paying for air fees. Are room and board also provided?. The card value is based on what a prior Judge posted earlier in the thread. Even with the uncertainties in values, that sounds like enough to make this seem like an employment relationship which is being handed "under the table", and enough to create real tax issues. I imagine that tax authorities take a dim view of schemes to provide untaxed compensation, irrespective of labor issues.

Thx!
TomB

 

[LordEntrails]

I did once on a contract, where the hourly rate was very out of balance with the work that I was doing.

But generally, isn't this exactly the case of gender bias in compensation? I know of one specific case: A lady friend of a friend was awarded back pay for gender based wage disparity. Folks asking for back pay increases doesn't seem uncommon.

Thx!
TomB

Valid. Though both of these cases are for jobs that were undertaken as a means of self-support. I see a large moral difference between effort (work) taken on as a means to support oneself, and another when someone engages in effort (work) for enjoyment, pleasure, ego, etc.

Yes, it's not legally volunteering, but it is optional activities that you take on for non-monetary compensation.

The arguments mentioned by others (too difficult to try to multi-quote) regarding being taken advantage of and that regardless of a contract or agreement, the laws still apply are strong. And have made me re-think my stance.

But, again, I see a difference between monetary and non-monetary focused activities. If they had been engaged in monetary focused activities, then I would agree with you. But they weren't.

What happened to personal responsibility? Regardless of any potential laws that were broken, these judges should have stepped up and taken responsibility for themselves. To me, they are just as much in the wrong for engaging in (potentially) illegal work practices as WotC is for allowing such a system to be setup and run. Just because an individual does not have a lawyer on retainer or reviewing all activities they engage in does not mean that they are not responsible for their own actions.

If illegal work practices were engaged in, it was engaged in by BOTH sides. If one side was deceitful, if one side was dis-honest, if one side knowingly or intentionally engaged in illegal activity. Then that would change my moral argument. But, if both sides engaged in good faith, then both sides are equally at fault.

 

[Dire Bare]

I have been myself a high level MTG judge for several years, judging events in Japan, US and Europe. I know several of the people in this action.

Most of them could almost been considered as professional judges, not only because they judged high level events (profesionnal events, continental and world championships) but also of their work outside "floor judging". High level judges are required to be leaders, teachers and for some of them, active workers on the policies that judges are to enforce. This part of the job is not even taken into consideration in this class action.

I have myself been paid with shiny cards that I was able to sell for several hundreds of $ just 5 minutes after receiving them.

My worst tournament had the following schedule :
Friday : I helped for the set-up of the venue, the computer configuration and I took registration of players from 6PM to 10PM.
Saturday : Arrived at the venue at 7AM for pre-event meeting. I was the Scorekeeper of the event at this time, registering all results and providing pairing of the new rounds ... We faced several computer issues during the day and the tournament finished at 2AM in the morning. During this time, all judges worked on the complete duration (no shift at this time) with at most 1 real break for 19 hours. Personnaly I had additional works after the tournament ending for the day, I got to my hotel room at 5AM to wake up at 7AM.
Sunday : Arrived at the venue at 8AM, day was long again and the finals completed at 11PM. Some clean-up later and debriefing, it was 1AM.

It was an awful schedule, and I was quite lucky to be sitting behind a desk. Friends of mine were not that lucky.

I have been paid 12 boxes of product, that was worth of 12 * $90 at this time plus $200 worth of limited magic judge cards. I was one of the most fairly paid (most of the judges got 3 or 4 boxes).

I think not one judge who has ever work on a Grand Prix will tell you that he/she was a "volunteer".

But why the class action? Because of WotC. WotC management of the judges is garbage. It is toughier to become a judge than getting a basic job, the requirements are hard, especially if you want to progress in the hierarchy. But you don't have anyn contract with WotC, if at any point you express an opinion that WotC disapproves you may be terminated of your judge certification.
A close friend of mine was at the top level of the judge community (Level 5, max level). He disapproved some policies that were worked on at this time. At some point he expressed publicly his disagreement. Within 24h, he received an email entitled "Welcome to Level 0".
This way of treating judges is quite common for them, and they have years of HR managment to demote people disagrreing with them.

Guess what, I think all of the plaintiffs here have been treated this way (for some I know for sure, but I don't know all of them). So this is basic grudge and revenge. Is this moral?
Perhaps not, they were part of the system and probably managed to profit from it. But then WotC screws you. I think that's fair to try to screw them.

Regards.
PS: english is not my native language, forgive my spelling and/or my grammar

Thanks for the post! I suspected that the high-level judges were definitely "volunteering" under very "work-like" conditions, and your post confirms that. I don't think it necessarily has to do with grudges or revenge . . . if you volunteer for a program because you love the game, and then put in insane levels of work and labor under strict requirements and come to realize that you are in truth an unpaid employee, you have every right to challenge the companies practices.

WotC is clearly taking advantage of the passion certain mega-fans have for Magic to get some free labor, and I support those judges trying to remedy the situation in court.

Should judges at cons and local game stores be considered employees rather than volunteers? I think it rather depends on what kind of work and restrictions they labor under. It isn't necessarily the same as these high-level judges in the Magic pro tournament circuit.

I do know that at least several of the game stores in my area only have store employees running Magic tournaments. Probably for some other games as well. D&D in-store play seems to be totally volunteer in my area, but the DMs are actually playing the game themselves and have little responsibility other than to show up and run the game.

I think the problem lies in that tabletop gaming is a hobby, and the first cons grew out of the grass-roots level gamers gathering to play. The only way to make that happen was for some gamers to step forward as volunteers. But, for certain games, Magic especially, we've long moved past the grass-roots and we're in the big leagues where volunteers are no longer always more appropriate than paid employees.

I can see WotC's side of the issue, in that they've always relied on volunteers and that was okay for the beginnings of the Magic tournament scene. But WotC should have realized long ago that pro Magic has outgrown volunteer judges and organizers.

I hope this lawsuit is a success, and that WotC and other game companies are more careful on what they ask volunteers to do.

 

[Dire Bare]

Valid. Though both of these cases are for jobs that were undertaken as a means of self-support. I see a large moral difference between effort (work) taken on as a means to support oneself, and another when someone engages in effort (work) for enjoyment, pleasure, ego, etc.

Wha? When taking a job for pay, the job being for "self-support" has nothing to do with anything. You work, you get paid. I work as a teacher both to support myself and because I enjoy and am passionate for teaching. If I took a part-time job at my local game store to earn some extra scratch, and because I love and am passionate for the gaming scene, should I not get paid for that?

But, again, I see a difference between monetary and non-monetary focused activities. If they had been engaged in monetary focused activities, then I would agree with you. But they weren't.

If I love Magic (which I do), and I love it so much I want to be involved in the game more than just as a player, I might just volunteer to become a tournament judge based solely on my passion for the game, not expected to get paid but appreciated the unique cards I get as a thank-you. But, after working as a tournament judge and realizing, "Hey! This is tougher than my day-job! I should totally be getting paid for this!" It is not hypocritical or unethical for me to challenge WotC's policies on volunteer judges. I still love the game, I still want to be involved as a judge, but I want WotC to treat me and, more importantly, my fellow judges fairly. If WotC disagrees, then taking the issue to court is a logical next step.

My involvement and perception of my volunteerism began as "non-monetary" and shifted to feeling my contributions should be "monetary".

What happened to personal responsibility? Regardless of any potential laws that were broken, these judges should have stepped up and taken responsibility for themselves. To me, they are just as much in the wrong for engaging in (potentially) illegal work practices as WotC is for allowing such a system to be setup and run. Just because an individual does not have a lawyer on retainer or reviewing all activities they engage in does not mean that they are not responsible for their own actions.

If illegal work practices were engaged in, it was engaged in by BOTH sides. If one side was deceitful, if one side was dis-honest, if one side knowingly or intentionally engaged in illegal activity. Then that would change my moral argument. But, if both sides engaged in good faith, then both sides are equally at fault.

Wha? This makes no sense to me. "Personal responsibility"? How is feeling that your passion for a hobby was taken advantage of by WotC, and they trying to change that situation, show a lack of personal responsibility? These tournament judges suing WotC are not doing anything hypocritical, unethical, or irresponsible. That's just crazy talk!

The only possible way you could view the situation as showing a lack of personal responsibility is that the judges volunteered KNOWING that they were volunteering for positions that should clearly be performed by paid employees with the express purpose of later suing WotC. Which, if you believe that, I've got a nice tinfoil hat you can wear.