I found this article which I thought was interesting: Police officer sold his family’s gold bars to fund gambling addiction
Assuming one does the gambling outside of work hours, should gambling ever be cause for concern in employment? I guess it depends on the type of job but interested to know people's thoughts. Also I don't see the difference between having a gambling debt and having a mortgage? You could argue both put someone at risk of doing something illegal in order to pay it back.
https://www.accountantsdaily.com.au/business/17611-accountan…
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-11-23/woman-pleads-guilty-t…
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-08-11/tax-accountant-james-…
"if you have ANY access to employer funds or accounts, yes, your gambling should be of a concern to your employer."
@try2bhelpful too
100%, an employee gambling outside of work hours should be of a concern to an employer.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but when else would they be gambling regarding work hours?
So every punter in the casino is a concern to whoever they work for???
when else would they be gambling regarding work hours?
During? Betting apps on their phones for one. During the day at the casino, there were plenty of suits walking around and gambling. I am sure that a fair share of them would have been in there on company time.
So every punter in the casino is a concern to whoever they work for???
No, of course not, but some of them, absolutely. Some people have self control and gamble with what they can afford and have fun… some, on the other hand, cannot exercise any self control and gamble with money they don’t have or don’t own. So no, not “all” gamblers are a concern, but yes, some who are developing an addiction certainly are a much higher risk, especially those with, again, access to employer account and funds.
Also I don't see the difference between having a gambling debt and having a mortgage? You could argue both put someone at risk of doing something illegal in order to pay it back.
Behavioural differences. A compulsive gambler is looking for big win to pay it off. A mortgage holder is looking at a portion of their income to consistently pay it off. It's why money launderers use casinos and not the property market, they can reliably lose 10% of their funds but come out with "clean" cash.
You can be a functioning gambler, like you can be a functional alcoholic (been there). The problem is the risk/reward calculation that goes on. A problem gambler isn't looking for a consistent income to pay off their debts, they're waiting for the big one. One that will never, ever come. Mortgages aren't about looking for a quick win, it's about having a long-term debt strategy based on income. Even if you do something illegal it's actually incredibly hard to pay off a mortgage with that - there are $10k cash limits on deposits, income is taxable and traced, deposits are traced, it simply doesn't work well. But a problem gambler, it's all about hitting the big one.
I worked in big 4 audit. Included a casino audit - which meant I wasn't allowed to gamble in the state that casino was in (I was put on that audit specifically because I didn't gamble at that time). You simply don't win at a casino. If you rack up debt and your plan is to pay it off via winnings then you're a massive risk to everyone. Anyone with gambling debt should stop ASAP because they've already proven they can't win money gambling and there's no evidence that it'll change - unlike housing which has significant evidence of housing prices increasing over time.
Honestly, you need to take a really long look at your life if you think gambling debt is ok. Gambling as fun entertainment is fine, much like never winning money on a cinema ticket. Gambling that creates debt? You're already (profanity) and you don't seem to have realised it yet.
Also I don't see the difference between having a gambling debt and having a mortgage?
Look up equity.
We are in agreement here. The house can be sold if the owner can’t meet their mortgage. With gambling there is nothing.
Some interesting data:
Australians lose more money than any other country in gambling.
Annual losses per person are around AUD 1,635.
That's twice what Americans lose, and $300 more than the next country, which is Hong Kong.
The high figure is driven by Australia’s unique saturation of poker machines (pokies) in local venues and aggressive advertising across media.
Half of all gambling losses in Australia are via pokies.
76% of the world’s pub and club poker machines are in Australia, despite us only having 0.3% of the global population.
In FY 2020–21, Aussies lost around $12 billion via pokies alone—about $608 lost per person.
In FY 2022-2023, that figure reached $14.5 billion, of which $8 billion was lost in NSW alone.
Interestingly, while Hong Kong has the 2nd highest gambling losses per person globally, this is partly (indirectly) the responsibility of Australian businessman James Packer, who built 2 huge casino resorts in Macau (only 60km from Hong Kong), where many Hong Kong people go to gamble (Hong Kong has no casinos).
Even 'indirectly' it's a bit of a stretch. There were already 10 to 12 casino licenses in Macau before Packer built his reosort/casino. And there's around 41 now, of which Packer has a financial interest in zero. He had (i.e. doesn't now) a financial interest in 2 or 3 licenses (depending if you count Studio City) which were sold to Blackstone group. Also I'm 100% certain that not all gambling by Hong Kongers is done at legal venues in Macau. Many wealthy Hong Kongers fly all over the world, including to Australian casinos, to lose their money. So the average gambling losses by Hong Kongers will be higher than those data suggests. And that also means, depending how the gambling losses are calculated, the average annual loss per person in Australia cannot be attributed only to Australians, considering many casino users are not citizens or residents here. Nevertheless the average is likely to be much higher if you exclude people who strictly do not participate in gambling activities.
So the average gambling losses by Hong Kongers will be higher than those data suggests.
Wouldn't that also apply to Australians?
And that also means, depending how the gambling losses are calculated, the average annual loss per person in Australia cannot be attributed only to Australians
Wouldn't that also apply to other countries? Also, how do you know how the data I cited was calculated?
considering many casino users are not citizens or residents here.
Half our gambling losses are via poker machines and the overwhelming majority of those are not in casinos, they're in regular pubs, etc. Also, pretty sure a lot of Australians' gambling losses are via horse races or sports betting, most of which is not done at casinos.
Nevertheless the average is likely to be much higher if you exclude people who strictly do not participate in gambling activities.
You're right about that.
Also, how do you know how the data I cited was calculated?
I don't. Care to share the source and methdology?
I'm agreeing with tenpercent here (which is unusual). In HK gambling tends to go through the HK Jockey Club, which operates as a monopoly. Lots of HK other betting happens overseas- Macau or international so it doesn't get reported.
In Oz, most betting is done inside the country. People are not flying overseas to play slot machines, they are heading to the pub or the RSL.
Oh dear. You're back. I thought you were perma banned.
Yes. The average gambling loss for people who do not participate in gambling is $0. Including people who do not gamble in a statistic for 'average gambling losses' artificially inflates the denominator and therefore reduces the reported number.
@tenpercent: Yeah, I didn't need you to spend an extra couple of sentences confirming you understood what an average is, but I guess even small accomplishments are worth celebrating. You absolutely nailed it!
A totally unnecessary comment, and unfair criticism of tenpercent. I'm not sure why you feel the need to be so condescending, without offering anything of value to the discussion (unlike tenpercent, who has raised several valid points).
@soaringphoenix: It's probably just a difference of opinion.
I thought it was facile, but I got through a lot of the exhuberance of understanding those concepts back when we covered the subject in school in Year 7. But I know we all haven't had it so easy (for some Year 7 is the hardest three years of their life) so if you found that stuff an interesting addition to the discussion, I'm happy for you as well, I guess?
Thanks for your feedback.
@Crow K: Whether or not I personally gained any value from the contribution is irrelevant. In fact, I specifically stated that the points were valid, not interesting or enlightening.
Nonetheless, even if only an incredibly small percentage of individuals gained only a small percentage of value from the comments, there is still nothing to be gained from your condescending criticism.
I trust you'll disagree, naturally. I get the sense that we're not really debating, and that this is a subtle contest of egos - yours earlier, and now mine.
@soaringphoenix: Well, you though they were valid and I thought they were facile, and thus our opinion differs like I said.
If you are pushing the barrow of "but Crow your own unnecessary comments didn't add value to the thread", then I would suggest that's something you have recently done, and ask you to show me the same grace and concessions you allow yourself.
You've offered me feedback on my tone and I acknowledge and thank you for it.
@Crow K: Good point - I troll quite a bit on here for amusement. That's probably selfish of me. That said, I do so by feigning ignorance, and never direct harshness or criticism at others.
I'll update my position. My comments indeed have zero value, but the issue is that yours (on this occasion) had negative value in spreading negativity by mocking someone.
I don't mean to do the same thing to you, so will leave it there. If you want to continue discussing, feel free to message me directly. All the best.
@soaringphoenix: Yes, I don't think there's much mileage in measuring our comparative evils. I understand that you find it distasteful if I use a condescending tone and criticise, and you understand I find it distasteful if you intentionally waste people's time and energy with selfish trolling and so on. We are back to having different opinions (which is fine).
All the best to you too.
Half of all gambling losses in Australia are via pokies.
This is so dumb!
Aussies should have more class and at least lose it on short term options like wallstreetbets. At least there is more intelligence to it and a chance of success, with a similar thrill.
As opposed to a mathematically guaranteed loss playing low quality UI of spinning wheels.
I reckon it is actually a small portion of the population losing all this money via poker machines.
Hong Kong Jockey Club
Also I don't see the difference between having a gambling debt and having a mortgage?
Hahahahahahahahahahahaha
Deep breath
Hahahahahahahahahahahaha
Also I don't see the difference between having a gambling debt and having a mortgage
Wild to think that you can't figure this out
Our quality education system.
Don't blame the teachers for the crayon eaters.
To be fair, some teachers are really sh**house.
But the system is broader than just teachers and crayon eaters students.
The syllabi are also inadequate.
There's also a lack of discipline and inadequate disciplinary procedures.
And let's not even get into the woeful and warped funding model.
Blame the crayon manufacturers.
(But the schools really do suck here.)
With gambling the house always wins. A friend called it a tax on those who don’t understand statistics.
You hear sbout court cases where people steal thousands of dollars from an employer to pay for a gambling habit, you don’t often hear of ones where they do it to pay off their mortgage. With a mortgage the house could be sold to compensate the loss, with gambling it is just gone.
With a police officer a gambling habit could make him susceptible to corruption.
With gambling the house always wins.
I see what you did there!
So what you're saying is a mortgage debt is better than a gambling debt?
with Mortgage, the win is the house
Absolutely. Wth a mortgage you have a saleable asset to cover at least most of the debt.
The mind boggles that this not obvious to the OP.
Also I don't see the difference between having a gambling debt and having a mortgage? You could argue both put someone at risk of doing something illegal in order to pay it back
With gambling, you owe the house.
With a mortgage, the bank owns your house and can sell that big fat juicy asset to get their money back.
Don't forget this Saturday, horse #6 race 1
If a cop will steal from their own family to gamble more, who else would they steal from?
Drug dealers and criminals… they aren't exactly going to go to the authorities.
no, but then that means he is also stealing from the public as he enables those drug dealers and criminals to continue on rather than get locked up where they belong.
Used to work with some cops. The pattern is the ones that hang around long enough hang around criminals and become criminal minded themselves. The good ones don't last and retire or get shoved in to the background roles.
sounds like working in mental health where sometimes you cant tell who is the patient who is the nurse
Used to work with some cops.
Were you a cop? Or a robber?
I believe the term is asset removal technician, some operate in the attended asset market segment, others specialise in unattended assets.
Can't trust (problem) gamblers and drug addicts.
They'll steal off their own kids.
Addictions are varied.
Gambling, BTC, stocks, hookers, coke, meth, mull, OF subscriptions, Labubus, how is a company to monitor all these and end my employment if it is excessive?
I would be rather cheesed off if I was let go because of my never ending endeavour for the golden Labubu.
I hired a guy years back who told me that he had a gambling problem. no problem for tow years, and a small amount went missing, He cofessed and was walked. I still can't comprehend the state of mind that made him do it.
The other one was a lady I hired for accounts payable. she was great and asked if her husband could be hired as a field service contractor. Most employees were staff
Employees didn't have Accounts Payable Invoices posted against their jobs, but contractors did, so she started allocating Invoices to her husbands account. He was roundly praised for his performance for a couple of months.
Who knows or cares if it was gambling?
I was once told that when it comes to staff
10% will never steal
10% will always steal
80% Opportunity
I was once told that when it comes to staff
10% will never steal
10% will always steal
80% Opportunity
That sounds entirely made up (by whoever told you or whoever told them)
"78% of statistics are just made up" - Abraham Lincoln, 1904.
What's your point?
It's called the10-80-10 Rule and fits into standard business practices just like the Pareto Principle, except in Bureaucracies
I have an Ozbargain principle called the 1-100 Rule, where a commentor's ratio of Posts to Comments is less than 1%.
That swuggests that such Ozbargainers have nothing to add to the pool of knowledge, biut plenty of uninformed criticism
10-80-10 Rule
Okay. 10% will never steal. 80% will always steal. 10% opportunity
See what I did there?
My gambling addiction is to buy computer parts from HN.
Generally I get a win every 11th part…
Gambling, in all forms, and lying about it, is a red flag in vetting for security clearance.
They dont care that you buy lotto once a week, they care if you lie about it, diminish it or fail to see how the behaviours and debts can be leverage against you.
And for those reasons, gambling is a problem for many jobs
And for those reasons, gambling is a problem for many jobs
More surprising how many people posting here don't understand why gambling addiction would be considered a risk in a number of job industries.
It's legal and outside work hours it's none of the employers business.
This is an unacceptable mentality for a wage slave. Your employer owns you. Act accordingly.
/s
Separate to the questions in OP, the article really begs the questions:
Haven't heard anything about it in Victoria. but is the source involves any government body, you may get the full weight of the law.
A couple of soccer punters got caught over a yellow card scam. They were very lucky. Even the AFL Brownlow Medal voting is sacrosanct and every minorirregularity is fully investigated
His job is to uphold the law, the minimum is that he doesn’t commit significant offences himself. Some employment contracts have conduct clauses.
Who allows and facilitates all of this legal gambling in Australia?
Who takes a big cut of the profits?
Take a guess…
Would you actually be OK if the gov passed laws to ban pokies? You won't consider it violation your freedom ect?
Quite happy to.
Pokies bring poverty and distress. The goverment profits from that.
People that are addicted are actually enslaved, so they have already list their freedom.
Pokies are not a freedom.
Pokies are an utterly constructed 'freedom' designed only to maximise profits at an individuals vulnerability and expense. That's not freedom.
Of course. Some people here consider any kind of regulation from the gov violating their "freedom" and right to destroy their life.
The RSL Clubs?
Back in the day all the cash was taoen to safe upstairs when i worked at coles
I had a manager who stole about 50k before they realised to fund his gambling addiction
officers with a gambling compulsion are at risk of exploitation by criminals.
Perhaps if the police officer didn't have access to family funds, he wouldve had to pay the debt through other means, like favours. When you have a behavioural problem, which an addiction is, you'll do whatever to get the fix. It's a serious issue that has led to suicides.
It's good that you mention 'addiction'. Addiction is a disease, or disorder, depending on your school of thought.
And denying employment or indeed firing somone because they have either a disease and disorder is unlawful under the Disability Discrimination Act.
Granted there are exceptions and it "may not be against the law to refuse to employ a person with a disability if, because of their disability, they cannot perform the inherent requirements of a job". However a gambling addiction does not necessarily prevent a person from undertaking the inherent requirements of the job (not all gambling addicts are thieves, for instance… let's not go down the path of pre-crime policing… maybe he would have done or will do X, Y, or Z if this or that were true, etc) and where it does impact ability to perfor requirements of the job then "reasonable adjustments to help them do the job" should be explored.
officers with a gambling compulsion are at risk of exploitation by criminals.
It depends on the job. It probably would not matter if it was a low level employee who is not involved in finances, or in the position that can be exploited by criminals. The cop is an enforcer of the law, policing the very criminals who he may owe money to.
Ignoring these risks and red flags will just build more distrust in the gov and the police.
in the position that can be exploited by criminals
You're making unfounded pre-crime-esque assumptions about the person in question in this story. And so is the commisioner making assumptions about the person in question and more broadly anyone else with that disease/disability.
@Ughhh: All police officers are in a position where they can be exploited by criminals. Doesn't mean they will be.
@Ughhh: …… dude. Do you realise you're othering a person with a disease/disability? Your reasoning suggests that all people with that disease/disability should be treated as if they are guilty before anything has happened because of their disease/disability.
They would have to be diagnosed with it first and accept that diagnosis for your statement to be true.
Australia have surprisingly relaxed regulations on gambling. The only thing that isn’t allowed is online casinos. I have travelled to a number of countries and nowhere have type of pubs with pokies and betting machine and with that many people like Australia.
well online casinos exists but just not operated in Australia but people can still access it here
yes pokies in the pub is quite an Australian thing
We got 0.3% of the world's population but 18% of all poker machines here
We got 0.3% of the world's population but 18% of all poker machines here
Aussie Aussie Aussie!
Going for gold!
/s
Gonna play the slutz
At the last bank I worked for, we had a branch manager who ended up in prison because of her gambling addiction. To feed her habit she was taking small amounts from the ATM topups, and because she was ATM custodian and balanced it herself it went undetected for quite some time. In addition, she was "helping" her older customers when their term deposits matured - her "help" consisted of getting them to sign withdrawal forms so that she could help them roll their funds into a new TD, then she was siphoning off funds out of the TDs.
That's one example of why gambling can be an issue for employers to look out for.
Also I don't see the difference between having a gambling debt and having a mortgage?
Bank's not going to come round and break both your legs if you don't pay….
Banks do contract goons to threaten people
A mortgage isn't an addition (at least I haven't heard of people using it as one), Gambling is an addiction for a lot of people, if you are in debt from it then it is a serious problem and with it comes a lot of potential negative behaviour associated with that, it is why it is something that is looked at if you are after a security clearance as it is something that can easily be leveraged against you. So yes for many jobs Gambling debt is a serious issue that they care about even if done in your own time. It is also truly scary you don't see a difference between a gambling debt and mortgage.
You seriously don't see the difference between having a gambling debt and having a mortgage?
The cop was 1.2million in debt to a criminal, yes this is a concern.
Exactly this, when a loanshark or organised crime has a police officer in their pocket its serious cause for concern.
Same as sports players not being able to gamble, they get into debt then have to throw games - quite a massive issue in the NBA right now.
Surely OzBargainers, by definition, don’t gamble?
The lesson learnt as a young, poorly paid 1st career jobber is surely enough - that take home pay after paying tax is so pitiful, how the hell could anyone afford to gamble what’s left?
Gambling like anything else is on a spectrum from a punt on the Melbourne cup once to pathological. In this case it was pathological and criminal. Gambling is not an investment. It just gives you temporary gains but show me a numerable section of society who have consistently had a better life because of gambling and not just a one off.
and criminal.
What was the crime? Have any charges been laid? Has anyone been found guilty?
thank goodness I live in WA where seeing pokies is always a win ;-)
yes gambling is a red flag for employers as there are too many stories of employees embezzling company funds to pay for their gambling addiction.
I once stayed with a young woman who was CEO of an international company, on a very high salary, and living in a penthouse overlooking Sydney harbour. I wondered where she went every night …
Later I found out she had a gambling addiction on the pokie machines, had embezzled maybe half a million dollars in company funds, and was not only kicked out of the penthouse, but also deported from Australia.
So sure gambling is fine if you don't mind LOSING EVERYTHING …
Of course it'll be a factor. Even as a normal working citizen in society… if I see my solicitor, financial advisor, mortgage broker, or the dude I'm getting renovation quotes from in the casino I ain't continuing my business with them.
Lets say the tradie just lost 5K in the casino, yeah nah no problems lets just tac that onto the carport construction invoice as "unexpected costs". Then it'll turn into charging people for say 10M of copper tubing to relocate an aircon installation but only actually needing/using 5M. Then stealing/hogging scraps from construction sites. And then ultimately just charging customers full cost upfront and never actually starting the build at all. It's a downwards spiral.
I used to work in a bank and of the cases of staff dismissal for stealing I knew of they were all related to gambling and this was before the prevalence of Pokies and Online gambling we have today. So yes it should be a cause for concern. One of the cases was one of the lowest acts I could imagine taking advantage of a vulnerable person. They went to Jail for it.
of the cases of staff dismissal for stealing I knew of they were all related to gambling
But did all bank employees who were gamblers engage in theft?
Also I don't see the difference between having a gambling debt and having a mortgage?
A gambling debt is between you and the lender. No money is created and no inflation occurs because of it. The money you receive already exists.
A mortgage is between you and the lender and every other person in the country. Money is created by the bank when the 'issue' you the loan funds. The money you receive did not exist before you received it. This inflates away the purchasing power of every other dollar in existence and so is effectively a theft of wealth from every other person.
Gambling can become an addictive disease much like it's more commonly known cousins of alcohol, smoking, dope, other drugs and unhealthy chemical reactions in your brains.
These addictions infiltrate your daily lives and cause significant interference and repercussions. Usually a cure, management and recovery from your addiction needs substantial support from family, friends, medical intervention and guidance, and whilst you may go into remission from time to time you will always be an addict susceptible to relapse for the rest of your life.
It ranges from live auctions, lotto tickets, raffle tickets, bingo, pool hustling, in app sports betting, keno.
You can gamble on almost anything. The dogs, toad races, pacer horses, cage fights,more prominent horse races. Various sport gambling, probably so much more before the stakes at the pokie machines, roulette tables, black jack tables, craps, pocker tables and beyond.
It's a mental disorder and disease of the mind. and decease that can cost you your financial security, your family, your job, friends, employment, credit rating, your home, your car and your dignity.
There is nothing glamorous about gambling, and nobody every truly wins.
In short, the pleasure and reward centre of your brain (nucleus accumbems) produces lots of dopamine when we feel good. This is what keeps us captive and can lead to long term damaging affects.
https://responsiblegambling.vic.gov.au/documents/1013/GHAW20…
If you or others think that you have a gambling problem, just like most other addictive substances there is help, counselling, groups, therapies and in house ReHab if you want to get on top of it.
As someone who worked in a casino, yes, 100%, an employee gambling outside of work hours should be of a concern to an employer. I lost count of the number of punters I knew that I subsequently found out they were pilfering their employers bank accounts to feed that addiction.
So, absolutely, if you have ANY access to employer funds or accounts, yes, your gambling should be of a concern to your employer. It also comes down to your readily available access to assets, stock inventory or accounts. Some dude sweeping the floors is not as much as a worry as someone in accounts or in say, a warehouse store.
The difference between a gambling debt and a mortgage is that with a mortgage, there is usually some kind of asset that can be seized and sold to cover the debt… no such “asset” can be seized in gambling debt cases.
If you can’t understand the difference between these two financial situations, then I suggest you need to call your states gamblers help line. Your post question coupled with this almost dismissive correlation and asking about employer concerns is giving me PTSD casino problem gambler vibes.