Topic: Should Employers Screen Applicants for Problem Gambling Before Employment? - page 3. (Read 1050 times)

I don't think employers should do any kind of problem gambling tests or similar, unless the job is at a casino or something.

There are many ways in which things can go wrong when you hire someone, not just problem gamblers, and you can't possibly test the employee for everything.

You need to have a proper face to face assessment of the person and see if he or she is able to do the job and if you're willing to trust that person. That's pretty much it. It's a bit of a gamble to hire someone, but that's part of being a human, it's a human relationship in the end.

Privacy is not absolute. If you're applying for a job, you will give your complete name, complete address, brother and sister's names, parents' names, wife's name, children's names, their birthdays, their jobs, their contact numbers, your schools, your religion, and so many other information about you. Moreover, you will be interviewed about your plans in life, your likes and dislikes, your opinions on things, your hobbies, and so on. The company would talk to your previous supervisor, your neighbor, your university teacher, your friend, and so on and ask about your life. You would also be sharing whether you have illnesses and certain physical conditions. They would even inquire whether you have tattoos and piercings in your body. And beyond what you directly provide, neuro and psychological exams even get to know your tendencies, your character, your attitude, your behavior on certain occasions, and so forth.

These information do not necessarily suggest whether or not you're fit to have the job.

I think it's a hassle for employers to do background checks. I don't know how employment works in other countries but here, employers are asking their applicants to provide Police Clearances and NBI documents. That document is proof that the person is free from criminal records.

And yes, I agree with your last statement that it's really unlikely that companies will screen their applicants about anything related to gambling addiction even if that department is more of handling money. What they are looking is if that person is really capable to do the works.

These kind of information are illegal in some countries to be obtained due privacy laws and it's clear illegal obtain such data.
Plus they can't save these information. or share with a third part.

in general most of the times it's well known if someone has gambling problem likewise there are some precedents on criminal records...
Or there are also other serious issues (e.g. coming late at job, appear violent with colleagues, taking big debts, etc)

That would be very George Orwellian to have to undergo detection for mind crimes, you could bet alot and it not be a problem.   The main thing employers sometimes do screen for is a credit check perhaps  in some jobs you cannot be in debt or suffering pressure financially because of the problem that might bring with it to your performance.  I know bank employees have to be extra vigilant on debt and be willing only to bank with their employee but in that industry its understandable.   Most firms its none of their business, at most a check on any prior convictions beyond that is paranoid.

A person lands into the act of stealing and similar things when he isn't able to make progress or meet his needs. As said, even the person who isn't involved into gambling does stealing of money. With addicted gamblers one day he could've made a mistake by playing with others money, and the same continues when he/she doesn't have the money to spend. Screening applicants for problem gambling won't be possible. Because, these kind of acts happen out of situation and not by intention.

According to the friend of mine who is addicted to gambling,  he told me that he doesn't really gamble, and does not feel it when ever he does not have money,  but the addiction takes its full force on him immediately money enters his hands,  to the extent that he feels restless until he has gambled the money away.

So,  what point am I trying to make from the above story?,  most addicted gamblers don't actually gamble when they have no money,  that is no job or source of income,  their gambling addiction grips them as soon as they start earning money or find a source through which they can be getting money.

So for me,  I think the screening for gambling addiction is not needed, as it will be difficult to catch an addicted gambler that way,  I can only suggest that the employer suspend or sack the employee immediately it is discovered that he or she is an addicted gambler and have been stealing from the company/employer.

Addicted to gambling or not, people would still do things like stealing or getting something which arent theirs which is totally the reality of this world.
People are different when it comes to mindset and plans that they do have in mind.Some do really wants to play fair and some wants the fastest way
on attaining things without doing much hard work and this is why they do really end up on illegal way.

For the instance that I have made, the game house don't allow anybody to stake for themselves but if it is above closely hours, you can play from somewhere that is not the company because you are expected to have closed.

No matter the field of the candidate or employees, whoever has the tendency of stealing will eventually go with that because it is on the blood.

Its really not of their business on asking out on things that you've been doing specially those personal choice that you do made.Its not their right on knowing it but since you are applying for a job then there's a

chance that they might be asking it and you dont have choice but to answer and its up to you whether you would really be that honest or would be simply ignoring and making lies in regarding to it.

Gambling is an activity or entertainment and there's nothing wrong if someone do make out involvement or not.Just make things everything on control and you are just fine.

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.


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.

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.

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.


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


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


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.


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

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.


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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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. 

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.