Jump to content

There's a Case to be Made for AGM Rights...


ColeMrtz
 Share

Recommended Posts

...but not in the way everyone else is pushing them. If you've been active in the discord the past couple of days, I'm sure you've seen bits and pieces of the AGM rights movement, and there's merit to both sides. The issue is everybody is arguing their "side" of the issue, rather than working towards a middle ground. That's what I'm here to do. So with that being said, let's tackle the biggest point of the AGM rights debate:

AGM's should NOT be paid.

You HAVE to look at the AGM position as an unpaid internship, because that's what it is. You get paid in experience, that should eventually push you into a true GM position in the future. The whole reason this debate is being shut down is the demand for TPE, which sure, I'd like a couple TPEs so I can actually cap, but AGM shouldn't be a paid position. This is true of real world internships as well, you get paid in the experience you gain, and that's what we should expect of the AGM position here. That being said,

AGM's SHOULD be an officially recognized position.

It was brought up by (I think) Beketov that AGM's aren't a real job, so they don't have access to much of anything besides the GM discord channel. Maybe that's all there is, but if there is more it makes sense that AGM's should be able to see everything a GM does for the above reason. If you're being paid in experience, you should GET the experience. Restricting AGM access to GM materials restricts the learning one can gain from the experience. In that same vein,

AGM's SHOULD (at some point in their tenure) receive some from of "training" from their GM's.

Obviously this doesn't need to be constant, it doesn't need to be immediate, but GM's should have an obligation to "train" or at least explain some of the GMing basics to their AGM's. If we treat this position as an internship then it only makes sense that some amount of responsibility falls on the GM's shoulders. It's the only fair way to establish this dynamic of unpaid intern in the AGM sphere. And as my final point in the AGM rights debate,

AGM's SHOULD have minimum requirements as far as work they will handle.

The AGM position needs a base, a ground zero of what is expected of them. There's unofficial requisites floating around from team to team, but an official position requires official rules. This bit may take more time than the rest of the points on here, as discussion among GM's and Commissioner's (and staff) are going to be necessary, but this way both GM's and AGM's have a pretty good idea of what they are getting into. Obviously things like setting lines and advising come as privileges to this position, whereas things like setting pressers would be a job requisite.

 

I figured with how the discussion in the discord was going I'd bring my take out into the open, and bring the debate to the forums where all members will be involved. Violently argue below and whatever.

 

522 Words

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AFAIK you can negotiate job pay with you GM, by sharing his. I really have no interest in job pay though, rather write an article to get to my 12 capped TPE (and GM/AGM pay should be capped, and I think it is?); but I think pay is a possibility if you GM is active otherwise and doesn't rely on the job pay.

I don't know, but I believe a lot of the trades and such are discussed privately, so it's up to your GM to let you in on that, tell you why he wants to trade like he does or ask for your input. I am not sure though, but like in real life every GM/coach will probably have his way of running the team. It would be neat to at least be part of other channels as read-only or something like that. Like having had the ability to follow rule changes discussions (if all GMs were involved in those - again, had I know those were going on I may have asked my GM to fill me in during the process).

The way I have taken my AGM position is that I should 1) help my GM where he wants, asks or needs help, 2) help players by being active in the locker room, answer questions, and generally being a positive force. 

Also, your GM can't really stop you from being active - but yeah, if my GM held me in the dark, didn't let me do anything, I would probably resign and just focus on my player and the team he is in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean, AGMs now have access to team management, so they can make trades and such. They have rights. Also, how come you think they don't need TPE, but they should have minimum requirements?Every AGM for every team serves a different purpose. Some GMs are very hands on, other's are more laid back. So that minimum requirement thing would be too difficult to enforce. I agree that AGMs should have 'rights' but they already do

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Matt_O said:

I mean, AGMs now have access to team management, so they can make trades and such. They have rights. Also, how come you think they don't need TPE, but they should have minimum requirements?Every AGM for every team serves a different purpose. Some GMs are very hands on, other's are more laid back. So that minimum requirement thing would be too difficult to enforce. I agree that AGMs should have 'rights' but they already do


Hah, I've always wondered what happens if I click on the red buttons. :) Good thing I didn't.

pKA2tiB.png

Edited by Elmebeck
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ColeMrtz said:

This is true of real world internships as well, you get paid in the experience you gain, and that's what we should expect of the AGM position here.

 

unpaid internships are actually illegal in some places and certainly aren't the norm where I'm from.

 

1 hour ago, ColeMrtz said:

AGM's SHOULD have minimum requirements as far as work they will handle.

The AGM position needs a base, a ground zero of what is expected of them. There's unofficial requisites floating around from team to team, but an official position requires official rules. This bit may take more time than the rest of the points on here, as discussion among GM's and Commissioner's (and staff) are going to be necessary, but this way both GM's and AGM's have a pretty good idea of what they are getting into. Obviously things like setting lines and advising come as privileges to this position, whereas things like setting pressers would be a job requisite.

 

Not sure how this jives with your point of not giving them pay. Are you really gonna ask the league to fire an AGM from an unpaid position even if the GM is happy with what they're doing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Commissioner
3 hours ago, Elmebeck said:

AFAIK you can negotiate job pay with you GM, by sharing his. I really have no interest in job pay though, rather write an article to get to my 12 capped TPE (and GM/AGM pay should be capped, and I think it is?); but I think pay is a possibility if you GM is active otherwise and doesn't rely on the job pay.

Correct. GM’s receive 2 TPE/week and can split that with their AGM if they wish so an AGM could get 1 a week if their GM wishes them to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ColeMrtz said:

Violently argue below and whatever.

Reeeeeeeeeeeeee

 

2 minutes ago, ColeMrtz said:

AGM's should NOT be paid.

Although I like the "GMs get 2, AGMs get 1" system best, I agree with this more than the current system. Either pay AGMs without penalizing GMs, or don't let AGMs have anything, without giving the GM a raise. GM pay is fine at 2; I could honestly go either way on AGM pay.

 

4 minutes ago, ColeMrtz said:

AGM's SHOULD be an officially recognized position.

Indeed. See below for my "perfect world" scenario in which there's an actual point to AGMing.

 

3 hours ago, ColeMrtz said:

AGM's SHOULD (at some point in their tenure) receive some from of "training" from their GM's.

...and this should be a requirement that EVERY GM has to satisfy if they hire an AGM. Having an AGM is by no means necessary, and there's nothing wrong with any GM who chooses not to. If a GM hires someone, and doesn't train them, and they don't ever end up contributing to the team or the league, then that is what makes the AGM position pointless. AGMing should be about learning the ropes, primarily, and helping the team, at a secondary level (at least in my opinion--some might disagree, but I'm very much against hiring AGMs with experience just to have someone who knows what they're doing run the team with/for you). If you hire an AGM, TEACH THEM STUFF. Enough so that, if something unexpected happens and, say, your internet goes out for a week, you can return after that time confident that the team will have been run well and effectively. There's absolutely a point to the AGM job, but a lot of the time it's misinterpreted as "I'm hiring someone so I can do less work," because, unfortunately, that type of thing does happen occasionally.

 

3 hours ago, ColeMrtz said:

AGM's SHOULD have minimum requirements as far as work they will handle.

Yes and no. A good AGM should be doing stuff, but what stuff that is should be left up to the GM. Can't really establish boundaries there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Elmebeck said:

Also, your GM can't really stop you from being active - but yeah, if my GM held me in the dark, didn't let me do anything, I would probably resign and just focus on my player and the team he is in.

I don’t mean to be rude but I’m unsure where you grabbed this from, Ive only been AGMing for a couple days so this isn’t based on personal experience, just my take on a current issue. Esso has been nothing but helpful thus far.

 

3 hours ago, Matt_O said:

I agree that AGMs should have 'rights' but they already do

The rights thing was just for the meme, I was arguing more that AGMs should be treated like actual interns if that’s the mindset we’re going off of

 

2 hours ago, Enorama said:

sure how this jives with your point of not giving them pay. Are you really gonna ask the league to fire an AGM from an unpaid position even if the GM is happy with what they're doing?

Not what I meant by that at all, I don’t expect the league to fire AGMs as they fall under the GMs in terms of hierarchy, but I was saying that if there was a set standard it would make more sense as an “official position”. Obviously the last bit has gotten some negative sentiment from most so maybe that’s an error in judgment on my part but it made sense to me.

 

42 minutes ago, GustavMattias said:

Reeeeeeeeeeeeee

This is the violence I was looking for

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, ColeMrtz said:

I don’t mean to be rude but I’m unsure where you grabbed this from, Ive only been AGMing for a couple days so this isn’t based on personal experience, just my take on a current issue. Esso has been nothing but helpful thus far.


I didn't mean to imply any of the kind, I was arguing in generalities, I know Esso is a great GM - it's why I signed - I just meant you can probably run in to GMs of that kind, and that's OK.
You as AGM have to decide if it's worth staying. It was not a put down on any GM at all, I don't think I have spoken to anyone not deserving of their place this far, just pointing out I am fine with a GM not letting their AGM doing anything (though as GustavMattias said, if you do take on an AGM, show him the ropes, or don't take on one).

Edited by Elmebeck
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...