Bank employee gets fired for playing crypto games

[Dr.Bitcoin_Strange]

This is not about the problem of games involving crypto but because of the rules of the company and it seems that they are very concerned about his behavior which makes a strong reason why he was fired.

If it's the rule of the company, then the employee is at fault for playing around during working hours or for conducting some prohibited activities in the working environment. There are some company that doesn't want an employee to even perform a certain activity in the office premises, they don't care if it during work hour or free time but if such law is violated, it's an automatic sack. It happened to someone I know, who slept on duty and was warn twice but the last one was a permanent sack.

[delfastTions]

This is not about the problem of games involving crypto but because of the rules of the company and it seems that they are very concerned about his behavior which makes a strong reason why he was fired.

If it's the rule of the company, then the employee is at fault for playing around during working hours or for conducting some prohibited activities in the working environment. There are some company that doesn't want an employee to even perform a certain activity in the office premises, they don't care if it during work hour or free time but if such law is violated, it's an automatic sack. It happened to someone I know, who slept on duty and was warn twice but the last one was a permanent sack.

Yeah. Every company has certain requirements for employees. Somewhere they are tough and strict, somewhere softer. And this is especially true for banks and other business structures related to finance. Sometimes just a violation of the appearance or unkempt form of clothing accepted in the company are grounds for dismissal. By the way, banks usually have quite large salaries for employees, and there is also competition for jobs. And it is not surprising that an employee's passion for gambling, which the employer finds out about, is grounds for dismissal. Well, and even more so if the player played during working hours. By the way, in such matters, it is important to maintain the anonymity of the player so that the employer does not have reliable information about this employee's passion. And KYC checks almost always destroy such a player's disguise, which can clearly harm him both in stable work and when applying for a job and during an interview.

[bakasabo]

So what the corporate rules should be then? Dont gamble with crypto at work? First of all, if employee managed to access gambling site by using company device (pc, laptop, tablet), then its admins fault that he does not restrict them or even made it free internet access for a device that is used to operate with banking software. If that employee has used his own device to gamble at work, that is not really a crime. Bank can not interfere in employee life. As well as bank should not give a damn about employees hobby, passion, maybe even addiction, as long as employee does his job perfectly.

Every corporate have its rules and that will be different from one to another. But they have the same rules that will prohibit their employee playing gambling, whether they use crypto or fiat. They are work in the corporate, and if they are doing other things besides working, that still break the rules, right? Maybe that will not a crime but we must understand about the point doing other activities that is not related with your work description is not allow. So even if he using his own device to gamble at work will not be allow because he is still in his work/office. That will be different if he is in public area or in his home. The rules is something that all employee needs to obey and HRD can do anything if they found their employee doing something that is not as their work description.

Wrong. I have number of tasks listed in my work contract that I had to do. However, if I am asked, I do extra tasks. But, according to what you have said, even going to WC, drinking coffee or walking out of the office take a parcel. Employer can prohibit me to gamble at work on working pc, but he can not prohibit me to gamble on my phone. First of all, how can he tell that I am gambling on my phone, but not answering work phone call or texting about the work? By sneaking into my mobile? That is not acceptable and allowed. Just understand, work/office is not a jail where employees must strictly obey rules and get punished when they do something besides working.

I have a great example at my work. We have actuary, whos tasks are to do annual and quarterly calculations. His works is dependable from data he gets; his work is dependable from other people work. He isnt busy all day long. Sometimes he comes to office for few hours to watch video and read news. If he wants, he can come and gamble all day. There are even times, when he works 3-5 days a month and get monthly salary. However, he can not be fired. Because when audit starts, company future and success is highly dependable from his calculations.

[rachael9385]

The employer made the right decision, firing the employee might have been a tough move but it had to be done. I know an organization that was completely disorganized because some employees were using the resources coming into the account to gamble and at the end of the day 50 percent of those funds couldn't be replaced, this led to a complete downfall to the company. An employer gambling on duty shows a sign of incompetence and a display of someone that cannot be trusted. People should know when to do some certain things, while you are at work ensure that you focus on your job.

[Su-asa]

I came across something similar to this and it was a little disturbing, I don't think it's ideal for an employee to do this because a bank is always crowded with people that needs to be attended to, how can a worker attend to his or her clients when they are focusing on gambling. It's not proper to gamble during work hours and in such a financial institute gambling habits cannot be condoned. Most people might say firing the employee wasn't really nice but this isn't something that should be treated lightly, perhaps he wasn't expecting to get caught while doing that.

[Akbarkoe]

This is not about the problem of games involving crypto but because of the rules of the company and it seems that they are very concerned about his behavior which makes a strong reason why he was fired.

If it's the rule of the company, then the employee is at fault for playing around during working hours or for conducting some prohibited activities in the working environment. There are some company that doesn't want an employee to even perform a certain activity in the office premises, they don't care if it during work hour or free time but if such law is violated, it's an automatic sack. It happened to someone I know, who slept on duty and was warn twice but the last one was a permanent sack.

There are many companies that make such regulations, but we currently do not know whether the company really restricts the activities of its employees or not because it is not certain as a whole, or it is pure because the bank owner hates crypto gamblers being in his environment which causes him to be fired, it can happen in fanatical environmental situations.
Regarding your case, it is very natural and it is something that company owners should do to their employees who cannot be managed even though they have been warned carefully several times before dismissal.

[terrific]

I believe every organization has its laws and policy and if his reason for being sacked is never in the policy of the organization, then they should not have sacked him or maybe they sacked him because they don't support crypto. If the man knew it was against the company policy to do such activities during work hours, then he is wrong.

It's not about the company not supporting crypto. It's about what the employee did for doing something else while at working hours while getting paid by the company. Whether he knew any policy or not, it's obvious that your hours should be rendered for things related to productivity for the company.

Correct. Whatever reason he has either it's crypto gambling or he is just playing online crypto games while using the bank's computer then it doesn't matter. It's work hours and it means he must do his job. Obviously, he is not working because he also told the judge that he ain't crypto gambling but only playing crypto games. That's a stupid thing to say and maybe he thought he could save his job by saying that since the only accusation to him was that he was playing crypto games.
He just made things worse by saying that and he probably be blacklisted by the bank to other banks so that they won't hire him when he tries to get a job again.

That is wrong in all matters if someone has done that during the working hours. It is unreasonable and unprofessional to do that.
Sometimes, the headlines are making crypto look bad by just tagging crypto on the title of their stories.
But in the entire story and articles they make, it's about the mistake and corrupt practices of the people involved on their written articles.

[Huppercase]

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?

Let's even leave crypto games aside first. You are a banker and you know fully how banks don't like crypto activities due to conflict of interest from them and you couldn't hide it from them. He didn't think about that then couple with the fact that he gamble for a living. The bank saw a red flag and they dodge it immediately, no one can tell if he is going to use the customer money to gamble, it's possible and it's not but the bank has decide what they want.

I don't know if it's my toxic trait but asode my real guy that knows I bet on sports games, nobody around me knows that I gamble and it's not because I don't want them to know but people react differently when they know you gamble. I will rather do my thing with privacy than see your reactions, your awareness doesn't boost my chance of winning nether does it stop it from losing. Somethings are better left unknown by some people for your own good.

[I_Anime]

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?

This is like a sign of gambling addiction though he may not have noticed it yet , but his gradually getting addicted to it without him knowing, because if he was actually doing it for fun why must it he his working place , it would have done it else, or his apartment
But no he couldn't wait and the painful part he lose his job and the game he where playing there's no guarantee of him winning.

[uneng]

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

Yes, because what is being discussed here is the fact the employee was a gambler. The fact the platform he was gambling dealed with crypto is just a secondary detail in the story. If he were gambling only with dollar or any other fiat currency, the bank would have fired him anyway, because they were fearful of having an addicted gambler dealing with huge sums of money inside the bank. We never know what an addicted gambler might do in order to fulfill his compulsive desires for this practice.

I think the bank was on their right to dismiss the employee thinking on their customers' security and also on the bank's safety. Of course they could have adopted another measures, such as providing treatment and therapy for the employee, so maybe he could get rid of this addiction, but they decided to go through the easiest and most direct route with the support of the court...

Now the man is on his own and will have to find a new job. With a history of gambling addiction, it can be pretty hard, though. So he should do his best to overcome this addiction.

[STT]

The conduct in or outside work is what got him fired, a banking license is a sensitive thing in many regimes and if was contracted to stay away from gambling then that is enough for him to get dismissed.  His only path to strike the dismissal and claim compensation is the terms of the contract are unfair.   I find this path to be unlikely as banking is generally a sector demanding high standards in many different respects, an entire economy can be upset by a scandal in banking so it continues to be a sensitive topic.   2008 was an exaggeration of that topic but it should not be forgotten in any decade, then or now.

This is why he was dismissed as he broke a contract demanding strict behavior, his best path was to go IFA or some other finance route where he was self employed but within a bank its not uncommon to find these restrictions so he will not win imo.

[EarnOnVictor]

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

For habitual gambling a bank can prove against its employee, yes, it will be fine and fair to fire such an employee. But that must have been after many unyielding warnings, you don't just fire your employees anyhow. The court can side with the bank because if care is not taken, such an employee may be desperate to use the customers' money to gamble, we've seen cases like that.

Again, the bank must have enough evidence to back its claims, otherwise, such a judgment pronouncement against the guy is unfair. However, for the court to pronounce the judgment on the grounds of cryptocurrency is certainly unfair, for this, if it is fiat, it could have played out differently. South Korea is a country where cryptocurrency is legal, the judge may be an anti-crypto person, who knows?

[bakasabo]

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

Yes, because what is being discussed here is the fact the employee was a gambler. The fact the platform he was gambling dealed with crypto is just a secondary detail in the story. If he were gambling only with dollar or any other fiat currency, the bank would have fired him anyway, because they were fearful of having an addicted gambler dealing with huge sums of money inside the bank. We never know what an addicted gambler might do in order to fulfill his compulsive desires for this practice.

I think the bank was on their right to dismiss the employee thinking on their customers' security and also on the bank's safety. Of course they could have adopted another measures, such as providing treatment and therapy for the employee, so maybe he could get rid of this addiction, but they decided to go through the easiest and most direct route with the support of the court...

Now the man is on his own and will have to find a new job. With a history of gambling addiction, it can be pretty hard, though. So he should do his best to overcome this addiction.

Since when gambling or being a gambler turns to be a reason to fire a person? From the article we know that, this person does not gamble at work, does his duties at work, did not cause any reputational or financial damage to the bank. Then why the company use gambling as a reason to fire him. Why do even a company use non work related information to fire a person. If they were afraid that there is a chance that this person will use bank funds in gambling (which is impossible to perform and stay unnoticed), then they should not even hire him.

You know, this is as if you were fired because you are familiar with crypto and post on crypto forum, because crypto is used to purchase something illegal. Or purchase crypto while being at work, even if you do it on your own mobile. Same situation. I just replaced gambling with crypto. Dont you think this would be unfair and illogical?

[sompitonov]

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

For habitual gambling a bank can prove against its employee, yes, it will be fine and fair to fire such an employee. But that must have been after many unyielding warnings, you don't just fire your employees anyhow. The court can side with the bank because if care is not taken, such an employee may be desperate to use the customers' money to gamble, we've seen cases like that.

Again, the bank must have enough evidence to back its claims, otherwise, such a judgment pronouncement against the guy is unfair. However, for the court to pronounce the judgment on the grounds of cryptocurrency is certainly unfair, for this, if it is fiat, it could have played out differently. South Korea is a country where cryptocurrency is legal, the judge may be an anti-crypto person, who knows?

I often see such cases in the news feed. And of course, no client wants their money to be used like that. Probably the bank fired him because it was afraid that this employee could cause reputational damage to the company with such actions, which could cause them possible big losses in the future. But the problem is that the bank does not know if anyone else is playing, but still remains unnoticed, and in general this can happen to any bank and no one will be able to predict this, because it is impossible to read the thoughts of each employee.

[GigaBit]

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

The matter cannot be realized without knowing the real situation. There are many people who gamble but they don't gamble during work and some gamble even when they go to their workplace. A bank is generally a financial institution where people hold deposits and obviously that is recognize as sensitive place. But if any employee is proved to be addicted to gambling then the bank authorities must consider that matter seriously. Because no bank wants its bank's reputation to be ruined.

If the person is not an addicted gambler or is not gambling at work, how would others know that he is addicted or that he is gambling? I definitely think he gambled on duty too which is why such an allegation was made against him. I am not in favor of firing him without any prior confirmation. Authority should warn him first.

But what I found in the reference was that the work was related to unethical work which does not fall within the banking rules. He worked with bank clients on personal finance lines that no one would take lightly. It is logical to fire him in such a situation. But I think there is no big crime in gambling with crypto. But if crypto is illegal in that country then he can be prosecuted for it.

[Dr.Bitcoin_Strange]

I believe every organization has its laws and policy and if his reason for being sacked is never in the policy of the organization, then they should not have sacked him or maybe they sacked him because they don't support crypto. If the man knew it was against the company policy to do such activities during work hours, then he is wrong.

It's not about the company not supporting crypto. It's about what the employee did for doing something else while at working hours while getting paid by the company. Whether he knew any policy or not, it's obvious that your hours should be rendered for things related to productivity for the company.

If that was the case, I wonder why he would charge the company to court while he was the one at fault. Probably he have money to spend or just want to show off, because he can not be wrong and yet want to justify his wrongs. Who does that?

[$weetne$$]

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?

I do not think it was because of cryptocurrency being involved that he was fired but because he has a habit that might put his job at risk. There are many stories of people using money that is not theirs for gambling and losing all. Do you want somebody that can do something like that to be incharge of a business that deals with people money. It was a correct decision for the bank to fire him and this will serve as a lesson to others. The banks are playing very good enough salary, so why will the bankers gamble or is he lacking money. If he is gambling as a hobby, it would have been kept secret and not to allow it get to the attention of the banks. He would have been gambling during work hours for him to be caught and gotten fired.

[Akbarkoe]

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?

I do not think it was because of cryptocurrency being involved that he was fired but because he has a habit that might put his job at risk. There are many stories of people using money that is not theirs for gambling and losing all. Do you want somebody that can do something like that to be incharge of a business that deals with people money. It was a correct decision for the bank to fire him and this will serve as a lesson to others. The banks are playing very good enough salary, so why will the bankers gamble or is he lacking money. If he is gambling as a hobby, it would have been kept secret and not to allow it get to the attention of the banks. He would have been gambling during work hours for him to be caught and gotten fired.

permanent employees even getting a big salary will not be enough for them even if they have a high position in banking, and not everyone gambles to make money in casinos, maybe looking for fun and others as their goal of gambling, and you also need to remember that not all banks pay their employees with high salaries, it depends on the minimum wage area and many more things need to be considered to see the size of your view.

Since this story seems incriminating to crypto engagement, maybe it's true what I mentioned earlier that they don't like crypto in the environment they grew up in.

[Sim_card]

This is not about the problem of games involving crypto but because of the rules of the company and it seems that they are very concerned about his behavior which makes a strong reason why he was fired.

If it's the rule of the company, then the employee is at fault for playing around during working hours or for conducting some prohibited activities in the working environment. There are some company that doesn't want an employee to even perform a certain activity in the office premises, they don't care if it during work hour or free time but if such law is violated, it's an automatic sack. It happened to someone I know, who slept on duty and was warn twice but the last one was a permanent sack.

Violating your company laws is what makes it look as if you are a child and don't understand the meaning of law, because if you do, you should know that such action might lead to a sack. I don't see anything wrong in what the bank did to that young man, because his actions shows that he doesn't care about what the his bank will do to him if they find out.

[zuzie]

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

By concluding your story above, I think that this kind of dismissal action should be investigated first whether an employee really made a mistake by often playing online games during working hours or not. If the employee is caught playing online crypto games during break time and there is a friend who doesn't like crypto, maybe this is one of the factors that caused him to be fired because the friend has reported it to HRD and the company thinks that it is also gambling.
Indeed, an incident like this sounds very unkind to the employee who was fired, but there must be a special reason from the company that knows that their employee likes to play crypto so that the company takes a shortcut, namely direct dismissal.