There has been an odd turn of events- a few Magic the Gathering judges have filed two lawsuits against Wizards of the Coast. The lawsuit claims that Judges are employees of Wizards of the Coast, and are therefore entitled to employee rights (like wages, lunch breaks and overtime). Both suits have asked for class action status.

Here is the website run by the lawyers representing Magic the Gathering Judges.

Here is Wizard's Response to the lawsuit.

Here is an analysis (presumably by someone with credentials, but I didn't double check).


This could have some big implications for a lot of organized play. What does everyone think?

Didn't this already happen in the video game industry?

If I remember correctly. They would advertise for helpers for their games (usually mmo type games). These helpers would answer questions and help out in other ways as volunteers. I think they set times they would need to cover if they wanted to remain a helper. Note Helper is my term as I can't remember what they were called in game.

I believe the gaming industry lost that lawsuit and now has to pay people to do that type of work.

I wonder if all those judges not involved in the suit are going to be happy with their new employee status (as it seems pretty clear they'll eventually end up there)

when the IRS starts asking for their cut of the value of all those exclusive cards they get.. you can argue they are gift when your a volunteer (google tells me you can avoid tax on up to $14000), but not on wages which is what they'll become

(and no Wizards etc assigning a nominal tiny value to them won't cut it they're wise to the 'honest its not worth anything scam)

I'm thinking it might be inspired by recent developments against The like of Uber and Deliveroo - Uber certainly lost, with their drivers counting as employed rather than self-employed.

I think the judges just don't like being micromanaged by Wizards (WotC keeps tight reigns on their judges).

They wanted Wizards to form a non-profit Judges Alliance that could run as a volunteer organization (for profit corporations aren't allowed to hire volunteers like non-profits can).

I kind of think that the case started with Judges who wanted to force WotC to make a non-profit, but then realized that they could get back wages for everything they've been doing.


* -The cards Judges got can easily be called of nominal value in a legal sense- the only reason that they're more valuable on the secondary market is due to the rarity (which is the point, right?).

But honestly, if they had a retail price, it would be pretty cheap.

And I don't know if the cards ever actually make up for the time (and overtime) that Magic Judges put in. All together, I think the back wages would cover it pretty soundly.


* - From what I saw of Uber- they settled the case. New cases can come forward, but Uber payed out a handsome sum, but Uber drivers continue to be considered "independent contractors." But the door was left open for other cases to be brought forward against Uber.

The work that judges do is 100% essential to the game (unlike the type of volunteer who really only recruit new players), so they should be paid.

I find this very interesting.

[grabs chair & pop-corn]

 odinsgrandson wrote:

-The cards Judges got can easily be called of nominal value in a legal sense- the only reason that they're more valuable on the secondary market is due to the rarity (which is the point, right?).

But honestly, if they had a retail price, it would be pretty cheap.

The problem with that is I'm pretty sure they can't, especially when the IRS becomes officially 'aware' of a situation as is going to happen here with the court case,

I think this paraphrase (actually relating to their own art being given/donated by an artist even when the materials used are of negligible value not magic cards says it best)

"Now for the sticky part:

How do you determine the fair market value of the art you're gifting or donating?

According to Internal Revenue Code, fair market value is defined as "the price that property would sell for on the open market. It is the price that would be agreed on between a willing buyer and a willing seller, with neither being required to act, and both having reasonable knowledge of the relevant facts." With art, dollar amounts are not written in stone. Nevertheless, how you interpret or determine prices may well be scrutinized by the IRS which means that you have to be careful in stating dollar values."

so once cards that have pretty decent secondary market value become part of a 'salary' people who volunteer as judges and are working so have other taxable income may well have to think carefully about whether to declare them too

I'm wondering what kind of impact this will have on other volunteer programs. PP just cut their entire Pressganger program because of this lawsuit (allegedly).
What might happen to others like them in smaller companies?

I'm wondering what kind of impact this will have on FLGSs if anything major happens. MTG pretty much floats many, if not most, game stores. Those folks already have rockitty margins and day-to-day situations as it already stands. Hoping this doesn't cause much splash damage.

I would think that technically (I realize this is complicated because State laws have an effect as well) volunteers would be considered "Independent Contractors". As long as they don't receive more than $600 in paid wages, then they don't need to file a 1099. As far as I can remember only the paid wages matter and not 'additional compensation' that would be agreed upon.

This however is being watched by quite a few gaming companies. I don't see it effecting volunteers and FLGS events. However it can have an impact on volunteers for working conventions, which is pretty much what I do. I'd rather not be considered an employee... and I'd rather not be paid a flat wage, then have to fend for myself to find hotel and transportation. I rather enjoy paid flight and hotel, stipends and $$$ compensation in product that I can use to trade with other vendors and volunteers.

In the mid 90's comic shops seemed to be everywhere.. and then the marked imploded on its self...
Now there is game/comic stores (even just magic shops) everywhere including in small towns with populations
of a few thousand people.. My gut feeling is the same thing will happen.. Magic will not die but it will
get knocked down a little and many stores will close up... same as the comic trend a few decades back.

As for being a paid employee.. if they are volunteers that means to work for free, but there should be some type of contract signed..
If there was one.. the people suing really don't have much to stand on... if there wasn't one.. Hasbro may have their lunch eaten..

so TLDR this lawsuit could deal a mortal wound to the hobby... ncie job judges

BrianDavion wrote:
so TLDR this lawsuit could deal a mortal wound to the hobby... ncie job judges

Not the hobby as a whole, but certainly the organised event side of it.

This issue comes up from time to time.

As far as Magic- Glad I don't play, and if the paperwork is good, the phrase "Too big for their own good" comes to mind.

I mean in the land of frivolous lawsuits, THIS is one of the best.

Volunteer judges playing a card game are suing to be paid for a hobby... yeah, only in America.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Genoside07 wrote:
In the mid 90's comic shops seemed to be everywhere.. and then the marked imploded on its self...
Now there is game/comic stores (even just magic shops) everywhere including in small towns with populations
of a few thousand people.. My gut feeling is the same thing will happen.. Magic will not die but it will
get knocked down a little and many stores will close up... same as the comic trend a few decades back.

As for being a paid employee.. if they are volunteers that means to work for free, but there should be some type of contract signed..
If there was one.. the people suing really don't have much to stand on... if there wasn't one.. Hasbro may have their lunch eaten..

Great comparison. I like the way you think on this one, because I was just thinking the same way when I read the complaint by the plaintiff.

 Grot 6 wrote:


Volunteer judges playing a card game are suing to be paid for a hobby... yeah, only in America.

Volunteers work for non-profit organizations. Your local games tournament might be non-profit, but Wizards of the Coast is NOT. WotC determines who becomes a judge (and how they become a judge) and already has a compensation system in place (exclusive cards) and has the ability to discipline judges who step out of line, up to and including removing their certification ("firing them"). This is pretty much an employer/employee relationship. It's a PART TIME one, so the requirement for benefits is minimal, but still employment.

At the bare minimum WotC should have guidelines for breaks and meals and require sanctioned events to follow them. It would be fairly easy for WotC to require sanctioned events to pay judges minimum wage - at worst, the registration fee for a tournament would go up a bit. This won't ruin the hobby, just make sanctioned events more expensive to attend.

The dates on the OP links say that this started around April last year. Has anything happened yet? How long does it take to reach a outcome?

Lost Wages? I think that's where I lost my shirt.

 durecellrabbit wrote:
The dates on the OP links say that this started around April last year. Has anything happened yet? How long does it take to reach a outcome?

from this https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/11191519/Shaw_et_al_v_Wizards_of_the_Coast,_LLC# it looks like its live but nothing much as happened since april 2016

you can also still sign up tp be a part of it http://www.wizardslawsuit.com/

 durecellrabbit wrote:
The dates on the OP links say that this started around April last year. Has anything happened yet? How long does it take to reach a outcome?

It can take a year or more just to get a court to grant class status, and then every aspect of the suit can take longer due to the class action nature of a suit. Three to five years from filing to final outcome is pretty common.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grot 6 wrote:
I mean in the land of frivolous lawsuits, THIS is one of the best.

Volunteer judges playing a card game are suing to be paid for a hobby... yeah, only in America.

this isn't frivolous, not by a long shot, at least not according to how the legal community defines "frivolous."

We know they aren't volunteers, for two reasons. First, they aren't working with a non-profit organization, but for at least two businesses: WOTC and the sponsor of the event they're judging. Secondly, they expect and receive compensation. They receive product, exclusive cards, etc.

So, they provide a service to a business, in the location and times given by that business, under the rules and policies of another business, and receive compensation. The real question is: in what way are they not employees?

The cards as fair payment kind of melds into a (nonsensical in its own context) argument raised by the 'not a massive scam at all' WeRe Bank - namely that anything can be used in place of recognised currency - provided the value of said good is agreed by both parties.

Where WeRe and the Freemen on the Land claptrap falls down of course is that payment tendered is not payment accepted - here that wouldn't appear to be the case.

(For those wondering about WeRe, this is a pretty interesting read

Maybe it's just because I don't follow Magic, but, err, if the judges were unhappy with the conditions of being judges why in the hell did they become judges?

I mean I can understand wanting to hold up the ideals of minimum wage, but surely these positions only exist because WotC don't have to pay them? It's not like people are being fired and replaced with other workers below minimum wage is it?

OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:from this https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/11191519/Shaw_et_al_v_Wizards_of_the_Coast,_LLC# it looks like its live but nothing much as happened since april 2016

you can also still sign up tp be a part of it http://www.wizardslawsuit.com/

Polonius wrote:It can take a year or more just to get a court to grant class status, and then every aspect of the suit can take longer due to the class action nature of a suit. Three to five years from filing to final outcome is pretty common.

Thanks

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
Maybe it's just because I don't follow Magic, but, err, if the judges were unhappy with the conditions of being judges why in the hell did they become judges?

I mean I can understand wanting to hold up the ideals of minimum wage, but surely these positions only exist because WotC don't have to pay them? It's not like people are being fired and replaced with other workers below minimum wage is it?

I don't know much about the magic judge's program, but in my experience, people that sue former employers do so because they feel wronged. If I had to guess, based on the issue of WOTC having the right to sanction and/or remove judges, is that the plaintiff's were probably disciplined or let go, and are more likely to look at their time as a judge less favorably.

My complete speculation is that there was probably some unwritten promises made as well, that weren't carried out.

 Polonius wrote:
So, they provide a service to a business, in the location and times given by that business, under the rules and policies of another business, and receive compensation. The real question is: in what way are they not employees?

Not going to argue that the lawsuit is frivolous, but I don't see how they're employees (at least for most tournaments). How it works with MTG judges is that WOTC certifies a judge has passed a test, but outside of major WOTC-run tournaments they don't assign particular judges to an event. The local store that wants to have a sanctioned event is responsible for finding a judge and convincing them to do the job. Nor is WOTC setting the time of the event, how the store compensates the people running the event (many/most of whom are employees of the store), etc. It's a situation like with other professional certifications: Microsoft might send you a certificate saying "this person knows Windows", but using that certificate to get paid to work at a local company's IT department doesn't make you a Microsoft employee. An individual judge might have a case against a local store they've judged for, but not WOTC.

Now, for the major WOTC-run events like the pro tour there might be a better case that WOTC is directly hiring judges to work as employees. I don't know the details on how much individual judges get "employee"-type arrangements for a permanent job and how much it's an independent contractor sort of job where any certified judge can show up at a single event in exchange for a fixed payment, but it's certainly a much less interesting case for the hobby as a whole. Given the budget of these events, with tens of thousands of dollars in cash prizes, renting large convention spaces, etc, it's hard to see how having to pay some judges minimum wage and a lunch break is going to be more than a rounding error in WOTC's business model.

That's the thing. When you have someone in a corporate office doing nothing but looking at numbers, that rounding error is still a sum of money they don't need to spend.

That's the thing about business, doesn't matter what's both reasonable and right, but still within budget, it's just about the bottom line.

TBH I haven't looked much into this, but honestly it depends on what the company was asking of judges and how much they gained for that extremely cheap labor.

Having read the legal analysis it appears there's a fairly specific set of criteria that may need to be met to be deemed an employee, involving things like the certification process, having a company-backed official competitive ruleset, etc.

As such I wonder whether this will have any implications for other organised play that doesn't meet all those criteria. FFG organised play, for example, certainly has company-defined standards of play but no official recognition of the quality of judges through a registration or certification program.

As with any legal matter the devil is in the details, but from my incomplete understanding of the law here it looks like this may be a situation that's rather specific to how WotC runs their tournaments and judges program. As such it may not have such a seismic effect on other companies. Even if other companies are affected it may be that some relatively minor adjustments to their policies will keep them within the law.

 Peregrine wrote:
Not going to argue that the lawsuit is frivolous, but I don't see how they're employees (at least for most tournaments). How it works with MTG judges is that WOTC certifies a judge has passed a test, but outside of major WOTC-run tournaments they don't assign particular judges to an event. The local store that wants to have a sanctioned event is responsible for finding a judge and convincing them to do the job. Nor is WOTC setting the time of the event, how the store compensates the people running the event (many/most of whom are employees of the store), etc. It's a situation like with other professional certifications: Microsoft might send you a certificate saying "this person knows Windows", but using that certificate to get paid to work at a local company's IT department doesn't make you a Microsoft employee. An individual judge might have a case against a local store they've judged for, but not WOTC.

I have not read the details of the claims in the lawsuit, but what you are describing sounds awfully like a multi-level marketing scheme. The function the judge serves may not be to officiate the game, but to provide a sense of legitimacy to the event. In this case - having control over schedule and fees charged may not be a determinant in whether or not the person is rightfully classified as an independent contractor / volunteer.

 Peregrine wrote:

Now, for the major WOTC-run events like the pro tour there might be a better case that WOTC is directly hiring judges to work as employees. I don't know the details on how much individual judges get "employee"-type arrangements for a permanent job and how much it's an independent contractor sort of job where any certified judge can show up at a single event in exchange for a fixed payment, but it's certainly a much less interesting case for the hobby as a whole. Given the budget of these events, with tens of thousands of dollars in cash prizes, renting large convention spaces, etc, it's hard to see how having to pay some judges minimum wage and a lunch break is going to be more than a rounding error in WOTC's business model.

Employee doesn't always mean full time, or even part time. I serve on the board of a couple organizations. My employment agreement with them does not state anything about the amount of time I must spend involved in organizational activities. It specifies I must not compete or release confidential information, and also details compensation.

 John Prins wrote:

 Grot 6 wrote:


Volunteer judges playing a card game are suing to be paid for a hobby... yeah, only in America.

Volunteers work for non-profit organizations. Your local games tournament might be non-profit, but Wizards of the Coast is NOT. WotC determines who becomes a judge (and how they become a judge) and already has a compensation system in place (exclusive cards) and has the ability to discipline judges who step out of line, up to and including removing their certification ("firing them"). This is pretty much an employer/employee relationship. It's a PART TIME one, so the requirement for benefits is minimal, but still employment.

At the bare minimum WotC should have guidelines for breaks and meals and require sanctioned events to follow them. It would be fairly easy for WotC to require sanctioned events to pay judges minimum wage - at worst, the registration fee for a tournament would go up a bit. This won't ruin the hobby, just make sanctioned events more expensive to attend.

Its a hobby. They are not employees, they are volunteers. You have proved my point though.

Judges are not on the payroll, and this is a game, that they volunteer to rep. Same as most rep programs.

But they are on the payroll though, in that they apparently receive compensation in the form of goods.

At a quick glance, the whole situation might sound ludicrous. "Obviously signing up to ref a few games of magic is not the same as a 9-5 job in the factories".

But look a bit closer at the legalities, and it's not so clear cut.

 Zywus wrote:
But they are on the payroll though, in that they apparently receive compensation in the form of goods.

At a quick glance, the whole situation might sound ludicrous. "Obviously signing up to ref a few games of magic is not the same as a 9-5 job in the factories".

But look a bit closer at the legalities, and it's not so clear cut.

And that, I guess is the shtick of a supposed lawsuit. It is clear cut, and in looking over the program, its pretty cut and dried as to the down in the weeds issue. Unless I am missing something not written or discussed in the website, THAT stuff given is part in parcel of the compensation of "Volunteering".

Much the same as other Rep programs from other companies, this one, as well has obviously grown too big for its own good. On personal opinion, THIS has also been one of the biggest hang ups on companies representation systems. Be it the old school GW Freebooter program, to the now famous Privateer system that PP has now given up the ghost on.

I have seen this almost since the inception of the "Volunteer" system from Star Trek, to GW, to Bolt Action, to My infamous run as Mongoose's powder monkey, to the current situation that we have today with this one. GAME companies themselves have a pretty open base to work from, and in the same token, you have self appointed "Judges" who then go on to push the envelope on the system, trying to cheese even more free lickies and chewies out of the gig.

The system of being a rep in as itself should be sufficient, but then to go on and try to make it a full time gig, people are now expecting free health care, a retirement plan, and weekends off- out of a volunteer program to promote a game, sufficiently compensated with a couple of figures, cards, pins, or whatever.

All this "Lawsuit" is going to do is to mess up the spirit of the system, and end up killing even more of the metagaming then is already living on a fingernail of life in the grand scheme.

Bad enough that tabletop/ gaming is competing with the online market, and jacking up the price range- now we get stuff like this to add more fuel and drive costs up even more...

Don't forget, lawsuits like this are the wellspring of many a law securing worker's rights.

So successful or not, as a dirty lefty socialist, I'm not sure anyone can label it frivolous with a straight face

I'm really not seeing how this is doom and gloom for gaming forever.

So they just make a new contract explicitly laying out that judges get paid in cards, judges sign or they don't. Boo hoo now they get lunch breaks, I'm sure the MtG scene will never recover.

The reason it is complex and important is because federal law prohibits volunteer labor for profit employers. "Under the FLSA (Fair Labor Standards Act), employees may not volunteer services to for-profit private sector employers. Simply calling someone a "volunteer" will not shield an employer from its FLSA obligation to pay the required wages if that individual performs work that benefits the for-profit organization."

There is the law to protect people from being exploited and then beyond that, there is IRS/Taxes, because if someone is getting compensated even if it is product then the IRS does not get their cut. So between the mix of state and federal factor in however there are usually 6 factors that the law uses to determine if someone is considered an employee or independent contractor (in this case volunteer). According to the Labor Deapartment, no one factor controls the identification that someone is an employee or contractor. In other words just because 1 and 6 are true, that doesn't necessarily mean it is an employee. However each "yes" to each question increases the chances that it is an employee relationship and not an independent contractor.

Is the work an intergral part of the employer's business?

Does the worker lack managerial skills to impact the opportunity for profit or less?

Does the work lack "skin" (an opportunity for profit or loss) in the business relationship?

Does the work robotically follow orders (as opposed to exercising independent thought, judgement and initiative)?

Is the relationship between the worker and the employer permanent or indefinite?

Does the business excercise a lot of control over the worker?

Now the IRS has a 20 Factor Test.

Level of instruction. If the company directs when, where, and how work is done, this control indicates a possible employment relationship.

Amount of training. Requesting workers to undergo company-provided training suggests an employment relationship since the company is directing the methods by which work is accomplished.

Degree of business integration. Workers whose services are integrated into business operations or significantly affect business success are likely to be considered employees.

Extent of personal services. Companies that insist on a particular person performing the work assert a degree of control that suggests an employment relationship. In contrast, independent contractors typically are free to assign work to anyone.

Control of assistants. If a company hires, supervises, and pays a worker's assistants, this control indicates a possible employment relationship. If the worker retains control over hiring, supervising, and paying helpers, this arrangement suggests an independent contractor relationship.

Continuity of relationship. A continuous relationship between a company and a worker indicates a possible employment relationship. However, an independent
contractor arrangement can involve an ongoing relationship for multiple, sequential projects.

Flexibility of schedule. People whose hours or days of work are dictated by a company are apt to qualify as its employees.

Demands for full-time work. Full-time work gives a company control over most of a person's time, which supports a finding of an employment relationship.

Need for on-site services. Requiring someone to work on company premises—particularly if the work can be performed elsewhere—indicates a possible employment relationship.

Sequence of work. If a company requires work to be performed in specific order or sequence, this control suggests an employment relationship.

Requirements for reports. If a worker regularly must provide written or oral reports on the status of a project, this arrangement indicates a possible employment relationship.

Method of payment. Hourly, weekly, or monthly pay schedules are characteristic of employment relationships, unless the payments simply are a convenient way of distributing a lump-sum fee. Payment on commission or project completion is more characteristic of independent contractor relationships.

Payment of business or travel expenses. Independent contractors typically bear the cost of travel or business expenses, and most contractors set their fees high enough to cover these costs. Direct reimbursement of travel and other business costs by a company suggests an employment relationship.

Provision of tools and materials. Workers who perform most of their work using company-provided equipment, tools, and materials are more likely to be considered employees. Work largely done using independently obtained supplies or tools supports an independent contractor finding.

Investment in facilities. Independent contractors typically invest in and maintain their own work facilities. In contrast, most employees rely on their employer to provide work facilities.

Realization of profit or loss. Workers who receive predetermined earnings and have little chance to realize significant profit or loss through their work generally are employees.

Work for multiple companies. People who simultaneously provide services for several unrelated companies are likely to qualify as independent contractors.

Availability to public. If a worker regularly makes services available to the general public, this supports an independent contractor determination.

Control over discharge. A company's unilateral right to discharge a worker suggests an employment relationship. In contrast, a company's ability to terminate independent contractor relationships generally depends on contract terms.

Right of termination. Most employees unilaterally can terminate their work for a company without liability. Independent contractors cannot terminate services without liability, except as allowed under their contracts.

To be fair as someone who has worked these events as well as conventions, I can understand the reasoning. There are some long hours that are usually "scheduled and required to work" these events, they typically are 10-12 hours shifts with a lunch and sometimes a break if any. Each event can be different depending on venue as well. On one hand I see it as a choice, they send out a call and offer compensation and people accept or don't. On the flipside it can be seen as exploitation because many people get into the hype, then never do an event again because of the work and let's be honest and real... they can afford employees and/or better compensation but they really do the minimum they can get away with.

 ScarletRose wrote:
I'm really not seeing how this is doom and gloom for gaming forever.

So they just make a new contract explicitly laying out that judges get paid in cards, judges sign or they don't. Boo hoo now they get lunch breaks, I'm sure the MtG scene will never recover.

The thing is that MTG cards are priced based on a variety of factors that are out of WOTC's control, and there are different levels of judge (basically ranking) which have traditionally received different judge promos. I've made jokes in the past about WOTC printing money, but the cards accused of being printed money tend to be high-demand low-supply printings that are relatively stable. But there are a lot of low-level judges, most of whom sell their promos sooner or later. WOTC can either "pay" the low-level judges with a relatively low-demand reprint and pay them almost nothing, or pay them with a high-demand reprint and mess up the card's value while paying them somewhat more. You can pay the high-level judges with foil alt-art chase mythic from a set out of print and it works fine because they're so rare, but the low level judges are where payment with cards gets confusing. One could print many high-demand cards and give one of them out at random to each judge to deal with the inflation of the card's supply, but that results in judges feeling cheated because they got a card that isn't worth as much as another. In addition the value of card staples in standard and modern (two of the MTG formats) can fluctuate dramatically as the meta shifts (or Travis Woo needs to unload some stock for ChannelFireball), making trying to pay the judges a certain amount with cards difficult, and the prices of many modern and legacy staples are only stable due to their limited supply, which means that this is even less of a stable source of money.

Or they could just rehire Rebecca Guay (and Phil+Kaja Foglio ), but only have them draw art for judge promos . (Context for people who aren't too familiar with MTG: they're both artists with very distinctive, and in Guay's case very popular, art styles that used to do card art but no longer do.)

100% excellence in posting.

I can also see how that the issue can honestly become a landmine to bring on a lawsuit with this information. It really does look like the programs have grown well past the point of general local support.

On this end, with your added insight, it is a little more complicated in adding the issue of price/ magic cards.... I am to take it then that volunteering for a card game is a little more involved then getting a rep kit, and playing some games with a PP shirt on, as you put together a local event and cultivate a stable local game scene for whatever game you are supporting.

Am I to understand that these workers count as independent consultant level of support for the card games, as opposed to tabletop, or are they all lumped in together?

 Grot 6 wrote:
100% excellence in posting.

I can also see how that the issue can honestly become a landmine to bring on a lawsuit with this information. It really does look like the programs have grown well past the point of general local support.

On this end, with your added insight, it is a little more complicated in adding the issue of price/ magic cards.... I am to take it then that volunteering for a card game is a little more involved then getting a rep kit, and playing some games with a PP shirt on, as you put together a local event and cultivate a stable local game scene for whatever game you are supporting.

Am I to understand that these workers count as independent consultant level of support for the card games, as opposed to tabletop, or are they all lumped in together?

Perhaps it is.

I think the issue is that it could set a precedent for this sort of thing. Which from what my arm-chair lawyer-learnin has found, often puts most cases that are 'similar' in a position of following the original verdict. So how this goes, could set the tone despite the two sorts of 'volun-ployees' having different sets of guidelines or rewards for being a part of the program.

Of course, I could have it all backwards too.

Dark Severance wrote:The reason it is complex and important is because federal law prohibits volunteer labor for profit employers. "Under the FLSA (Fair Labor Standards Act), employees may not volunteer services to for-profit private sector employers. Simply calling someone a "volunteer" will not shield an employer from its FLSA obligation to pay the required wages if that individual performs work that benefits the for-profit organization."

There is the law to protect people from being exploited and then beyond that, there is IRS/Taxes, because if someone is getting compensated even if it is product then the IRS does not get their cut.

At one of my first jobs while in high school, the employer at the job site came up to me after my 8 hours and and told me my shift was done and I was all like "cool, thanks" as we were pretty engrossed in the work. A minute later his foreman came up and was like "hey if you want to be considered for a raise in the future, it would be cool for you to volunteer and stay here and help us all finish the job." I got a better job a few weeks later but a friend of mine stayed there and apparently they did it all the time as a means to avoid paying anything at all for overtime.

I can definitely see why you'd want laws that require a defined employer employee relationship.

 Grot 6 wrote:
On this end, with your added insight, it is a little more complicated in adding the issue of price/ magic cards.... I am to take it then that volunteering for a card game is a little more involved then getting a rep kit, and playing some games with a PP shirt on, as you put together a local event and cultivate a stable local game scene for whatever game you are supporting.

Am I to understand that these workers count as independent consultant level of support for the card games, as opposed to tabletop, or are they all lumped in together?

It can vary. Minimum requirement is a level 1 test and some involvement locally to usually work at a regional level. There are some professional companies that outsource volunteers (at least for Magic). Level 2 and higher judges become more valuable because of experience but honestly a lot of people get burned out before they make it there. Turnover tends to be really high. Regional levels are where the main concerns and issues are.

The lawsuit and outcome should really have no impact on a "local" level for game store volunteers. The main reason is there isn't a measurable amount of comp but the biggest is, usually the TO or local person runs everything. That means they don't answer to anyone except for the rules to run an event, they are in control and thus a less murky area for an "employee" vs "volunteer" basis.

The concern is conventions and other regional level events. Even so much as local cons could be effected. I run events for various companies, they usually get me a badge and I have a rough setup of what they want focused. I tend to get items that supports the event, plus comps me a bit, but if the water becomes murky then we loose on the that support. Then larger events like Origins Game Fair, GenCon, etc where most of the companies use volunteers to staff booths, run demos and tournaments it can mean that no longer happens if these people have to be considered "employees". For those events most things are outside the volunteer control, they work a schedule, do lunches, breaks when told and work until released. So it is can be considered more employee relationship. If these companies now have to pay volunteers, file tax forms and other things then that can change the dynamic of the relationship as well as the landscape at cons.

 Dark Severance wrote:
The reason it is complex and important is because federal law prohibits volunteer labor for profit employers.

WotC simply needs to reclassify Judges as (unpaid) Interns, and all will be well...

 Dark Severance wrote:
The concern is conventions and other regional level events. Even so much as local cons could be effected. I run events for various companies, they usually get me a badge and I have a rough setup of what they want focused. I tend to get items that supports the event, plus comps me a bit, but if the water becomes murky then we loose on the that support. Then larger events like Origins Game Fair, GenCon, etc where most of the companies use volunteers to staff booths, run demos and tournaments it can mean that no longer happens if these people have to be considered "employees". For those events most things are outside the volunteer control, they work a schedule, do lunches, breaks when told and work until released. So it is can be considered more employee relationship. If these companies now have to pay volunteers, file tax forms and other things then that can change the dynamic of the relationship as well as the landscape at cons.

I was thinking about convention roadies. I think you can make more of a bona fide case that they're independent contractors. Would the highly intermittent and short term nature play in? In my experience with a small company, the expectation was to help with set up and tear down, and then after that we all took turns manning the booth. I wouldn't call it setting my own schedule, but it also wasn't particularly strict when and where I had to be. If you really looked at the number of hours I "worked" over a five day con, it was rarely more than six hours a day.

Practically, the people that help those companies with cons are more likely to be friends or part time employees that are looking to get a free con trip. They're just not going to rock the boat.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Dark Severance wrote:
The reason it is complex and important is because federal law prohibits volunteer labor for profit employers.

WotC simply needs to reclassify Judges as (unpaid) Interns, and all will be well...

That is dependant on the State because of how the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) governs how interns must be compensated under federal law. That's not to say employers can never have unpaid interns; they're just not very common, at least legally.

The vast majority of interns working at for-profit organizations must be paid at least the minimum wage and any applicable overtime. Technically, paid interns are temporary employees and treated virtually the same as regular employees with respect to labor law. But you may legally hire an unpaid intern if the following six criteria are met:

The internship, even though it includes actual operation of the facilities of the employer, is similar to training which would be given in an educational environment.

The experience is for the benefit of the intern.

The intern does not displace regular employees but works under close supervision of existing staff.

The employer providing the training derives no immediate advantage from the activities of the intern and on occasion its operations may actually be impeded.

There is no guarantee of a job at the conclusion of the internship.

Both parties understand that the intern is not entitled to wages for the internship.

 Polonius wrote:
I was thinking about convention roadies. I think you can make more of a bona fide case that they're independent contractors. Would the highly intermittent and short term nature play in? In my experience with a small company, the expectation was to help with set up and tear down, and then after that we all took turns manning the booth. I wouldn't call it setting my own schedule, but it also wasn't particularly strict when and where I had to be. If you really looked at the number of hours I "worked" over a five day con, it was rarely more than six hours a day.

Practically, the people that help those companies with cons are more likely to be friends or part time employees that are looking to get a free con trip. They're just not going to rock the boat.

I have to say I've worked pretty hard to build a reputation as person who can self-manage, understands the roles that need to be filled, as well as overall just a hard worker at this conventions. It is one of the thing that allows me to go to them and usually get paid hotel as well as airfare (which tends to be rarer), on top of comp and stipends. I'm less stingy with comp though (but that is just me) only because I also tend to get other product just simply for being a demo person for these various companies. I can say that I've never worked less than six hours a day though :( However that is more something I've taken upon myself. At GenCon I tend to run Tournaments so that means I'm doing setup, takedown as well as there for the majority of the time. I do have a bit more freedom in terms of getting away here and there but that is because my day is at least 12 hours, so lunch may be a quick bite but browse around the floor. At Origins I tend to work the floor, so my hours are limited by Exhibit Hours but there is extra time into that. We do setup, takedown but also we've run Publisher Dating Events and other "industry events", less work/work but still a lot of time on feet.

Out of the companies that I do work, I could probably accurately estimate that about 75% are of the type that do only work 6-8 hours (Exhibit Hours), get a lunch and break. Some of them get hotel comp while other groups of volunteers have worked together. The other 25% though definitely put in above and beyond. Part of that is some are trying to "impress" because they might have a game in the pipeline, looking for industry help or input, or looking to become an employee. I know quite a few volunteers that moved to official employee status. There are also a good portion of that 25% that think if they say "no" or "rock the boat" they won't be accepted to work at one of these events again... and there is some truth to that. We have list of some volunteers that overall aren't allowed because of horrible work ethic even as a volunteer. I will say women volunteers are on a higher rate, as there is a smaller amount of them so when they split hotels there are usually openings for women volunteers since they don't room them with men.

I'm not going to comment on the merits of the case because I have not read it, but the first thing that jumps to my mind is "be careful what you wish for you just might get it".

Is this why Privateer press is stopping their Pressgangers?

Privateer Press cited redundancy in their axing of the Press Gang- basically they say that they've started supporting the retailers directly (with event packs and such).

They may also have feared a lawsuit from the Press Gang- although I believe they have a lot less control over the Press Gang than Wizards has over the Judges, so it probably wouldn't look the same.



Quick note- These laws governing volunteer work NEED to exist. Imagine what Hollywood would look like if they could hire actors as volunteers (they have guilds because actors would gladly work for less than living wages for the opportunity to get their face out there).


And there's something fishy about hiring volunteers to make a corporation a profit. From what I've read, the law distinguishes between how exactly the work environment is controlled- and Wizards seems to control the conditions of employment very closely, which is treading into employer relationships.

There's actually nothing illegal about a company supporting enthusiastic gamers who want to spread the word. As I understand it, the Judges in question want to force Wizards to create a separate non-profit entity that runs the Magic events (non profits are allowed to employ volunteers in a way that for profit corporations are forbidden). They want things to keep going, but they don't want Wizards to micromanage them.

The response that WIzards issued was not that Judges are volunteers- because they aren't allowed to employ volunteer labor.

 OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:

 odinsgrandson wrote:

-The cards Judges got can easily be called of nominal value in a legal sense- the only reason that they're more valuable on the secondary market is due to the rarity (which is the point, right?).

But honestly, if they had a retail price, it would be pretty cheap.

The problem with that is I'm pretty sure they can't, especially when the IRS becomes officially 'aware' of a situation as is going to happen here with the court case,

I think this paraphrase (actually relating to their own art being given/donated by an artist even when the materials used are of negligible value not magic cards says it best)

"Now for the sticky part:

How do you determine the fair market value of the art you're gifting or donating?

According to Internal Revenue Code, fair market value is defined as "the price that property would sell for on the open market. It is the price that would be agreed on between a willing buyer and a willing seller, with neither being required to act, and both having reasonable knowledge of the relevant facts." With art, dollar amounts are not written in stone. Nevertheless, how you interpret or determine prices may well be scrutinized by the IRS which means that you have to be careful in stating dollar values."

so once cards that have pretty decent secondary market value become part of a 'salary' people who volunteer as judges and are working so have other taxable income may well have to think carefully about whether to declare them too

Good point- but if this item were available on the free market, it would sell for a LOT less than on the secondary market. Because Wizards of the Coast sell all magic cards for the same price, it becomes easy to calculate what the retail price would be. Just determine what it would have cost for a consumer in a random pack, and that's the price of the card.

Wizards of the Coast sell Magic the Gathering cards for around 30 cents apiece (a bit less form my calculations). It is hard to argue that this isn't the price that they would have, were they to be sold on the open market by Wizards. If they charge more for foil cards, they'd need to account for that accordingly, but they might also consider any employee discounts they offer.

The IRS would accept these prices, because that is the appropriate way to calculate them. The IRS would lose a court battle to claim that they had higher value than what their employer would clearly sell them for- especially since Wizards makes them for almost nothing.


And there is simply no way that the taxes on these cards would come anywhere close to the back wages and overtime that the judges claim they are owed, even if they did start claiming that they were worth the secondary market value.

 odinsgrandson wrote:
There's actually nothing illegal about a company supporting enthusiastic gamers who want to spread the word. As I understand it, the Judges in question want to force Wizards to create a separate non-profit entity that runs the Magic events (non profits are allowed to employ volunteers in a way that for profit corporations are forbidden).

The response that WIzards issued was not that Judges are volunteers- because they aren't allowed to employ volunteer labor.

That's a fascinating distinction.

Wizards has gone the other direction though and now all their premier level events will be run by one of the large online retailers, Channel Fireball.

I can get pretty anti-commercial, so I really like the idea of organized play for games being moved away from the product sales focus and towards a non profit approach. Like the many local and regional societies for all sorts of other hobbies, art forms and cultural expressions. An international alliance of national collectible card game appreciation societies sounds pretty good to me. They can run Magic and Pokemon and Yugioh and so forth.

I'd also like to see North American miniature gaming communities stop being tied so closely to retailers. There might be a cultural barrier there though where the profit motive of the retailers drives them to sell people on the idea of being part of the gaming community at a given store.

 odinsgrandson wrote:
Privateer Press cited redundancy in their axing of the Press Gang- basically they say that they've started supporting the retailers directly (with event packs and such).

They may also have feared a lawsuit from the Press Gang- although I believe they have a lot less control over the Press Gang than Wizards has over the Judges, so it probably wouldn't look the same.



Quick note- These laws governing volunteer work NEED to exist. Imagine what Hollywood would look like if they could hire actors as volunteers (they have guilds because actors would gladly work for less than living wages for the opportunity to get their face out there).

The sad thing is that is happening in Hollywood every day! Actors, crew members etc.. dreaming of the glamorous life and the "next big project" are taking sub minimum wage jobs and the employers are getting away with it. The only difference is that a group hasn't really stuck together to hit those types of producers where it hurts.

This is a sticky situation, but seems like the judges have the right end of this.

 odinsgrandson wrote:
Good point- but if this item were available on the free market, it would sell for a LOT less than on the secondary market. Because Wizards of the Coast sell all magic cards for the same price, it becomes easy to calculate what the retail price would be. Just determine what it would have cost for a consumer in a random pack, and that's the price of the card.

Wizards of the Coast sell Magic the Gathering cards for around 30 cents apiece (a bit less form my calculations). It is hard to argue that this isn't the price that they would have, were they to be sold on the open market by Wizards. If they charge more for foil cards, they'd need to account for that accordingly, but they might also consider any employee discounts they offer.

The IRS would accept these prices, because that is the appropriate way to calculate them. The IRS would lose a court battle to claim that they had higher value than what their employer would clearly sell them for- especially since Wizards makes them for almost nothing.

That's flawed reasoning, because these are NOT the same mass production run items. GM sells a huge number of Chevys at a mass market price point, and a smaller number of Cadillacs at a higher, exclusive price point. They don't go into bulk distribution, they are one-off deliveries.

If anything, these exclusive cards are equivalent to an executive stock option, where the cost to the company is fixed, but the taxable fair market value to the employee is MUCH higher. Given that WotC has been doing these exclusives as payment in kind, and the secondary market does exist to determine their typical value, everybody knows roughly what they are doing. Nobody is working an event for the equivalent of a 30c Common.

 frozenwastes wrote:
I can get pretty anti-commercial, so I really like the idea of organized play for games being moved away from the product sales focus and towards a non profit approach. Like the many local and regional societies for all sorts of other hobbies, art forms and cultural expressions. An international alliance of national collectible card game appreciation societies sounds pretty good to me. They can run Magic and Pokemon and Yugioh and so forth.

I'd also like to see North American miniature gaming communities stop being tied so closely to retailers. There might be a cultural barrier there though where the profit motive of the retailers drives them to sell people on the idea of being part of the gaming community at a given store.

Be careful what you wish for, you might get it. For-profit businesses have the budget to run major events. Non-profit clubs are usually working with a much smaller budget (since they have to depend on only event entry fees to pay for everything, and can't supplement that with product sales) so that means smaller prizes, fewer major events, local events that cost a lot more to join and are played in space that isn't as nice, etc.

 Peregrine wrote:
Be careful what you wish for, you might get it. For-profit businesses have the budget to run major events. Non-profit clubs are usually working with a much smaller budget (since they have to depend on only event entry fees to pay for everything, and can't supplement that with product sales) so that means smaller prizes, fewer major events, local events that cost a lot more to join and are played in space that isn't as nice, etc.

I'm going to lose something I don't have. Oh no!

The only problem areas with the local community are small factional groups with an unmerited sense of store loyalty who won't go to events run by other stores. And that's slowly being busted up by social media groups being pan-city focused and player run events turning out better than store run events.

 frozenwastes wrote:
The only problem areas with the local community are small factional groups with an unmerited sense of store loyalty who won't go to events run by other stores.

That was one of the big issues locally about being a Tournament Organizer. A couple stores didn't care that I ran tournaments in other stores because the people that attended them tend to be locals plus extras who were more into the competitive play and would travel. I wasn't asking people to switch their "local game store preference" or to buy product from what was perceived as my main store but a couple store owners took it that way. They usually gave a cold shoulder when trying to coordinate a group calendar or trying to run events at their stores. This instead meant they never got picked for State, Realm or Regional Championships because I wasn't about to recommend a store that didn't help the community. Many players have a normal game time but there are also many players that can't always show up, so trying to keep events evenly distributed between stores, meant that someone could at least attend one or multiple events a month because they could go Saturday early, or Sunday late or Tuesday evening. But there are still owners who view their customers as "theirs" and even customers who view their store as "theirs" so they won't attend events anywhere else. There have definitely been some frustrating times.

For Magic the stores cooperate a lot. They don't run the same format on the same evenings (except for standard on fridays). Which means that when people get into a format like standard or modern and decide to do it twice in a given week, they'll end up at more than one store during the week. And all these events are run by paid staff members.

For Magic you can go to one store and see posters about upcoming large events at other stores.

It's actually the miniature players that are the factional bunch. We actually have X-Wing players who won't attend regionals if the "wrong" store is hosting it that season. And as well as the store issue you have 40k players being hostile to AoS players as the popularity of AoS since the General's Handbook came out is siphoning players away from 40k. Same thing happened when Flames of War became popular 10 years ago and Warmachine/Hordes 5 years ago.

It's probably a culture caused by 10-20 or so selfish individuals spread between 3 stores who trash other stores and other games whenever the opportunity arises, creating a negative impression about store cooperation all the while the store owners and event organizers are doing everything they can to fully cooperate.

The good thing about these toxic individuals is they will not come to player run events or multi-store run events. Now if only I could get them to stop spreading their factious negativity at the times they do show up to a given X-Wing night at their store of choice. I'm sure they have talked other people out of showing up at events who otherwise would have. And they probably have driven away people from their store of choice. You tend to alienate people when you trash the game they're interested in.

I've heard store owners complain about how "mercenary" magic players are. They'll play anywhere, and don't care which local store they're supporting! Personally, I don't like it when a store owner feels like he's entitled to your business,. but that's off topic.

 Todosi wrote:

 odinsgrandson wrote:
Privateer Press cited redundancy in their axing of the Press Gang- basically they say that they've started supporting the retailers directly (with event packs and such).

They may also have feared a lawsuit from the Press Gang- although I believe they have a lot less control over the Press Gang than Wizards has over the Judges, so it probably wouldn't look the same.



Quick note- These laws governing volunteer work NEED to exist. Imagine what Hollywood would look like if they could hire actors as volunteers (they have guilds because actors would gladly work for less than living wages for the opportunity to get their face out there).

The sad thing is that is happening in Hollywood every day! Actors, crew members etc.. dreaming of the glamorous life and the "next big project" are taking sub minimum wage jobs and the employers are getting away with it. The only difference is that a group hasn't really stuck together to hit those types of producers where it hurts.

This is a sticky situation, but seems like the judges have the right end of this.

That's what the Guilds in Hollywood are all about- they try to keep the young and excited actors from being exploited. The actor's guild protects extras (they get paid pretty decent, actually). They also make sure that the film credits people where credit is due.

But that's also why they kick people out if they work outside of the guild rules (including working for sub-standard pay).

True enough, but there is always non union work, and that is where it starts to get sketchy sometimes. Even when there is law set as precedent, someone will step up to take that sub minimum wage job.

This will get a lot of attention from outside the gaming industry, much like the Chapterhouse case (where it wasn't about the after market for space marine shoulder pads worth literally tens of dollars, but aftermarket car parts worth hundreds of millions).

Wizards are telling the judges when to work and paying them in something that could be interpreted as company scrip.

Think what a certain US retailer that relies on the federal food stamps programme to stop their employees starving to death and medicare/medicaid to stop them dropping like flies from preventable disease would do with a judgement supporting company scrip as a valid means of payment for employees.

Would your employer decide to pay you in something other than money?

Ben2 wrote:
Would your employer decide to pay you in something other than money?

Many startups compensate employees in stock and options instead of cash. Depending on how things go, those options can be worth far more than cash.

https://www.facebook.com/magichaven/photos/a.916566308362080.1073741828.916563408362370/1405962976089075/?type=3




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

Ben2 wrote:
Would your employer decide to pay you in something other than money?

Many startups compensate employees in stock and options instead of cash. Depending on how things go, those options can be worth far more than cash.

And therein lies the problem. How does the 'man' tax those benefits? At the nickel value of the card that they get for their time, or at the exorbitant price that can be gotten in the secondary market? If this sort of thing becomes too big of a problem, you could see tax codes shift in such a way as to see new requirements for tax documentation for the swaps in the swap shop forums here and on other sites. After all, the 'manz' have to be able to get their pound of flesh from the invisible transactions on these sites.

 carldooley wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

Ben2 wrote:
Would your employer decide to pay you in something other than money?

Many startups compensate employees in stock and options instead of cash. Depending on how things go, those options can be worth far more than cash.

And therein lies the problem. How does the 'man' tax those benefits?

At the nickel value of the card that they get for their time,

or at the exorbitant price that can be gotten in the secondary market?

As I've said earlier, it'll be *exactly* the same as stock options.

The fractional nickel cost is what WotC writes off as their salary expense.

The (vastly higher) fair market price is what the employee must use as their basis for IRS income taxes owed.

A representative program is dependent on the TOS/ Letter of Agreement.

As to taxing- It doesn't get taxed for volunteer work, but in some of these programs, such as what I take it from the Magic one, you DO have a training program which may be linked in there with a open question to the issue.

I've done this for several different games, and specifically, there was a Terms of Service agreement for the programs.

A side question to ask would be to know if these companies get a tax break for the use of these volunteers for the companies benefits.

At this point, those Judges will be Employees, and their cards will be treated as taxable wages, as payment in kind, at the current fair market (i.e. eBay) value. If I were a Judge, I'd talk to an accountant.

Or those judges will be employees, thus getting a minimum wage and WotC will stop giving out cards as incentives.

Oh, I think WotC would try and keep handing out promo cards - keeps their costs down and forces the extra tax burden onto individuals rather than the corporation. Everyone*'s a winner.

*who matters.

But the cards won't count towards the minimum wage, so getting rid of them would reduce the costs to compensate for having to pay minimum wage.

Excuse me, but why wouldn't those cards count toward minimum wage? The employee agreed to be paid in company scrip, not USD as payment in kind. And at this stage of the game, they have an established general market value. Now, if those cards turn out to translate into something less than minimum wage, then WotC would be liable for the difference. But if they're valued higher than the equivalent minimum wage, then WotC should be fine.

If I were WotC, I would simply allow all of those Judges to redeem their cards for cash at minimum wage for those hours worked. Simple and easy.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Excuse me, but why wouldn't those cards count toward minimum wage?

I was under the impression the law didn't allow people to be underpaid in exchange for goods. If that's not correct then my apologies.

If the value of those goods is greater than minimum wage, they they're not underpaid.

The fact that those Judges continued to voluntarily accept such payment for future work suggests that the value was at least fair, if not at least equivalent to minimum wage.

The only issue is convertibility, which eBay provides. As would the redemption process I outlined above.

Are you sure about that? I'm not that familiar with law but just googling...

Wikipedia wrote:"Scrip became illegal under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938."

It links to an artical on Cornell law, but not being a lawyer (and it being almost 4am and needing sleep ) I'm not sure how a couple of the terms should be interpreted.

§ 531.34 Payment in scrip or similar medium not authorized.
Scrip, tokens, credit cards, “dope checks,” coupons, and similar devices are not proper mediums of payment under the Act. They are neither cash nor “other facilities” within the meaning of section 3(m). However, the use of such devices for the purpose of conveniently and accurately measuring wages earned or facilities furnished during a single pay period is not prohibited. Piecework earnings, for example, may be calculated by issuing tokens (representing a fixed amount of work performed) to the employee, which are redeemed at the end of the pay period for cash. The tokens do not discharge the obligation of the employer to pay wages, but they may enable him to determine the amount of cash which is due to the employee. Similarly, board, lodging, or other facilities may be furnished during the pay period in exchange for scrip or coupons issued prior to the end of the pay period. The reasonable cost of furnishing such facilities may be included as part of the wage, since payment is being made not in scrip but in facilities furnished under the requirements of section 3(m). But the employer may not credit himself with “unused scrip” or “coupons outstanding” on the pay day in determining whether he has met the requirements of the Act because such scrip or coupons have not been redeemed for cash or facilities within the pay period. Similarly, the employee cannot be charged with the loss or destruction of scrip or tokens.

Magic cards aren't "scrip", though. Scrip, as I understand the term means you're being paid in some form that is worthless except at establishments run by the paying organisation themselves (like working in Tesco and getting paid in Tesco Clubcard points, for example). In this case, assuming it turns out to be legal, they're being paid in something that is accepted to have a value by the market at large. it's no different to being paid in shares, gold bars or sacks of spuds. The difference is that WotC pay fractions of a cent to print a card, which the Judge then sells on for $50. Much cheaper for WotC to do and the Judge is now liable for all the income tax (I don't know if there are taxes that companies in the US need to pay based on their employees, analogous to National Insurance in the UK).

The first card as payment-in-kind would be scrip-equivalent. However, now that there's an established market for those particular cards, with a relatively well-defined market value, the employee's time can be fairly valued against the value of the card(s) to be received.

As for what it costs WotC to produce, it's not really relevant in terms of compensation, unless the employee now wants to redeem their card(s) for minimum wage pay with COLA interest.

There would be some corporate income tax liability to WotC, and that would be retroactive. But I doubt there would be big penalties, as the law changed out from under them - most likely, the late payment penalties would accrue as of the date of the decision that made the Judges employees.

I was thinking more that WotC would be paying the judges, say "$50", while only spending 0.5c to do so.

If you got paid with the signed football jersey used by the Superbowl MVP, it might be worth quite a bit more than the what it cost the team to buy it.

In the UK it's explicitly illegal to replace pay with goods like this.

Magic cards have no fixed value and are dependent on a secondary market and forced scarcity. You can't give coupons of indeterminate value as wages.

I always love how people go straight to 'but what about people taking their wages in stock options'. Shares via salary sacrifice are legal in the UK, and you could potentially sacrifice your entire salary. I imagine it is similarly legal in the US.

Walmart was taken to court in 2008 for paying workers part of their wages in Walmart vouchers. It's companies who don't want to pay the minimum wage that do this.

Would this affect WOTC's other games? DnD in particular since they have a DM program.

This is why it is important first to establish are they employees or are they independent contractors. If they are employees they should be paid an actual wage, magic cards don't count towards that value as a wage. If they are contractors then they can accept other things in lieu of a wage, so if they agree to it then that is on them for agreeing to it.

Although magic cards have a value, it is a secondary value and market. The reason the card market value will not equate to a wage is because it isn't a stable value. $1 paid to me today, will more or less still be $1 in 10 years. $100 magic card today, can be $0.10 tomorrow or next year. There are multiple factors that effect and keep $1 at the value, while for a card there is only one factor.

Although you could compare it to stocks, stocks themselves are a primary market. There is a secondary market to stocks to where investors trade amongst themselves, but that is different than the primary market itself.

Does the nature of the market even matter? Aren't payments in the form of stock options an exception to the general law? Why would it apply to giving collectibles in lieu of wages at all?

Ben2 wrote:
In the UK it's explicitly illegal to replace pay with goods like this.

It just feels like something that should be illegal everywhere, it just sounds dodgy as all hell Is there examples of any employees being paid entirely in goods? I figure if it was legal I'd hear about a bunch of overweight fast food employees being paid in food

There's employee benefits and reimbursement in stocks and whatnot, but I can't think of any examples where this is the only form of payment such that the employee is earning less than minimum wage. They're usually offered as an incentive on top of a regular wage, not instead of it.

And if you do pay exclusively in cards, isn't it the responsibility of the employer to withhold tax? Normally for an employee with mixed income the tax for goods would be withheld from the cash portion, but if you pay them only in cards wouldn't they have to pay the tax man separately?

Like the cards, the actual taxable value of the employee's stock option is determined by the secondary market, not the primary market (which determines the cost basis for the employer).

It most likely doesn't matter other than establishing that although equivalent in value, they aren't equivalent as a stable wage.

If I read the law, like a MtG Judge would read a card. Then in the case of wages, it says:

Wages

The Department of Labor enforces the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), which sets basic minimum wage and overtime pay standards. These standards are enforced by the Department's Wage and Hour Division.

Minimum Wage

Current Minimum Wage: $7.25 per hour

Applies to workers covered by the FLSA

Effective as of July 24, 2009

Overtime Pay: Not less than one and one-half times regular rate of pay

Required after 40 hours of work in a workweek.

Certain exemptions apply to specific types of businesses or specific types of work.

Minimum Wage by State

According to the rules on the card, the wage must be an actual dollar amount. Although if it said "can't be X" then the can't would obviously win. However in this case, the card says "can" in terms of, this is a wage and what must be paid. And no where does it define "may take something else instead of wage".

It does state what it "can do" but also states what it "can't do" in terms of, the FLSA does not however require any of the following:

While the FLSA does set the minimum wage for certain workers, it does not, however, require any of the following:

Severance pay

Sick leave

Vacations

Holidays

The FLSA does not address nonproduction cash bonuses, payments that are not production-based. These bonuses are generally a matter of agreement between an employer and an employee (or the employee's representative).

Benefits such as educational assistance, life insurance, or travel accident insurance are generally a matter of agreement between an employer and an employee (or the employee's representative).

So the only place where it mentions "nonproduction cash bonuses" or other equivalent, although a matter of agreement it considers it a "bonus" which means on top of the actual requires minimum wage. I'd have to check but I'm out of time. I do believe as an Independent Contractor though it does state they can agree to other forms and methods of payment, unlike an employee relationship.

OK, I see. Due to the level of control, these will definitely be interpreted as employees instead of ICs.

As WotC won't be able to supervise them as employees except at the highest-level WotC-run events, the entire lower tier of Judges is going to disappear. The liability risk is way too high for a co-employer. Imagine, for example, that one of these Judges says or does something - suddenly, WotC is legally liable as a co-employer for the actions of their "employee".

I'm beginning to think a non profit between WotC and the events might have a lot of utility. Keeps WotC at arms length for liability reasons as well.

 OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:

 odinsgrandson wrote:

-The cards Judges got can easily be called of nominal value in a legal sense- the only reason that they're more valuable on the secondary market is due to the rarity (which is the point, right?).

But honestly, if they had a retail price, it would be pretty cheap.

The problem with that is I'm pretty sure they can't, especially when the IRS becomes officially 'aware' of a situation as is going to happen here with the court case,

I think this paraphrase (actually relating to their own art being given/donated by an artist even when the materials used are of negligible value not magic cards says it best)

"Now for the sticky part:

How do you determine the fair market value of the art you're gifting or donating?

According to Internal Revenue Code, fair market value is defined as "the price that property would sell for on the open market. It is the price that would be agreed on between a willing buyer and a willing seller, with neither being required to act, and both having reasonable knowledge of the relevant facts." With art, dollar amounts are not written in stone. Nevertheless, how you interpret or determine prices may well be scrutinized by the IRS which means that you have to be careful in stating dollar values."

so once cards that have pretty decent secondary market value become part of a 'salary' people who volunteer as judges and are working so have other taxable income may well have to think carefully about whether to declare them too

Except they aren't filing a W2 for cards if you get my drift. There is no legal proof anyone is receiving any card at any time in any quantity. So good luck enforcing a tax on them. Wouldn't be worth the man hours on the IRS side.

So these promo cards aren't mentioned anywhere in the documentation for signing up as a Magic judge? someone at WotC just hands them over in a brown envelope?

It might not be worth it when you consider an individual, but I'm sure there's something along the lines of conspiracy to evade taxation that would be worth the IRS' time when you look at the system as a whole.

 AndrewGPaul wrote:
So these promo cards aren't mentioned anywhere in the documentation for signing up as a Magic judge? someone at WotC just hands them over in a brown envelope?

It might not be worth it when you consider an individual, but I'm sure there's something along the lines of conspiracy to evade taxation that would be worth the IRS' time when you look at the system as a whole.

The people in this thread act as if the IRS is as big as the dakka community or has the same free time In reality, the IRS is TINY. My original post was only highlighting how unrealistic the idea of taxing promo cards is. More likely, Wizards is forced to stop giving out promo cards as gifts. But here's the other problem, Wizards give out regular gifts to the player base, for example alt art foil FNM packs and generally the judge keeps the remainder, how on earth would you track that? That's the real reason they don't want you bartering, big brother can't reliably get his pound of flesh from each exchange. It would be an absolute mess trying to prove the judges were keeping cards rather then giving them all out to players, in reality it would be impossible.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Further food for thought as well is this idea of the cards having a certain value? I mean, based on what? It sure as feth isn't who the artist is OR the rarity, I have mythics worth a buck and in the past uncommons like Blood bride elf or vampire nighthawk rings a bell that were worth several collars, both were promo cards BTW. So it is dependent upon a constantly shifting meta. You can't treat it like a commodities exchange, so how on earth would you deal with it?

Yes- in actuality, I think the Magic Judges cards are just not worth the IRS's time, and they fall well below the IRS radar.

The IRS doesn't just audit everyone all the time. They have a list of things that set off red flags, and audit based on that. Being a magic judge isn't knowledge that they have access to.

The IRS looks for large fluctuations in pay, large write offs compared to income and things like that. The only reason they MIGHT come after magic judges is if they win this case and are given HUGE bundles of back pay cash- and even then, I'm not sure it would happen.

And after all of that- it is even possible that the cards would fall below the auditor's radar (if either the judge did not sell them, or if he regularly buys and sells magic cards at profit, or if he just sold them for less than about $600).

The IRS doesn't really like to advertise this, but their omniscience is exaggerated.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Excuse me, but why wouldn't those cards count toward minimum wage? The employee agreed to be paid in company scrip, not USD as payment in kind. And at this stage of the game, they have an established general market value. Now, if those cards turn out to translate into something less than minimum wage, then WotC would be liable for the difference. But if they're valued higher than the equivalent minimum wage, then WotC should be fine.

Is it even legal for employees to agree to be paid in company scrip? I know that the practice was popular back in the 1890s, but I thought they made it illegal after Standard Oil and such got out of control (the company would pay employees in company credit, then mark up their own prices- and offer credit plans to their employees).

To be fair- the reasons why we have employee protection laws are a lot more terrible than what Wizards is doing. Actually, I got to live in Brazil for a while, where many employers will only hire 'off the books' thus allowing them to skip wage restrictions and benefits laws. And there are enough poor starving folks in the country that they can always find someone willing to work for less than what's legal.


Correct me if this sounds crazy, but I believe that stock options on small startups are different since you are essentially making the employee into a part owner. Is that correct? Because the law doesn't prevent company owners from overworking themselves without compensation.

And my understanding is that there are a LOT of laws about exactly how stock options are to be handled, so it is not unreasonable to think that they can be handled differently from other items.

If I were WotC, I would simply allow all of those Judges to redeem their cards for cash at minimum wage for those hours worked. Simple and easy.

I don't know that it is either simple or easy- but it definitely seems like it ought to be.

Right now, their stance is that Judges are just enthusiastic fans who have little do to with Wizards of the Coast. I don't think that will hold up, and I think they're likely going to settle this one before it gets out of hand.

 Red Corsair wrote:
You can't treat it like a commodities exchange, so how on earth would you deal with it?

Absolutely, you can, and it's the owner's responsibility to report the value of income to the IRS, and then to pay taxes on it.

It's not like people don't make income and pay taxes based on being a commodities trader.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 odinsgrandson wrote:
The only reason they MIGHT come after magic judges is if they win this case and are given HUGE bundles of back pay cash- and even then, I'm not sure it would happen.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Excuse me, but why wouldn't those cards count toward minimum wage? The employee agreed to be paid in company scrip, not USD as payment in kind. And at this stage of the game, they have an established general market value. Now, if those cards turn out to translate into something less than minimum wage, then WotC would be liable for the difference. But if they're valued higher than the equivalent minimum wage, then WotC should be fine.

Is it even legal for employees to agree to be paid in company scrip?

Correct me if this sounds crazy, but I believe that stock options on small startups are different since you are essentially making the employee into a part owner. Is that correct? Because the law doesn't prevent company owners from overworking themselves without compensation.

And my understanding is that there are a LOT of laws about exactly how stock options are to be handled, so it is not unreasonable to think that they can be handled differently from other items.

If I were WotC, I would simply allow all of those Judges to redeem their cards for cash at minimum wage for those hours worked. Simple and easy.

I don't know that it is either simple or easy- but it definitely seems like it ought to be.

Right now, their stance is that Judges are just enthusiastic fans who have little do to with Wizards of the Coast. I don't think that will hold up, and I think they're likely going to settle this one before it gets out of hand.

Sometimes the IRS goes fishing, and they also do spot checks. In this case, courtroom testimony will likely expose a tax issue that the IRS may wish to explore if only to make an example out of someone, just to remind the rest of us that we are supposed to pay taxes on these sorts of things. As one wise man said, "It's not about money, it's about sending a message."

I think that maybe "company scrip" isn't the right analogy, as there is an obvious secondary market to convert cards to cash, and, most obviously, the Judges don't redeem the cards against their company-provided housing or food allowances in the company store.

I think that stock options are probably the closest from a monetary standpoint, but the equity thing is very different, as you can work at a loss. OTOH, you have CEOs and the President saying that they'll work for a dollar... So there's some oddity from a minimum wage standpoint when you look at that kind of thing. Legally, could Lee Iacocca have run Chrysler for a dollar? Probably not without stock options. OTOH, Trump as President for a dollar? I guess it's OK if he doesn't disclose his finances.

Anyhow, I think a redemption (with interest!) will be part of the settlement.

Let's just say they are ruled as employees. That means that WotC would need to start issuing W-2 forms. So then WotC would be responsible for assigning a value to cards to create the W-2, right? (Yes, they'd determine it using the secondary market. But judge promo cards will now effectively have a set value.)

Let's go with something like assigning $50 value to every card. If you run one event a week, that is like $2,500 of income that WotC is reporting to the IRS. So if your tax bracket is around 15%, you are now responsible for paying about $375 to the IRS despite never actually earning a single penny in cash. Do you still want to be a judge? Especially if you're the kind of judge that trades your promos for other cards to build decks?

 Lucky Logician wrote:
Let's just say they are ruled as employees. That means that WotC would need to start issuing W-2 forms. So then WotC would be responsible for assigning a value to cards to create the W-2, right? (Yes, they'd determine it using the secondary market. But judge promo cards will now effectively have a set value.)

Let's go with something like assigning $50 value to every card. If you run one event a week, that is like $2,500 of income that WotC is reporting to the IRS. So if your tax bracket is around 15%, you are now responsible for paying about $375 to the IRS despite never actually earning a single penny in cash. Do you still want to be a judge? Especially if you're the kind of judge that trades your promos for other cards to build decks?

If they are ruled as employee's, the The Department of Labor enforces the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) which outlines at a minimum they have to be paid a minimum wage. In no-where in how or what an employer must pay an employee does it even mention something other than actual dollars (real money). The only place it does mention a product or something else, other than real money refers to "bonuses" which is something on top of the minimum.

Now if they aren't determined to be employee's and are instead Independent Contractors, then there is a different tax form for that. They could assign a value to the cards. This actually ends up being worse than an employee honestly.

If they are determined to be "volunteers", which I is a big if considering they are a profit organization. Then there would be other rules that would have to be stipulated by them. In other words they couldn't create "schedules" for the volunteers at events, they couldn't enforce or technically require certain 'training' levels. It is more of a gray area in many aspects.

None of this should effect in store volunteers, tournament organizers and judges since they do run the event. This would only effect larger events usually at a convention or regional level. However quite a few of those are handled by a 3rd party groups like Star City Games if I recall. It has been many years since I've been part of the Magic judge team so I could be wrong. I was never involved with logistics at Magic events. I didn't start getting involved with logistics until World of Warcraft TCG Darkmoon faire events, regional and conventions but that is a different company with similar circumstances.

I know that when my LGS runs events which actually merit getting Judges in - such as a PPTQ or higher, I think - the TO does make sure to pay the Judges he gets in with cash, rather than product. As well as making sure breaks are scheduled in, etc.

I think he's been doing that since the first PTQ (on the old event structure) he ran, and it apparently was a discussion point at the time that he was paying in money rather than a box of boosters.

 Lucky Logician wrote:
Let's go with something like assigning $50 value to every card. If you run one event a week, that is like $2,500 of income that WotC is reporting to the IRS. So if your tax bracket is around 15%, you are now responsible for paying about $375 to the IRS despite never actually earning a single penny in cash. Do you still want to be a judge? Especially if you're the kind of judge that trades your promos for other cards to build decks?

Yeah, that's pretty much it -- except that an IRS auditor may be the one assigning value, and who knows what will happen! You are taxed on the "fair market value" of your compensation, regardless if it's liquid cash, or a hard-to-sell collectible. Just ask all those taxpayers who can't pay their estate taxes and have to sell off the stuff they inherited.

Remember when great-grandma got a "free" set of kitchenware for opening an account at the local bank? Then she got a 1099 and had to pay tax on it!

That's why banks don't give out free toasters, and grocery stores don't give away free tableware / free serving sets / free encyclopedias any more!

Note, we got a full encyclopedia set!

Man I love coming to dakka and seeing accurate legal analysis. Thanks guys!

I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic, but I wouldn't assume Dakka's legal analysis is accurate. There are a couple of lawyers kicking around on the forum, I don't believe any of the ones who have identified themselves as lawyers have posted on this topic but maybe one of us is a secret lawyer

Yeah... I'm pretty sure we're all in the layman's arena here.


Best I can do is read stuff I find online (in the original post, I linked to a guy who does claim to be a lawyer, and he cites the case for the precedent set in terms of who is responsible for employee compensation.

He seemed to think that Wizards had no case, and that they'd best be settling the whole thing as quick as they can (he comparred it to a recent Uber case).



Actually, where this goes for me is to wonder what the legal status of a gaming support squad is. Press Gangers, Ninja Corps, etc. I would be very sad if none of them could continue to exist.

PP already dropped the Press Gang (possibly due to this case). I think there may have been significant differences between the Press Gang and Magic Judges, but I don't know enough about the law to know for sure.

You might be laymen, but most of what has been said is pretty accurate as far as employment law. Especially the "what makes someone an employee" and "What counts as wages."

 odinsgrandson wrote:
He seemed to think that Wizards had no case, and that they'd best be settling the whole thing as quick as they can (he comparred it to a recent Uber case).

First, I should make it clear that while I am a lawyer, I am not providing specific legal advice, and I am not your lawyer. I am merely providing general comment, and no attorney/client relationship should be construed.

The thing with cases like this is that they live or die in the motion to grant class status. If WOTC can block the plaintiffs from forming a class, that means there isn't a class action, and the damages go from all lost wages from every judge, to those that actually file a suit. At that point, WOTC can pick off the individual claims for pennies on the dollar, because if you're suing over minimum wage violations, you probably don't have a lot of resources, and $500 now is better than $5000 in a year. Very few companies concede the creation of the class, because the burden of proof is strongly on the plaintiff, and it's fairly cheap to litigate it. If they do get class status, then I would imagine WotC will settle quickly.

Actually, where this goes for me is to wonder what the legal status of a gaming support squad is. Press Gangers, Ninja Corps, etc. I would be very sad if none of them could continue to exist.

PP already dropped the Press Gang (possibly due to this case). I think there may have been significant differences between the Press Gang and Magic Judges, but I don't know enough about the law to know for sure.

This area is a bit greyer, but from my view, you can clearer distinguish the magic judges the WotC case really hinges on from Pressgangers and the like. Remember that the problem isn't the guy running Friday Night Magic or even a big prerelease at the shop. the problem is that the qualifiers and other very large events, had judges working long hours for no pay. In those situations, they appear not just to be "technically" employees, but also employees by a common sense standard. Because the organizer set the hours, and established all the procedures, and had a fairly tight control of how the judges acted, they appear to be an employer.

OTOH, when you look at a press ganger, they generally set the times they worked, they ran events as they saw fit, interpreted rules according to their own judgment, and provided all of their own tools. They look much more like a classical independent contractor. yes, they were compensated only in product, but that's okay for independent contractors.

If we look at the level of how totally kosher things here, here's a rough sketch:

At the top are when paid employees of a store or company run an event. Clearly employees, but also all rules are followed. This is pretty common at a lot of FLGS's, especially the bigger ones.

Next are where a TO uses store space to run an event. The TO represents a highly informal non-profit gaming club, and the store is donating space for their event. This is very common for 40k events. Sometimes there's an actual club, sometimes it's just the guys that game locally, but the TO can "volunteer" time to his gaming club.

then are situations where a TO is asked by a store, or a company runs a support program, to run an event, and may or may not be compensated with some product. This can be an independent contractor situation as long as the TO has broad discretion in running the event: setting the times, breaks, and format. This is also very common for 40k.

IMO, the above three are probably fine. You can be a paid employee, you can be a volunteer for a non-profit, and you can be an independent contractor.

Where things get murky are convention road crews, where they dont' really draw wages, but have expectations for hours worked, and the company has a lot of control. While people are comped in badges/lodging and maybe some meals, this is a pretty legit grey area. It's hard to call them independent contractors, because the company controls their work.

Next are judges or other event staff, who are not one of the primary organizers, working set hours, while not paid. At best, these are people helping a 40k TO, while also painting/hanging out for the day. At worst, their the magic judges.

As you can see, there is a really broad range of possibilities, and this lawsuit doesn't imply that support programs have to fold. in fact, it's worth pointing out that WOTC hasn't changed it's judge program, and they're the target of the lawsuit! I'd guess that PP wasn't seeing the benefit of pressgangers, and pulled the plug. I'd guess they're comfortable with people thinking this lawsuit was a factor, because companies making wronged people seeking redress appear the villians is a play as old as time.

Ok- so the class status is the meat of the game here.

Can you help us layfolk to know how that is decided?

I mean, it seems pretty straightforward to me that whatever is legal for a few Judges would be the same as for all of the other Judges (the rules from WOTC are the same for all of the judges).

What would they have to prove in order to obtain class status?

More or less they'd need to show that the wrongdoing of the company was widespread enough that the people in the class all have the same (or close enough) damages. They also need to show that the case(s) would be better litigated in one go, instead of with tens or thousands, or whatever.

I'm just pulling from law school. So what I'm saying isn't to be considered legal advice, and I am not an expert on class action suits. If you want to bring a suit, you need to contact an attorney in your state.

Thanks- I've never been a judge, do I don't need personal legal advise (I'm just a curious member of the community who wants to see how this might change things at my LGS).

Honestly, we know that there are many judges, and we also know that none of them have been compensated for their time. At least from what I've seen, all the arguments center around company policies that are applied to all judges.

What would be the argument against granting them class action status?

 odinsgrandson wrote:
Honestly, we know that there are many judges, and we also know that none of them have been compensated for their time. At least from what I've seen, all the arguments center around company policies that are applied to all judges.

Point of order - MTG Judges have been compensated, but the question is if a, the compensation was suitable; and b, whether they qualify for employment status, leading to specific employment benefits.

Ah, yes, you are right about the facts there. They may or may not be employees, and if they are they may or may not have recieved some worker's rights (though definitely not others- like breaks or overtime).


But we're at the meta-legal level now. The big question is whether this case will win class action status (as Polonius pointed out)..


Personally, I can think of how one would argue in favor of granting class action, but I can't figure out what the arguments against class action would look like.


Of course, my legal training is limited to high school debate class.

So- can anyone try and give us a good argument against granting class action to the Judges?

 odinsgrandson wrote:
So- can anyone try and give us a good argument against granting class action to the Judges?

The obvious one would be that they don't form a single class. There might be a case for the judges working at WOTC-run events like conventions or the pro tour, but the judge at a random local store tournament has no convincing claim against WOTC*. So if there's a legitimate class it would have to be the small subset of judges working under direct WOTC control, not all judges as the lawsuit seems to be aiming for.

*They might, however, have a claim against the local store that is employing them, but that would be a completely different lawsuit.

Thanks- that's a decent argument. Not all Judges are employees- only some of them (I wonder how large a class that would be, and if it would still pose a significant problem for WotC/Hasbro, or if they could handle that number just fine).


WotC have made the argument that local stores are Judge employers (it is implied in their official response to the lawsuit).

This was discussed by a lawyer whose blog I linked at the start. He dismissed this by citing cases where two or more organizations are responsible as employers. But even that could alter the landscape of the case (in some cases, Judges are LGS employees/owners who are being compensated for their time by the LGS).


But even at the local level, one of the things that Magic has going for it is the Friday night time slot. I mean, everywhere you go, the local stores have Friday Night Magic because that's how WotC have structure it. I honestly think that helps them keep their strong spot as a mainstay of gaming.

But that's also an extra layer of control that WotC exercises over the judges (ie- the hours of employment are not determined by the local store, but by WotC).

 odinsgrandson wrote:
But that's also an extra layer of control that WotC exercises over the judges (ie- the hours of employment are not determined by the local store, but by WotC).

But that's not really true. WOTC allows stores to use the FNM brand for friday night events, but doesn't set the exact hours, location, pay for the judges, prizes, entry fees, etc. Nor does WOTC choose which judge gets to work at which FNM event, as long as a store has a certified judge for the event they get to be sanctioned. And there are lots of sanctioned events outside of FNM that WOTC has no control over outside of the MTG game rules. The local store is 100% responsible for setting the hours (and other terms) of employment and finding a judge to take the job.

And... the initial answer is "Nope"...

A federal judge in California has dismissed a proposed class-action labor lawsuit brought in late 2015 by a man who says that he has now worked for more than 20 years as a "judge" in Magic: the Gathering tournaments and demands to be paid.

In the court ruling, which was issued Wednesday, US District Judge Edward Davila sided with the defendant, Wizards of the Coast. The judge noted that, while Paul Yale’s years of experience to master all of the details of the popular card game and to become certified as a tournament arbiter takes time and extensive knowledge, “the complaint makes clear that Defendant’s program is purely voluntary and could be abandoned at any time.”

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/08/real-judge-no-you-dont-have-to-be-paid-as-a-magic-the-gathering-judge/

I'm hoping this is one of those things where the quote doesn't accurately sum up the larger legal ruling because any job (with the exception of certain contracts I guess) is "voluntary and can be abandoned at any time".

The difference being that a "job" has a defined pay structure, whereas "volunteering" says upfront that you will NOT be paid salary or wages.

Yeah, I was just wondering how exactly companies can distinguish between volunteer work and paid work.


Ultimately, this ruling is good for the gaming community. It means that small companies that rally their fan base to promote their games aren't necessarily 'employing' them.

 odinsgrandson wrote:
Yeah, I was just wondering how exactly companies can distinguish between volunteer work and paid work.


Ultimately, this ruling is good for the gaming community. It means that small companies that rally their fan base to promote their games aren't necessarily 'employing' them.

They can define it in the contract

 Jehan-reznor wrote:

 odinsgrandson wrote:
Yeah, I was just wondering how exactly companies can distinguish between volunteer work and paid work.

Ultimately, this ruling is good for the gaming community. It means that small companies that rally their fan base to promote their games aren't necessarily 'employing' them.

They can define it in the contract

Dollars to donuts the volunteer registration specifically states that no employer-employee relationship is formed.

As a bitter and jaded ex-MTG player, anything that causes WotC financial harm or potentially kills MTG, however small, is a-ok in my eyes. Lets hope this gets reversed on appeal.

Here are some insider information behind what is going on with the lawsuit. I know the lawsuit is over for now, but this video gives decent insight as to what was really going on.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALBtNFep9nc&t=1745s

I finally got around to listening to some of that, and the argument is a little interesting. What's amusing is that the Wizards Judges are apparently all dorks who don't follow sports, or they'd have to be aware of the employment status of most NFL cheerleaders, and the amount of control that is exerted over them.