• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Riot Games agrees to pay $100 million in settlement of class-action gender discrimination lawsuit

cormack12

Gold Member
Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/video-games/2021/12/27/riot-discrimination-100-million-settlement/

“League of Legends” publisher Riot Games announced Monday that it is settling a 2018 gender-based discrimination class-action suit with California state agencies and current and former women employees for $100 million. The company will pay $80 million to members of the class-action suit and approximately $20 million toward plaintiffs’ legal fees.

Riot Games agreed to settle the suit in 2019 for $10 million, but California’s Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) intervened, blocking the agreement with a court filing in which the agency argued that victims should be entitled to as much as $400 million. The DFEH posted a news release acknowledging the settlement Monday night.

The new settlement is with the DFEH, the California Division of Labor Standards Enforcement (DLSE) and certain individual claimants. All current and former California employees and contractors who identify as women and worked at Riot Games between November 2014 and present day qualify for a payout. At least 2,300 workers are eligible for part of the $80 million settlement, with those who started earlier or worked at the company longer receiving a larger allocation of the funds. Riot Games will pay into a settlement fund that will then be distributed to claimants following a court’s approval. McCracken settled out of the suit for an undisclosed figure. Riot Games declined to comment on whether certain individual plaintiffs who had entered arbitration agreements with the company would receive part of the $80 million.

As part of the settlement, Riot Games must be monitored by a third party for three years. That party will oversee human resource complaints, how they are handled and whether employees of all genders are being paid fairly. The third party, which could be an individual, must be approved by both the company and the DFEH. If the monitor discovers Riot Games needs to improve its practices, they can recommend changes to implement, which the judge presiding over the suit, Elihu M. Berle, may enforce.

While both sides have signed the agreement and filed with the court, they’re still awaiting final approval at an upcoming hearing set by the judge. No hearing date has been set yet.
 

ParaSeoul

Member
d4f.png
 

Lanrutcon

Member
They probably did around 1.8 billion in revenue (conservative) in 2021. They'll be fine.

The third-party coming in means that future complaints will receive more scrutiny, and then be even harder to take to court since it's not just Riot's word. There won't ever be a payout of this magnitude again for future "incidents". It would have been in future "victim's" interest to not have a third party looking at cases, because then they could just keep painting Riot as the evil corporation/boys club that do as they please, and the money would keep flowing.
 

Vagswarm

Member
Damn, that's a lot of money for a settlement. They were potentially going to lose even more if they continued?
 

MastaKiiLA

Member
You don't settle for $100M, unless you're facing a good chance of losing way more than that if things go to trial. Not solely in damages, but also in damaged reputation. But that amount of money suggests that there was serious merit to the plaintiffs' case.
Never understood women and never will. They want to be treated fair but act like a bunch of psychopaths.
The first sentence very clearly explains the second sentence.
 

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
Why work when you can sue them :messenger_winking:
That's the American way. Lose a lawsuit and some reason the payouts are like hitting the lottery. I remember an old article where someone got a haircut and the barber accidentally cut his head. Sued and won $8000.
Never understood women and never will. They want to be treated fair but act like a bunch of psychopaths.
Maybe, maybe not. Depends. Some are just clever and know how to milk a system or person for cash trying to do as little as possible.

Compared to guys, women like to sit home more, do crappier jobs, shop all day if they could and try to weasel as much cash off people/companies as possible. Just look at who the gold diggers and Only Fans typically are. Mostly women.

Guys are more like, forget that shit. I'll just get up in the morning and go to work at a normal job whether it's an office job, factory job, selling cars or being a garbageman. No job is beneath guys. If a dude needs work to pay the bills, he'll do it.
 

Orta

Banned
The suit came after gaming news site Kotaku published an exposé about a culture of sexism at Riot Games, where female employees were asked in job interviews to be “core gamers” and “League of Legends” players. In the article, women said they were turned away for insufficiently satisfying those criteria during the hiring process.

So women apply for a job at a games company and don't get the job because they don't play games? ffs, they should all be lined up outside the court and given a kick in the cunt each.
 
Last edited:

Jennings

Member
This is a drop in the bucket. And this won't scare off talent, because their most successful talent thrived in such an environment and like-minded talent will still apply.

I'm not seeing this as much of an actual punishment, but more of a symbolic gesture. $100,000,000 isn't enough.
 
Last edited:

The_Mike

I cry about SonyGaf from my chair in Redmond, WA
Sony has 3 major studios in California Naughty Dog, Santa Monica and insomniac. So when is Sony about to get hit? Feels like at this point it's not if but when.
As long as Sony release woke stuff they might be out of sight.

Naughty Dog has even been accused for being one of the worst places to work and no one seems to really talk about it.
 

Ballthyrm

Member
Never understood the US legal system, probably never will.
Such a litigeous culture where the only people who win are lawyers.

Giant sums of money change hands, nothing get fixed, you can often negotiate your way out of justice with money, what's even the point ?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fuz

JackMcGunns

Member
You don't settle for $100M, unless you're facing a good chance of losing way more than that if things go to trial. Not solely in damages, but also in damaged reputation. But that amount of money suggests that there was serious merit to the plaintiffs' case.

The first sentence very clearly explains the second sentence.


Works both ways actually. If someone is suing a Dr. for molesting their child, I doubt the parents would take a settlement, because it's about the child, not the money. Now, if they take the money...
 

JCK75

Member
Works both ways actually. If someone is suing a Dr. for molesting their child, I doubt the parents would take a settlement, because it's about the child, not the money. Now, if they take the money...

This is what almost made me suspicious about the Michael Jackson claims, it felt like nobody was after criminal justice but rather payment.
 

MastaKiiLA

Member
Works both ways actually. If someone is suing a Dr. for molesting their child, I doubt the parents would take a settlement, because it's about the child, not the money. Now, if they take the money...
There are a number of mitigating circumstances why people will take a settlement. Most of them stem from lack of funds to actually risk losing a legal battle. Since nothing is 100% guaranteed, I can't fault someone for taking the settlement money.

I understand what you're saying though, with regards to Riot Games settling because it's safer to settle than risk penalties and reputation in court. However, $100M settlements aren't small, and whether it's a few large settlements, or a bunch of small settlements, that amount of money in a settlement strongly hints at the case having merit. While Tencent is printing money these days, that's still an amount that they would fight if the odds were comfortably in their favor. You can fund a multiplatform game for that amount of money.
 

MastaKiiLA

Member
I am not American, what's the deal with California ?
Nothing. High taxes, but probably the closest place stateside to Europe, with regards to legal protections and welfare. Some people get really aggy about it, but then you realize that more people live in California than any other state, and that they have a crazy strong economy. So whatever the deal is with California, the rest of the country could use some of it.
 

nemiroff

Gold Member
I am not American, what's the deal with California ?

Former leftist Dave Rubin about California:


I spoke with Rubin to discuss the reasoning behind his move, which is undoubtedly symbolic of broader trends. He told me that individuals making choices to live in freer states is a “bottom-up” way to fix this country.

“This camel’s back has been breaking for a long time,” Rubin said.

“[Governor] Gavin Newsom is an unbearable tyrant, who dared to extend his emergency powers and then immediately take a $200,000 vacation,” he lamented. “Then he was just on The View promoting his children’s book… what emergency? And the people seem to want more of this.”

Rubin went on to cite vaccine passports, mask conformity, high crime, “human poop on the streets,” “overflowing trash cans,” and much more as motivating his exit. But he placed a particular emphasis on the role that high taxes and crushing regulations played in pushing his business elsewhere.

“We have the top marginal income tax rate in the country, 7 percent sales tax, our gas tax is 50 cents, and now they’re trying to push through a retroactive tax, an exit tax for rich California residents who leave,” Rubin complained in his video announcement. “They want to tax you for leaving! They stole all that stuff from you and now they want more because you make the decision to leave. California is the most regulated state in the country, with LA being probably the most regulated city in the state.”

As I previously explained on FEE.org, the terrible California economic policies Rubin is identifying are very real:


California has regulated and taxed its once-thriving economy into a coma. The state now ranks as the 50th-worst state to do business in, according to Chief Executive magazine’s 2021 survey. Meanwhile, the Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council ranks the Golden State the 49th-worst state to do business in. And the Tax Foundation reports that California has the 49th-worst business tax climate in the country.
 
Last edited:

ANDS

Banned
Not sure why the OP didn't include the second paragraph in the WP article which gives - very light - details of the original complaint and a link to the KOTAKU article which is a bit more than being about "psychotic women." Senior Leadership being emboldened enough to grab the genitals of male employees or musing about how they'd like to penetrate female employees seems a wee bit. . .not good. To say nothing of the stymied advancement through the companies ranks.
 

Tripolygon

Banned
This is how silly this gif is. If you rank the world by GDP and put California on it, it would rank 5th. So in this scenario, you want to cut off the world's 5th largest GDP which pays over $200 billion in taxes each year because some employees sued their shitty employer.
 
Top Bottom