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
​

 

[Maxperson]

I don't think you'll be eating anybody alive in the courtroom. Out of interest, which law firm do you represent?

Dahmer and Lecter would be my guess.

 

[Obryn]

The entire point is that these guys are going to have to prove there was some relationship with some sort of promise or expectation of compensation. This is going to be a hard sell, BUT if they do win that will open up a door wide open for a lot of other people.

I don't believe they do, after Browning-Ferris, but then again IANAL

 

[Ampolitor]

the other big issue is healthcare, WOW, if they are proven to be employees I believe they meet the federal mandate to provide healthcare. LOL, wow this will be one to watch because this could change a lot of things. I still think this is bad for what will happen down the road, another case of Greed IMO, I mean who really expects to do something like this, then expect to make a living off of it?

 

[fjw70]

the other big issue is healthcare, WOW, if they are proven to be employees I believe they meet the federal mandate to provide healthcare. LOL, wow this will be one to watch because this could change a lot of things. I still think this is bad for what will happen down the road, another case of Greed IMO, I mean who really expects to do something like this, then expect to make a living off of it?

For that they would have to work 1,560 hours in a year (average 30 hours per week).

 

[Ampolitor]

For that they would have to work 1,560 hours in a year (average 30 hours per week).

oops thats right forgot that they are not full timers,

 

[evilbob]

A lot of responses are bringing up or indirectly hint at the common misconception that most lawsuits are frivolous. You always tend to hear about those, so people tend to overestimate how often they happen - but remember, like shark attacks and airplane crashes, you hear about them so much because they are so exceptional. You don't tend to hear about the lawsuits which have merit just like you don't tend to hear about the car crashes in your area - because hundreds of them happen every day.

When it comes to companies pushing the bounds of what they can get out of labor, the history of the US is full of excellent examples of why we have and need labor laws and what makes them so important. And yes: sometimes companies still push as far as they believe they can, and it's up to the judiciary to determine if they have overstepped the (typically) slightly murky or sometimes otherwise untested lines. Lawmakers do what they can with the law to cover as many situations as possible, but there are always new situations coming up that redefine things and push in places the lawmakers didn't expect. All of this is perfectly normal and it's how this country works. No one - none of the parties involved in these broad examples - are necessarily acting in anything other than good faith. That's why we have the legal system: to sort all these things out and to maintain fairness as much as possible when doing so.

So to immediately assume that a lawsuit is frivolous is relatively naive. It's also relatively naive to assume that the answer is obvious: if it were obvious, it (in all likelihood) wouldn't have come to a lawsuit. (It's also relatively naive to assume that a lawsuit only happened because of something that has occurred very recently, or that negotiations weren't first attempted - even potentially multiple times over multiple years - before a lawsuit was filled. Lawsuits of this scope are always expensive and time consuming, and it's always the final course of action - not the first or second.)

Personally, regardless of how I might feel about WotC, the plaintiffs' case seems to have merit to me and certainly they are welcome to use the laws of this land to prove whether or not they are correct.

 

[evilbob]

A lawyer weighs in.

http://blog.legalsolutions.thomsonr...ges-sue-for-lost-wages-claim-to-be-employees/

The key quote?

"It’s difficult to envision a scenario wherein a federal judge, bound by the NLRB’s decision, somehow determines that these judges aren’t employees of Wizards of the Coast."

He expects WotC will "pull an Uber" and settle.

This is an excellent link and the person in that link presents a very reasonable opinion. It's worth a read for anyone who dismisses this case out of hand.

Here's what I think is the most important quote, although it's a bit biased in its presentation: "These are not friendly times for employers seeking to divest themselves of labor and employment regulations through loopholes and technicalities."

 

[DaveMage]

This is an excellent link and the person in that link presents a very reasonable opinion. It's worth a read for anyone who dismisses this case out of hand.

Here's what I think is the most important quote, although it's a bit biased in its presentation: "These are not friendly times for employers seeking to divest themselves of labor and employment regulations through loopholes and technicalities."

Yes. Though IANAL, I can tell you from working a lot with temporary services contracts that when it comes to the rights of workers, there is generally a very high burden of proof on the employer, and the employee will win most of the time - even in cases where you'd think it's a slam dunk for the employer.

 

[Maxperson]

the other big issue is healthcare, WOW, if they are proven to be employees I believe they meet the federal mandate to provide healthcare. LOL, wow this will be one to watch because this could change a lot of things. I still think this is bad for what will happen down the road, another case of Greed IMO, I mean who really expects to do something like this, then expect to make a living off of it?

If this goes against WotC you will overnight see sanctioned tournaments at stores vanish. Pre-releases, if they have them, will go back to the massive 300-400 person tournaments where they don't have to pay nearly as many people. The same with the PT Qualifiers. They'll figure out a way to make those judges that only work the occasional qualifier or pre-release independent contractors.

 

[Koloth]

If this goes against WotC you will overnight see sanctioned tournaments at stores vanish. Pre-releases, if they have them, will go back to the massive 300-400 person tournaments where they don't have to pay nearly as many people. The same with the PT Qualifiers. They'll figure out a way to make those judges that only work the occasional qualifier or pre-release independent contractors.

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.