Should Employers Screen Applicants for Problem Gambling Before Employment?

[dothebeats]

If I were applying for a position that is directly handling money for the company, perhaps I am subject to such screenings. But if my tasks do not include handling any money for the company whatsoever, I don't think this should  matter to them at all. I am there to work for them and be paid, and whatever I do with my salary afterwards is not of their concern so long as I do not tarnish or use their name to associate with my activities.

Employers should not treat their employees as if they own them. That's not how it works.

[GiftedMAN]

I'd like to know your thoughts -  Do you think that employers should screen potential employees for problem gambling before employment?

I don't think that will be necessary to do because a lot of gambling addicts do most of their gambling online only a few do it offline or physically. It will also be seen as an embarrassment to the employee as gambling is something that has to do with their personal lives, the only thing I would suggest in this case is to check their curriculum vitae then the company wishing to employ such a person can make a private investigation just to be sure if the person they wish to employ have good records it must not be based on gambling addiction.

[Gozie51]

The best is for the employers to take care of their business by making sure that no employee steal their money, gambling addicts are difficulty to know, if they want you not to know.

I think some game companies have done some restriction for their workers, they stop them from playing the games but to only concentrate on staking for the customers. This really works because no matter how they are tempted to stake for themselves, they look at the rules of not playing by themselves and this limit their involvement in the games which will also discourage them from playing with the company's money. The penalty for betting by employees is an immediate sake from the job if caught.

[Issa56]

If I own a company and my employee is a gambler I don’t really care but it depends on the position the person is heading in my company. If the employee is in charge of account section them definitely I will screen the employee out, I can’t really risk my funds with a gambler, have seen gambler’s doing illegal things just to make money to gamble, am talking from expensive, have seen people steal just because of money, so I can’t risk my money but if the gambler is not in account section then I don’t have problem with that.

[qwertyup23]

I feel like this is too much and its against basic human rights. You may think I am exaggerating this but think about this: People's hobbies are their private life outside working life. If you don't mix each other and mess your life you should be freely do anything you want. And all these so called scammer gamblers are scammers at first, gamblers at second. Being gambler doesn't automatically turn you into scammer/fraud. It is about personality.

There has to be some sort of balance in knowing the private hobbies of the person and their respective interests to the company.

Regardless, I think companies should not mandatorily infringe the privacy of their employees just because they gamble. Even if they have such hobbies but they still meet the expectations of the company, then I see no reason for these employers to screen their applicants. This should only be done if their output is hindered due to the intense and extreme causes of gambling addiction.

As much as this is favourable to the employee, employers should not screen but rather promote a healthy workspace that encourages different lifestyles. They should, in no case, meddle with their private affairs.

[ralle14]

I'd like to know your thoughts -  Do you think that employers should screen potential employees for problem gambling before employment?

I feel like there's no need for employers to do that even though there's a possibility for problem gambling to affect their employees it's still unlikely they'd destroy their reputation and career when the downside is much bigger compared to the little upsides they'd get if they decide to go there. For me if my employees are doing well regardless of the problem they have with gambling then it shouldn't be brought up unless it's starting to affect their performance in work as well.

[bitzizzix]

I think many workers or employees are involved in gambling, especially online gambling, and most of them only use their own money from salary.
to ask or some kind of interview to ask questions related to gambling I don't think they will be honest because it's their right, and only stupid workers or employees who commit theft or fraud in financial matters are taken to play gambling. And if I were their employer or boss, I would fire them and that would be the next lesson not to waste their work and not make the same mistakes.

[WeedGoW]

Definite "Problem Gambling"
Since that sound very vague and depend on what kind of people think about it. Some even consider one or two bets per week is a problem. Of course not, it was a very harmless and typical trick for HR to nitpick you and reduce your wage on the employment. I didn't realize HR can not cite "Problem Gambling" to shit on your CV for jobs. So what? We're on the same level of homeless or druggie now?

[jrrsparkles]

This is not only related to gambling, people often stole their company money in different forms and for various reasons but people who did for to satisfy their gambling urge may not even close to 0.1% of all the reasons we get from thise employees once they get caught. Employers should have better financial structure to avoid these kind of actions from employees.

[Fredomago]

I feel like this is too much and its against basic human rights. You may think I am exaggerating this but think about this: People's hobbies are their private life outside working life. If you don't mix each other and mess your life you should be freely do anything you want. And all these so called scammer gamblers are scammers at first, gamblers at second. Being gambler doesn't automatically turn you into scammer/fraud. It is about personality.

There has to be some sort of balance in knowing the private hobbies of the person and their respective interests to the company.

Regardless, I think companies should not mandatorily infringe the privacy of their employees just because they gamble. Even if they have such hobbies but they still meet the expectations of the company, then I see no reason for these employers to screen their applicants. This should only be done if their output is hindered due to the intense and extreme causes of gambling addiction.

As much as this is favourable to the employee, employers should not screen but rather promote a healthy workspace that encourages different lifestyles. They should, in no case, meddle with their private affairs.

In most cases, company that have a strict background checking will be asking for this kind of information but like you I also don't agree
that employee should be asked regarding to this kind of private information, sort of hobby or a part of being entertained. If the person still meets the qualification, just allow him to fill the position and let him do his work.

Personal life should be taken a part from the business side, interfere only if there's already a problem that occurs which affecting the employee functionally around the company.

otherwise, if he's not being affected, then let him do whatever he wants he deserve the salary and it's on him to where to take it.

[noorman0]

It seems that most people do not agree with the inspection because of the right to privacy. But if we look at it from an entrepreneur's point of view, this will still be a problem especially if something like this has happened before. In fact, no matter how private workers are about their personal activities, the problem is that gambling addiction can lead to potential crime in the workplace. More selective acceptance of employees must still be applied and does not mean rejecting them without any consideration at all. There are several methods that can guarantee that everything will (at least) go well, such as confiscation of employee original documents as long as they are bound to become employees.

[madnessteat]

^

I don't agree with you. Even if a person is into gambling it does not mean that he is irresponsible for work or money. There are plenty of professional poker players who are no worse than employees who do not gamble. 

In general, I think it's not just a breach of confidentiality but rather the fact that an innocent person is discriminated against by this approach. 

[YOSHIE]

I'd like to know your thoughts -  Do you think that employers should screen potential employees for problem gambling before employment?

Cases of theft and gambling by workers as the OP mentioned, are common in every country, especially workers in private companies, where there are several cases that end up in law enforcement and end up behind bars.

Speaking of worker screening, at first the employer thought the person was good, of course many employers didn't know the worker was gambling or not, in general, It was discovered that after several months of work the company's money was often lost and the bookkeeping was not appropriate, for that in my opinion, there is no need for filtering, what needs to be done is: installing CCTV at points and company rooms, especially cashiers, the possibility of theft can be avoided, if workers are also addicted to gambling, Of course he would use their salary money, without losing the company money.

[Daltonik]

Well, it seems to me that it depends on the field where the candidate who is hired works, and since in reality gambling addiction can become a significant problem for the employer if it is related to the employee's access to finance or some kind of information in critical areas.

[ChiBitCTy]

In short, NO! There first off isn't any way that they would be able to do so.  Secondly, it's none of their business what they do in their off time outside of work if it's not illegal and doesn't effect their job performance in any way.  Employers do enough nonsense when it comes to making hires, such as drug tests ...so this is hard no for me.

[poldanmig]

Well, it seems to me that it depends on the field where the candidate who is hired works, and since in reality gambling addiction can become a significant problem for the employer if it is related to the employee's access to finance or some kind of information in critical areas.

I don't think the company has the right to restrict its employees from gambling outside of their work activities, but the company has the right to prohibit their employees from gambling if indeed they do gambling during working hours, I think, gambling is a personal right as long as he doesn't harm other people or the place where he works, however, if the gambler has used the money and gave the company a loss just because of his gambling activities, of course the company has the right to fire him or even demand compensation from the employee.

[coolcoinz]

It's not up to employers to check background of employees. If they're gambling at work, sure, they can be fired, but this is pretty much the case with all else. If smoking at work is forbidden and they smoke you can fire them, but you can't fire them for smoking at home and they don't have to tell you if they smoke at home. It's their private thing and so is gambling.

Well, it seems to me that it depends on the field where the candidate who is hired works, and since in reality gambling addiction can become a significant problem for the employer if it is related to the employee's access to finance or some kind of information in critical areas.

You're wrong. They cannot ask for specific behavior and if they do you don't have to answer. It's like if they asked you if you have a girlfriend. It's private info they can't ask about it.

[Slow death]

I'd like to know your thoughts -  Do you think that employers should screen potential employees for problem gambling before employment?

in every country in the world there are laws, and in this part of laws it is well divided to the point that there are labor laws, even if someone owns a company, that person cannot say: " are you addicted to something? " that type of question in the job interview may lead the job seeker to file a criminal case in court and the court will order the company to indemnify the person who was asking for a job because it understands that you cannot discriminate against people, people have the right to do so. When the company hires someone, it is hiring an employee with X, Y and Z skills. The company cannot be investigating people's personal lives.

This is another job for HR and probably will not take this seriously and since I’m close to our HR the company I’m working with is not looking for this kind of addiction, they are purely looking for the skills, experiences and educational background in hiring people, gambling history is not their priority because I believe it’s a personal matter though it can only be investigated once the employee is exposed to money transactions in the company, I believe they should be more strict to this one to avoid any problem like this.

even if the person is hired and steals money, this task of investigating is the task of the police because it is a crime, the company has no right to investigate the personal life of employees

In my opinion employers should have the right to select the employee's profile they want, because after all it's a p2p deal between both parties exclusively which shouldn't involve anyone else. If a businessman doesn't want a gambler on his payroll, that is his right to not want to hire gamblers, even if they aren't problem gamblers, there is nothing they can do about it.

The same is valid for another aspects and characteristics including age, gender, health conditions... Not every companies will use this metodology when choosing their employees, though, so it's not a big issue if a gambler is denied by one of them, since there will be still many others where he can apply for a job.

again: all countries in the world have clear labor laws, and all companies must respect these labor laws, a company has no right to discriminate and judge anyone's life. the company has nothing to do with employees' private affairs, what happens outside the company is not the company's responsibility. for example:

when a person is hired to be a director of a company, cannot that person be addicted to drinking? how many people are addicted to alcohol and drugs and are presidents of big companies? there are a lot of people. But why aren't these people fired? the answer is simple: because these people behave well at work and the company has no right to interfere in the personal affairs of the company president

It is usual for a business owner to want to know the background of his employees to avoid problems that could occur in the future.

no, this is against the law, the company cannot investigate the private life of employees, this can be considered a crime and can lead the company to pay a heavy fine. from the moment an employee leaves work he has the right to do what he wants in his private life. if the person is addicted to alcohol, sex, gambling, these have nothing to do with the company, they are private matters for the employee.

It seems that most people do not agree with the inspection because of the right to privacy.

Governments have put clear labor laws, a company has no right to interfere in employees' private lives, this is clear in labor laws. The company hires employees based on skill. look as an example:

how many people do you see leaving work and then going to drink? there are a lot of people. and we all know that most of these people are addicted to alcohol

[Daltonik]

I don't think the company has the right to restrict its employees from gambling outside of their work activities, but the company has the right to prohibit their employees from gambling if indeed they do gambling during working hours, I think, gambling is a personal right as long as he doesn't harm other people or the place where he works, however, if the gambler has used the money and gave the company a loss just because of his gambling activities, of course the company has the right to fire him or even demand compensation from the employee.

Yes, of course, the company does not have the right to prohibit employees from gambling outside of working hours, but they have the right not to hire people with gambling addiction if it can somehow harm the company's activities or image, depending on what position the employee is applying for.

[serjent05]

If I were applying for a position that is directly handling money for the company, perhaps I am subject to such screenings. But if my tasks do not include handling any money for the company whatsoever, I don't think this should  matter to them at all. I am there to work for them and be paid, and whatever I do with my salary afterwards is not of their concern so long as I do not tarnish or use their name to associate with my activities.

You got a point but often times people with addiction often messed up their work.  The company does not concern with how the employee spends their salary but the effectiveness of the employee during their duty and how they abide by the regulation of the company.  So to avoid unnecessary headaches, the employer checked the background of their employee even asking for a good moral certificate, police clearance, medical clearance etc.

Employers should not treat their employees as if they own them. That's not how it works.

Well during working hours, employees are supposed to dedicate their time to their work because they are getting paid for it.  And background checking does not mean employers are owning the applicant.  This is just for safety measure.