Gaming

Back when I supported HR at a hospital I built these ultra detailed employee turnover reports, which included average cost of turnover (metrics for what it costs to cover shifts until the position is filled, cost of recruiting/posting positions, cost associated with hiring, separation cost of the employee leaving, etc etc). And of course they would focus primarily on nursing roles. They spent about 5 years doing just about anything they could; hiring bonuses, incentives, referral bonuses, various outreach programs and tuition assistance for nurses. After those 5 years they found no noticeable reduction in nursing turnover. What they did eventually notice, however, is a steady increase in turnover for all other non-nursing positions.

After another year or 2 of bullshit excuses and throwing whatever paltry perks they attempted to throw at us the only thing they found actually lowering their turnover figures...reinstate annual 3% raises. Because they found out paying their employees was actually cheaper than the annual cost of turnover.

What kills me with this ridiculous form of corporate thinking is the sequel does not have all the quality of life improvements of the original, i.e., they don't build on lessons learned. A game may have patchs that add features that improve playability, or make settings easier to find, or just add some cool mechanic that everybody loves. Then the sequel comes out and all those features are missing for some reason. It's fucking infuriating!

Why do you think they like AI so much? The bought into the hype and now they think they can just own a data center and make more money that way. Everything can be their “creative vision” because they’re the smartest and most talented because they got themselves so rich and god/society reward the best

Without a golden parachute.

What about a trial by combat clause? CEO has to fight one representative of the workforce. In America this could be a whole new genre of reality tv! We could call it... Luigi's Mansion.

That’s a paddlin’

Because when starting your own studio in the garage you and your family has no money or insurance.

It probably makes for a good look in your CV. You work there for a few years, and then you can apply anywhere else with better chances, I guess.

You can probably Occam's razor as to why they don't make their own studios

I had a professor who had worked for a big company, was laid off, joined a smaller company, then the bigger company bought that one up.

I mean, you joke. But this is just the definition of contract labor.

In theory, contractors earn sizably more than salaried workers. If you're bringing in $200/hr, you can get away with working six months a year. Or working two years and then taking a year off.

But because so much of this contract work has been outsourced overseas or managed through networks of subcontractors, you end up with people actually earning a $30-60/hr salary for work that's getting billed at $200/hr by some gatekeeping intermediary. And you end up with a steady stream of people in-between jobs whose skills atrophy and whose interests in the long-term function of the project don't align.

Alternatively, you've got a bunch of these little indie pop-ups that churn out reskinned GACHA crap based on whatever happens to be popular at a given moment. And the name of the game is to get enough end-users to win yourself a corporate buyout, then dash out the back door with all the cash you can stuff in your pockets.

The idea of seasonal or boom-bust employment isn't unworkable on its face. But without labor solidarity or a professional organization to prop up wages, you just end up with a bunch of middle-men and corporate suits draining the lay workers dry.