MCrossS

They staged a walk-out, and we supported it. About 100-150 people went out of 2,000. Many people went to support the cause for passion.

What is this supposed to mean? Why are you trying to minimize the support the walkout got? People came forward to express fear of participating and being labeled "anti Riot". The people who did participate did so knowing there are risks involved (you'd have to be incredibly cynical to say there aren't) so you can assume a number of people didn't. Do you really think the walkout's premises were less popular because only 10% of the employees went? Do you really think that the people who went to express support somehow don't count because they don't really feel that way?

Staging an act against your employer, no matter how well meant, is a move that requires BALLS, commitment, a manageable workload ⁠— I don't know what you were expecting, but it was never realistic that a huge proportion of the company was going to walk out. It has no equivalence to the amount of people who agree with the premises, which also weren't just arbitration, rather had arbitration as its firstmost actionable measure to foster employee confidence.

Reading through your comments on the matter is incredibly disheartening, and exactly the reason why these things must continue to happen.

Sorry. I can see how I wrote it poorly. I clarified this in the other thread. My point is that the walkout was about a protest about mandatory arbitration, and my point is that 5-10% of people felt passionate about that topic.

If the walk-out was about expressing support for D&I at Riot, I'm sure you'd have pretty much everyone there.

TenTypesofBread

Hmmm... I think the thing we found was most important was emphasizing their utility as community support, and centering our values around that over value to the business in other ways (outreach, networking, whatever, though we still do those things). I think the events we have organized are generally better quality because our first question is to how this furthers our goals around advocacy and support rather than visibility/roi.

It's not always the case, but I try not to associate myself with high visibility, low impact work. Which is fine... it's self-organized so people can do disparate things under the same umbrellas.

Interesting, thanks for sharing. I think that we're empowering the groups to prioritize their impact and value.

potatorunner

In a not so dramatic way, if i'm applying for 20 jobs then realistically I want to be the most excited as I can about a company when I start (based off second hand information). If i'm not excited then I'm not putting in half as much effort, will entertain other options, etc.

People can only pour so much energy into an application and this kind of image just predisposes them to spend their efforts elsewhere (this was the case for me).

It makes sense!

ekjohnson9

If your executive leadership is not accountable then nothing will change. I appreciate that Riot has a very insular culture and for a lot of people its the only place they've worked. In corporate america the entire reason that you have a C-Suite is accountability. I've worked and do work for some very large companies and have had the privilege of a fair amount of direct face time with higher ups pretty early in my career. The core thing that differentiates quality executive leadership from shit leadership is accountability. Dont take my word for it, this is a common principle in the business world. My favorite book on the subject is "Extreme Ownership".

Full stop, the fact that your COO was "internally investigated" and allowed to continue speaks VOLUMES about the lack of true change.

Remind me when the next incident hits and I'll apply to COO.

I agree with everything you wrote here. And fun fact: Marc and Brandon love that book Extreme Ownership. I would be unsurprised if they haven't met Jocko.

The only question I have is: doesn't the facts/validity of the investigation matter in determining whether true change happened or not?

Blue_5ive

I'm happy that there's effort towards making a change, I'm just sad that an article had to come out to force it.

Honestly, there was work in progress before the article. But the article helped speed it up.

TenTypesofBread

Hi! Under similar circumstances, I helped organize a few ERGs at my own work, so I have related knowledge. :)

Haha... I could tell you had knowledge about it. Any tips on how to do it?

HatefulWretch

I think you underestimate the cost of doing interviews.

(I can tell you exactly what it would take for me to answer the calls I've had from Riot recruiters; Scott Gelb to have left the company and a complete removal of the arbitration clause for both individual and systematic discrimination of all forms, for both new and existing employees).

Appreciate the thoughts back.

PhAnToM444

I appreciate your courage in responding, and I am sorry if you experience any sort of hate because of this comment. I disagree with some of your takes, but I think it's just because it can be hard to understand public perception from outside of an organization. Here are my expanded thoughts:

1. As far as Scott Gelb, I also can't know what was found in his investigation or how legitimate that investigation was, but it really feels like a "where there's smoke there's fire" situation. What I do know is that there's a difference between my opinion on whether someone did something and whether there is proof to meet a certain standard. Sure, OJ "didn't officially kill someone" but I wouldn't want him to work for me — and I fully acknowledge that is a false equivalency but the spirit is the same. There's a point where you have to take into account that there's a very low likelihood that they're all lying, and that some of the accusations (like the infamous farting) are very hard to actually prove. Can you fire a guy for bad public perception and (probably) starting a toxic work environment from the ground floor? I don't know, that's up for Riot to decide and they made their decision.

2. Regarding the DFEH, again it's all optics. If you're facing extremely high profile allegations, you gotta try extra hard to not butcher things like this. And it feels like the DFEH isn't going to release a press release on it unless they're very confident that Riot was withholding information and thought the best way to get that was to apply public pressure. It could have been a misunderstanding, but Riot releasing a statement saying "no u" isn't particularly convincing when you're already in a precarious spot.

3. The arbitration one is really weak... committing to providing an opt-out for new Rioters and providing a firm answer (?) on giving current Rioters that option after current legislation is resolved is ridiculous. One of my best friends is a lawyer who primarily works on employment discrimination and landlord-tenant disputes... most of even her simplest cases take years to resolve if nobody wants to settle out of court. And even whenever all current legislation is resolved, they may not extend that privilege to Rioters who worked there when it was allegedly a toxic environment (hmm... wonder why). And even then it still bars litigants from a class-action and only allows individual sexual harassment cases. Again, not a bad business move but horrific optics.

4. I actually commend Riot a bit for this. I fully expected to see reports of alleged retaliation which we haven't seen. So, good on that. However, even your instinct was to minimize it. "Only 100-150 people" and "Many went in support for 'passion.'" Sounds to me like you aren't ready to acknowledge that like 10% of your workforce has serious issues with how things are run... enough to risk their jobs and reputations and walk out.

Look, I actually think that Riot probably is getting better. And I hope it is. But the optics from the outside are still not great, and I think with something like this you really need to be batting a thousand. You can't hand-wave and say "LOOK! We hired some people and started diversity groups" while still having these other skeletons in the closet.

Just my two cents from the outside. It might be great but it doesn't look all that great.

I agree the optics don't look great. But, honestly: our company screwed up and that screw-up shouldn't look good. It's going to be a long, complex walk for us to even begin to make up for the pain some people experienced. I think it's a worthwhile walk and so-far I think we're mostly making steps forward. Give us a few years and let's see where we're at.

Quick reflections back:

1) I agree with the general notion. What I see that you don't see is that there are a lot of internal cases that have been acted on at very high levels. It didn't matter that they were considered important for the business at all. The way the process is set up with the external firm doing the auditing, I don't know how anyone could protect someone. Basically I trust an impartial well-funded external law firm which only has the incentive to find issues to be the best at finding these issues. They found something, but it wasn't fire-able. I basically trust the process because I've seen it have larger consequenc...

mabdesaken

Hi dzareth, and thanks for responding so in-depth to my answer! I'm glad to hear you find Riot a great place to work! And I do believe that whenever I watch some of the behind the scenes videos of the music or artwork; For example the recently released BTS video of the pantheon rework. It is absolutely amazing to follow stuff like that.

However, keeping that in mind, the gaming industry is very young, these game companies have seen a great deal of success in a very short amount of time. And in this short interval of time they have to take in a lot of people. And I don't want to demonize all of Riot, and say that all they do is burn people out and fart in their faces (it is important to also try to remember that isn't at all the industry remains. Because of this rapid growth, it also means that if the people hired at Riot, Epic Games, etc. aren't unionised and can't defend themselves, some are bound to be screwed over by the company. And this doesn't even surprise me, this is a very common thing in the movie industry, where certain people are hired for a very specific purpose, where they just work 24/7 with low pay, and then are fired immiediately after, without anything remotely close to reasonable severances.

But I do know that this show, the patriot act, is also monetary so they need to get as many viewers as possible. So they might be noble and act as the guard dog for the smaller man, but they still need to gain viewers. This is done by dramatic statements and negative stories, and that definitely is very saturated, in terms of looking at Riot as a whole. But then again, it isn't their job to say "Hey Riot is a cool place, but sometimes you get farted in your face", but rather "WTF Riot get your shit together"

Yes, that monetary incentive of many groups should be why folks pause and consider the full picture. Honestly, I don't even mind the biased reporting... Riot has screwed up, and we get what we deserve as a company.

Just keep in mind that at Riot we don't really have crunch or temporary 24/7 then fired workforce. We have great employee benefits and healthcare. A great campus with great catering. Our salaries aren't quite as good as tech, but we're also working on our passions and have good work-life balance for the most part. There's great parental leave policies equal for birthing and non-birthing parents. We're responsible with the player money that we're investing--but we are looked after. It's not a perfect workplace. But, it is an open workplace where you can bring up issues and address them. It's because of all this that unionization is a complex topic... I'll just say I just don't think anyone has really made the case for it for me personally. I've heard a lot about it too. It...

[deleted]

[deleted]

Not sure. I don't think it's because it's too small though... It's a good question.

PhAnToM444

I think it’ll be interesting for other Rioters to see which issues are still bothering players the most. So if you comment below, just know that I see ya.

Alright then.

1. Your COO who was one of the most frequently called out people in this whole situation is still employed and there is no indication of anything special done in regards to changing his behavior as a powerful and visible person aside from 2 months off. He would have been fired in almost any other position or almost any other company. Way to go with "leadership accountability."

2. You got accused of lying to investigators and withholding information. After promising transparency that's a pretty big slap in the face.

3. You still have the forced arbitration. I get that it's a good business move but it's a terrible look, especially considering that...

4. Your employees staged a very visible walkout about it like a few months ago.

The narrative isn't changing because this shit is still happening, and very very publicly at that. The measures you are taking are great, but ultimately it feels like doublespeak because the things that people continuously raise issues with are being entirely ignored.

Gonna try, but this isn't the most friendly thread. Wish me luck, I'm trying my best here.

1) I don't know any of the details with Scott Gelb's investigation, but I do know Seyfarth Shaw investigated it and that we've seen action from the company leadership to provide consequences at all levels... it's hard for me to believe this was an open and shut case--there are facts that need to be considered and I don't have them and I work for Riot. How do you know with confidence?

2) Regarding the DFEH's press release that we withheld information, we refute that claim: https://www.riotgames.com/en/news/riot-games-refutes-dfeh for what it's worth I don't think they accused us of lying either...

3) We made a statement about mandatory arbitration that I found a reasonable balance. https://www.riotgames.com/en/news/commitments-on-arbitration-and-cultural-transformation Not everyone agreed, but that's life... I do at least appreciate the openness and transparency about the decision and the...

potatorunner

If we don't fix our image, it's going to become really fucking hard to hire the best people in the industry. And that'd be a damn shame, because this is actually an incredible place to work with a lot of potential to become even better.

I wanted to work at Riot games, and not to pat myself on the back I think I'd be able to add value. Now I don't ¯\(ツ)/¯

Well... it's our loss. One thing to consider is whether you might not get a better perspective actually interviewing and talking with the people you'd be working with and making the call from that. It doesn't cost you that much to validate it more tangibly.

Blue_5ive

Agreed. It's a little late.

But better late than never.

TenTypesofBread

Usually ERGs are self-organized. It's possible a Latinx one is in the works or simply hasn't been organized yet.

That's right TenTypesofBread (hi again!) the ERGs are self-organized, and they're new...

TenTypesofBread

One person making one sad comment does not count as a response.

I hear you didn't like my post... Sorry, it's actually hard to write about the topic. What would count as a response for you?

GuGuMonster

I did read the Kotaku article at the time, not having heard of the publisher, and the writing definitely had an agenda it was pursuing beyond just reporting and it could have been written better but it didn't take away from the importance of the topic.

However, I seriously wouldn't minimise the incident of farting in someone's face in a work environment to "probably between two friends." Also, it is uncertifiable by the outside public to what extent the link is PR and what is genuine. So it's probably more important to convince peers in the industry, rather than the general public because if every professional can shut down that this behaviour is no longer an issue, it'll change public perception. That said, retaining the COO and him keeping his position will always loom over the company and create scepticism.

I really don't want to minimize the event. I think it wasn't OK. I also don't know what actually happened. All I know is that nothing even remotely like that has happened anywhere near me in the last 4 years.

TenTypesofBread

Yikes, I wouldn't trust your subjective experience on the subject if your first words about it are to minimize the reported harassment of others.

I definitely wouldn't trust you to deal with a situation where harassment is taking place, or someone is looking to confide.

Don't pretend you have any idea what is happening in your workplace when you close your eyes to the possibilities.

I don't know where I rejected the harassment of others. Please let me know where. I will apologize and retract that part immediately.

I am saying that my experience is different. I say it as a minority.

There's a lot of context. A lot. And the minimization of our genuine challenges and opportunities to lame fart jokes isn't it for me. It just doesn't cut it.

Neville_Lynwood

You've described very well why I hate modern journalism.

Everyone is out to make a big story. And if a big story doesn't exist, they will force it into existence. And half the time the story is being pushed to force an agenda.

Like sure, the Kotaku piece was based on some actual issues (though very few people know the actual facts), and it raised some genuine concerns and paved the way for improvements within the gaming industry. That's all good.

But I cannot tolerate that it was achieved by straight up shitting on Riot from every single angle and making it look like all the 4000 employees have a fart sandwich for breakfast and dick pics for lunch and every woman gets groped at the door.

It pisses me off that journalism is 90% over-exeggeration in order to push an agenda, and if that agenda is viewed in a generally positive light, all the collateral damage is just fine and dandy.

I hate how the modern western culture has devolved into something where nobody is innocent until proven guilty any more. Now it's everyone is guilty at the first accusation, and even if proven innocent, their reputation is forever fucked because half the people remain convinced the original accusations were correct.

Literally anyone can report sexual harassment at work and it's usually one word against another so it cannot be proven one way or the other. But the company will have to deal with it regardless and if reported to the news, they can have a forever tarnished reputation, which is such bullshit.

Be optimistic too: the article has helped us to come to term with some real challenges and has spurred some vital cultural changes and improvements. A lot of things have been improved.

I personally believe that reports of sexual harassment at work are treated seriously and that appropriate investigations and punishments are taking place. For all parties. More importantly I think the process for making that process continually better is in place too, because nothing is perfect.

mabdesaken

I really hope this gains some traction in here, because this is one of the few platforms where Riot actually reads and listens to us(the customers, subscribers, etc.). And if we're able to show them that we care about the environment within their offices, it might just help.

One point I think is important to emphasize was the "why should I care about the game industry, I have it the same way..." perspective. This is so stupid, just because other people are treated like shit doesn't mean we should accept that and let it follow over to this industry too.

So it's genuinely a bad idea to respond to these threads because rip my inbox by people who assume everything they read is correct and don't have the nuance of context within the company.

As an individual not speaking on behalf of Riot who has had experience working at many companies, Riot has been one of the most fantastic work places I've ever been at.

I've been at Riot for almost four years and I honestly feel like the company has been a good place to work. The way I think about it is that there were very likely issues in the history of Riot well before I joined and that some Rioters have had what seem to be pretty rough things happen to them, possibly even today. But my experience is radically and diametrically different.

One thing I will say is that Kotaku's article has been a wake-up call to many and really has helped to provide fuel to cultural and just professional improvements that had been slowly coming along in the years before it. There has been a lot of progress: h...

Teh_Ocean

Blink twice if you’re being held at gunpoint.

In all seriousness, I’m just curious how long you’ve been working there, and if you’ve heard of other people who’ve dealt with issues at riot.

I've been at Riot for four years. Vast majority of people I work with are happy.

I'm not speaking for everyone, I am sure people have had a rough time. Many of the events described in the articles written were several years before I've joined.

More importantly Riot took the feedback really to heart: Riot has always been employee focussed and so we've made massive changes. I'm really quite optimistic and excited about Riot's future.