Bank employee gets fired for playing crypto games

[stompix]

Why is nobody reading the article?

The company’s internal audit found that the employee had also “engaged in inappropriate private money lending” with the bank’s loan clients.

This was the main reason that he got fried not his personal gambling alone, it was a matter of security for the bak since his losses made him turn into a loan shark offering loans to the same clients the bank had, would you keep a guy like this employed at your company if you were the boss?

Man was gaming on the job and OP thinks he was fired due to using crypto lol.

No, he wasn't! Even in the ruling, it was stated he did it outside work hours, but again, the problem was him contacting the clients directly for private deals.

[adultcrypto]

In South Korea, A bank employee was found to be playing online games that use crypto as its in game currency. The bank claimed that the employee is a habitual gambler and fired him from his job. The ex-employee naturally raised his concern to HR as he thinks it is unfair dismissal but the HR rejected his appeal which led him to file a lawsuit. In the end, even the court sided with the bank. Even though the ex-employee claims that he never played during work hours and that his habits did not interfere with his work quality, the court rules it to be undignified to be gambling with crypto.

If crypto wasn't involved, do you think this employee would have gotten fired?

There problem was not with gambling but I think it is one of those indifferent behavior from conventional banks that sees cryptocurrency as a threat. Most banks naturally do not like cryptocurrency as they see it as a threat to their control. In my country, some banks will freeze the account of anyone that put cryptocurrency in the transaction details which also shows that there is a kind of universal consensus among conventional banks against cryptocurrency. Although some liberal country will not allow the firing of the banker to stand especially as it has gone to court but in most countries, his fate will just be the same.

[Yucky]

Why is nobody reading the article?

The company’s internal audit found that the employee had also “engaged in inappropriate private money lending” with the bank’s loan clients.

This was the main reason that he got fried not his personal gambling alone, it was a matter of security for the bak since his losses made him turn into a loan shark offering loans to the same clients the bank had, would you keep a guy like this employed at your company if you were the boss?

At first, I thought it was unfair to fire him, since he claimed not to be playing during working hours but then I learned he was loaning money to clients to fund his gambling addiction. As a bank employee, he should have followed the rules, no crypto gambling as it's against their financial venture.

The bank had to act fast to protect its reputation. His actions could have made people lose trust in the bank, that employees gamble with their money and adopt crypto gambling in a financial sector . The court even sided with the bank, showing there was strong evidence against him that was beyond gambling.

It's not just about crypto gambling; there was more to it. The bank did what was necessary to maintain its integrity in the face of the public.

[GxSTxV]

Honestly it really feels like crypto itself added an extra layer of judgment here for that story especially. Traditional workplaces especially banks can still be pretty wary of crypto because of its connection with volatility and speculation. It’s almost like they hold a double standard and if he would been playing regular online games without crypto, would it have even raised an eyebrow for that activity?

This makes me and us all wonder if companies need clearer guidelines on what counts as undignified behavior outside of work. It seems unfair to fire someone over a private activity that didn’t interfere with their job performance and especially since he claims he wasn’t playing during work hours.

[AmoreJaz]

At first, I thought it was unfair to fire him, since he claimed not to be playing during working hours but then I learned he was loaning money to clients to fund his gambling addiction. As a bank employee, he should have followed the rules, no crypto gambling as it's against their financial venture.

The bank had to act fast to protect its reputation. His actions could have made people lose trust in the bank, that employees gamble with their money and adopt crypto gambling in a financial sector . The court even sided with the bank, showing there was strong evidence against him that was beyond gambling.

It's not just about crypto gambling; there was more to it. The bank did what was necessary to maintain its integrity in the face of the public.

You would think that the verdict was unfair but uncovering more details will give you the reason why the court sided with the bank as they have other valid reasons for firing him. If it is the reputation of the bank which is at stake already, definitely, the bank should do something to protect their interest.

So it was not all about because of his crypto involvement with the gambling site but more on the loan aspect involving the bank clients.

[Smartprofit]

In practice, an employer can fire any employee. To do this, it is enough to "take off the white gloves".

In many countries, the employee's rights are protected by law (Labor Code). In some cases, a trade union can intercede for the employee. However, in a direct conflict between an employer and an employee, the employer usually always wins (who can always involve the most qualified lawyers in the trial).

In this situation, it is also necessary to take into account that gambling using cryptocurrency is illegal in South Korea. The employee of the company did not gamble during working hours (however, he used a work computer to play).

South Korea is considered a democratic country, however, the laws in this country are very strict, and the courts often appeal to moral and ethical principles.

[EluguHcman]

As much s I know, cryptocurrencies is not banned in South Korea rather the government implemented a policy for financial institutes not to facilitate on Crypto transactions just as it has been in so many countries like Nigeria.

So I think the banker was termed guilty of gambling with Crypto because the management could sense it as a possibility for the employee to execute crypto transactions with the banks facilities which we all know it is against the policies.

If the employee has actually gambled on "Crypto casino", the charge would not had held him or if he has gambled on "crypto casino" while at home, there would not had still been a charge against him.

Apparently, the management just fear that the employee could afford to bridge that policy so they have to sack him.

[o48o]

In South Korea, A bank employee was found to be playing online games that use crypto as its in game currency. The bank claimed that the employee is a habitual gambler and fired him from his job. The ex-employee naturally raised his concern to HR as he thinks it is unfair dismissal but the HR rejected his appeal which led him to file a lawsuit. In the end, even the court sided with the bank. Even though the ex-employee claims that he never played during work hours and that his habits did not interfere with his work quality, the court rules it to be undignified to be gambling with crypto.

If crypto wasn't involved, do you think this employee would have gotten fired?

We don't have any other information then that crypto gambling is illegal in there. And trying to appeal to the fact that others play too isn't in any way an argument that would help the ex employee.

But if i play a devil's advocate here for a moment:  Even if crypto gambling would be legal, then someone with a job like "head of lending", would be soon flagged as they don't want that job to end up for someone who could be irresponsible with money, or could have gambling debts.

Bank relies on being trustworthy, and this gives a strong signal that they have ethical standards they want to keep. Because you want trusted law-abiding citizens to handle your money. If anything, having only employees with impeccable backgrounds and raises trust. This isn't an attack against crypto, this is just about optics. They want to send a message that they employ workers that following the rule of the law.

[Asiska02]

The employee shouldn’t have even gone on a gambling site during working hours, it will only show the bank how not concentrating he is on his work. If he’s a gambler and the site does not use crypto to bet, I don’t think it will stop him from being fired. The thing here is that, banks are not likened to gambling and will not want their employee to be an addict of it because of the position of job he’s into. We may also say that it was because the gambling site uses crypto to play bets that may have resulted to that, but there is no evidence whatsoever that may be the major cause of it. Banks are against gambling and they won’t tolerate their employee engaging in it because the addiction can lead to some setbacks for the bank if the employee can’t withhold himself not to transgress when he’s out of money and already addicted to it.

[Docnaster]

As an employee that's working for a corporate firm like a bank, there are some engagements that you're not expected to engage in during work hours as it breaches the conduct codes of your job. Again, I do tell gamblers that regardless of your profession, you should always be able to manage your time and know moments that you should engage in any gambling activity. I think the bank employee who was sacked for gambling rightly deserves to be fired since he/she decided to gamble during work hours. That's an unprofessional act and should be condemned by all and sundry

[Sandra_hakeem]

If crypto wasn't involved, do you think this employee would have gotten fired?

The fiat system doesn't have any correlation with crypto -- infact, crypto is on its way to replace 'em fiat currencies, which is why the institution decided to fire him for the insubordination.
Dude was only trying to entertain himself and, just like you said, it wasn't during work hours so I'm wondering how they got to realize this?

The employee shouldn’t have even gone on a gambling site during working hours, it will only show the bank how not concentrating he is on his work.

OP said his claims of not wagering on crypto games during work hours was what he defended himself with, so why are you saying he it was during work hours? Do y'all read properly at all?

Why is nobody reading the article?

Mhan, I'm sick of reading the same gibberish from these people... They don't even go through the links -- all they do is read the last comment instead of the OP.

[Hispo]

I think the back staff is wrong in this situation. If indeed the employee gambled money which was his own and it did not interfered with his job within the bank, then what is the problem?
Perhaps the bank was afraid that employee could eventually use his position in the bank to use the money of clients to further push his gaming habit to new levels, levels beyond what we could describe as reasonable, still they did not have any evidence such a thing could happen in the future.

To me, this is just another classical example or stigma and discrimination against crypto gamblers.

Funnily enough, I have got a friend whose sister works on a bank and all bank employees are pretty much brainwashed on thinking Bitcoin and cryptocurrency in general is evil and only used to commit crimes and conceal black money from authorities. 
That may be what happened to that man, his workplace was surrounded with ignorant people when comes to Bitcoin and gambling.

[Lida93]

Firstly, you got to inquire to know if crypto is allowed in such country. If there exists any restrictions by the government against its use in that country then you shouldn't expect the bank to do otherwise, especially being engaged in by their employee, the bank would have no choice than to fire him under many other excuses patterning to his work effectiveness as a result of him gaming while at workplace.

He should've been sent to the jail instead of got fired because he broke the country laws. There's no correlation between broke country laws and banks, the banks only don't want to accept employees who're gambler. Someone should check all the device that used by the banks CEO, he might also a gambler.

Assuming the extant laws frowns against gambling, the banks actually don't have that power to send him to jail or probably they didn't want to take it further not to raise dust about the reputation of their establishment regarding with the public might think about their workers as a whole

About the CEO, how do you know or come to assume such? Perhaps, he doesn't gamble and  abhors gambling himself which is what made them took such stand against the employee caught playing gambling games aside it been a crypto gambling thing.

[Silberman]

In South Korea, A bank employee was found to be playing online games that use crypto as its in game currency. The bank claimed that the employee is a habitual gambler and fired him from his job. The ex-employee naturally raised his concern to HR as he thinks it is unfair dismissal but the HR rejected his appeal which led him to file a lawsuit. In the end, even the court sided with the bank. Even though the ex-employee claims that he never played during work hours and that his habits did not interfere with his work quality, the court rules it to be undignified to be gambling with crypto.

If crypto wasn't involved, do you think this employee would have gotten fired?

It depends on the law but I think it could be very possible this was the case, we must remember that a person like that is trusted to perform its functions and even if they were under control of their gambling, doing so while being in such position could lead them to abuse it, an occurrence we have seen several times on the past, so banks are not going to take any risk and will fire any person they find to be a gambler, as they are legally responsible to protect the assets of their clients as much as they can.

[nimogsm]

most likely the management saw him as an unstable employee and saw him as a future threat. And where there are finances, everything should be strict, I see it that way.
In addition, there is a note from the court:
“Furthermore, since the  suffered a significant financial loss through gambling, it could have had a negative impact on their overall work efficiency. If an employee in the financial industry gambles, there is a high possibility that they will commit additional crimes such as embezzlement to recover their losses.”
They simply assessed all the risks and decided to fire him.

[mindrust]

I don’t like employees that play games during their work hours also. It doesn’t matter what kind of game it is. They get distracted and do stupid stuff. The customer sees that he is not interested in serving him/her and leaves the store/bank. Then the store/bank loses a customer and customers are money.

If you are at work, you need to work. Play whatever game when you are home. Otherwise you might lose your job like this banker in OP.

What were this guy even thinking? He is dealing with his customers’ money. If he gets distracted because of the stupid game he plays, lots of people might get hurt.

[aioc]

If crypto wasn't involved, do you think this employee would have gotten fired?

Cryptocurrency has nothing to do with the case; its more on trust and breach of ethics if here is on a contract that he will abide by the highest standard of character and part of this is not being addicted to any form of gambling so even if its not Cryptocurrency the employer will still fire him and the judge will still side with the employer, he should know that he could get fired if the employers finds out so he should be very discreet in playing.

[cabron]

According to the article, gambling is not the cause.

The company’s internal audit found that the employee had also “engaged in inappropriate private money lending” with the bank’s loan clients.

But I would say there is probably more to what is in the story, maybe he has some issues with his fellow employees in the bank and the dislike about him causes HR to be alarmed. The workplace is not a safe place when you commit violations, you just don't know who are his friends and foes.

[SmartGold01]

If crypto wasn't involved, do you think this employee would have gotten fired?

If I could remember correctly during employment or interview there is always a form filled by newly employee about gambling during hours this also likewise applicable to some other office work at my country especially my state were someone wouldn't gamble at work period or seen gambling in the working environment. Same thing is applicable to those who smoke, they warned many of their staffs not to smoke during working hours or either smoke inside bank. Any staff seen violation of most of their rules are mostly fired without given any grace and like banks I know the way they operate they don't usually gives second chance as they are more strict and straight forward than any other sectors.

[salad daging]

Maybe the bank has made a rule that employees cannot play gambling during their tenure, especially when playing during working hours, so this is natural if he is fired because maybe the head of the bank is afraid that this will become an addiction and it will be difficult to stop or have an effect on his performance.

Agree with others, that this is not a matter of gambling with cryptocurrencies but because he gambled and got caught, that's all.
I don't know if some banks may allow gambling as long as it doesn't interfere with work, but every bank in the country has different regulations so gambling is prohibited for their employees.