5 ms·

Why would gambling be high risk for employees? Unless you compare it to some cushy govt job it isn't really more "layoff-prone" than others.

epc 2y ago
Layoffs are not the primary risk of being an employee at a gambling company.
- amonith 2y ago
  Then what is? I know the higher ups / owners have to deal with some straight up mafia shit or money laundering but a gambling company doesn't really look bad on a CV the way porn industry or even a government job (at least here in Poland) does.
- totallymike 2y ago
  You’ve piqued my curiosity. What would you say is the primary risk of being an employee at a gambling company?
  - jefc1111 2y ago
    I have no expertise here but I'd guess changes in legislation torpedo'ing the business model is probably a big risk.
    - amonith 2y ago
      All startups are probably way more risky. Law works against gambling. Entire market works against startups.
  - camdenreslink 2y ago
    Possibly reputation risk. Future employers may pass over applicants that worked at gambling companies if they consider it unsavory.
  - epc 2y ago
    Crime, criminals. Mostly organized crime, but the occasional whack jobs who “just need an edge”. Doesn’t matter where you are in the organizational hierarchy, I’d argue the most at risk are the lowest level employees.
- PaulHoule 2y ago
  I would be worried about organized crime. All sorts of sketchy things go on. The only sports event at my Uni where I wasn't able to photograph was college tennis because they have a problem with people past-posting on college tennis: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late_betting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late_betting On one level I can understand the thrill of having some money riding on a game but I am baffled by the prop bets. Fixing a whole game is not so easy and rather risky, but influencing the silly little events some people bet on looks easy and hard to stop. It's particularly crazy that people bet on decisions by individuals and small groups as opposed to the outcome of a contest.
  - amonith 2y ago
    Gambling itself is sketchy but legally hired employees especially developer-level have to be somehow protected from the decisions of the business, no? Unless you're worried about the crime itself (as in somebody might threaten you personally and send you to a hospital kind of thing) and not prosecution.
some_random 2y ago
The risk is that if you ever want to leave the gambling industry you'll be the candidate who made their living swindling vulnerable people.
- malux85 2y ago
  Capitalist societies where the alternative to employment is destitution can force people into working at huge online gambling companies due to the need for employment and their responsibility (kids, aging parents, etc) While I agree in an ideal world, individuals should all stand up against unethical employment options, I am also mature enough to know not to penalise someone who might be otherwise meritorious based on what could be situational. We should take a stand against predatory companies that attack the vulnerable, but this should be done at a government level, not an individual employee level, because it’s a much more efficient utilisation of resources for a large organisation with teeth to be subdued by another large organisation with teeth. I would hire someone who used to be in gambling (if they were a good fit culturally and technically of course) because that would take a skilled developer OUT of the gambling industry, implying that you shouldn’t hire someone who used to work in gambling is a sure way to make sure that predatory industry keeps enough developers to keep shirking the poor
  - some_random 2y ago
    People can absolutely be forced into working immoral jobs by muh capitalism, but some of you are way too enthusiastic about it. Someone doing blue team work for MGM after getting laid off in 2022 is one thing, a Staff Addiction Engineer looking to try a new industry in 2019 is another completely. Secondly, I agree that we should be hiring good people out of these industries, but there are a lot of people who just aren't going to be comfortable with that.
    - malux85 2y ago
      > but there are a lot of people who just aren't going to be comfortable with that. Actual LOL - who? I’ve worked at enormous orgs, Google, to medium sized orgs, to startups over my 20 year career, as a senior dev, engineering lead, CTO and now founder, I have hired and mentored hundreds, maybe close to 1000 engineers, hiring managers, project managers, and this has never ever been an issue, in one case we hired 20 engineers from Betsson, a huge (~400M/y) gambling company in Malta into a much larger organisation (non-gambling), and nobody from senior management, middle management or engineers ever even raised this point. I think you are uncomfortable with it, and are projecting that starry-eyed wishful and naive thinking onto others by saying “a lot of people aren’t going to be comfortable with that” I have 20 years experience working in 9 different countries, all with very different cultures, that says otherwise, nobody has ever mentioned it.
meiraleal 2y ago
You might not easily find another job after
- amonith 2y ago
  Maybe it's a country thing but here in Poland no one would care. Various forms of gambling are legal under supervision of authorities so legal companies exist around that. Unlike porn it wouldn't really be an embarrassing topic on an interview. Lots of interesting technical stuff to deal with in such a job.
  - gamepsys 2y ago
    I would be equally embarrassed if either of those were on my resume. I'd have similar levels of embarrassment with alcohol, firearms, cannabis or politics. You don't want your resume to suggest you are controversial in anyway. Maybe 80% of the people you run across will be cool with it, but it only takes one person in a company to veto your resume and there are usually 3+ people that look at a resume with veto power. It'll close doors for sure.
    - amonith 2y ago
      Interesting topic because I wouldn't want to work with those 20% who reject people based on n-th level relationship to anything controversial. I get not wanting to deal with people who run these things but employees? Those "anti-political" places typically mean a specific side (depending on your country that may anti-right in western countries and anti-left in eastern). When I worked in the office before 2019 we had all kinds of people there. It was kind of beautiful in a way. Straight up communists discussing stuff with conservatives without any heat. Isolation breeds extremism. It's true that it would close doors but man until the market takes that choice away from me I don't want to open those, and I say that as a guy who never worked with any of this even indirectly. And to be fair - not having experience with those things also closes doors, just different ones.
      - meiraleal 2y ago

epc 2y ago

Layoffs are not the primary risk of being an employee at a gambling company.

amonith 2y ago
Then what is? I know the higher ups / owners have to deal with some straight up mafia shit or money laundering but a gambling company doesn't really look bad on a CV the way porn industry or even a government job (at least here in Poland) does.
totallymike 2y ago
You’ve piqued my curiosity. What would you say is the primary risk of being an employee at a gambling company?
- jefc1111 2y ago
  I have no expertise here but I'd guess changes in legislation torpedo'ing the business model is probably a big risk.
  - amonith 2y ago
    All startups are probably way more risky. Law works against gambling. Entire market works against startups.
- camdenreslink 2y ago
  Possibly reputation risk. Future employers may pass over applicants that worked at gambling companies if they consider it unsavory.
- epc 2y ago
  Crime, criminals. Mostly organized crime, but the occasional whack jobs who “just need an edge”. Doesn’t matter where you are in the organizational hierarchy, I’d argue the most at risk are the lowest level employees.
PaulHoule 2y ago
I would be worried about organized crime. All sorts of sketchy things go on. The only sports event at my Uni where I wasn't able to photograph was college tennis because they have a problem with people past-posting on college tennis: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late_betting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late_betting On one level I can understand the thrill of having some money riding on a game but I am baffled by the prop bets. Fixing a whole game is not so easy and rather risky, but influencing the silly little events some people bet on looks easy and hard to stop. It's particularly crazy that people bet on decisions by individuals and small groups as opposed to the outcome of a contest.
- amonith 2y ago
  Gambling itself is sketchy but legally hired employees especially developer-level have to be somehow protected from the decisions of the business, no? Unless you're worried about the crime itself (as in somebody might threaten you personally and send you to a hospital kind of thing) and not prosecution.

some_random 2y ago

The risk is that if you ever want to leave the gambling industry you'll be the candidate who made their living swindling vulnerable people.

malux85 2y ago
Capitalist societies where the alternative to employment is destitution can force people into working at huge online gambling companies due to the need for employment and their responsibility (kids, aging parents, etc) While I agree in an ideal world, individuals should all stand up against unethical employment options, I am also mature enough to know not to penalise someone who might be otherwise meritorious based on what could be situational. We should take a stand against predatory companies that attack the vulnerable, but this should be done at a government level, not an individual employee level, because it’s a much more efficient utilisation of resources for a large organisation with teeth to be subdued by another large organisation with teeth. I would hire someone who used to be in gambling (if they were a good fit culturally and technically of course) because that would take a skilled developer OUT of the gambling industry, implying that you shouldn’t hire someone who used to work in gambling is a sure way to make sure that predatory industry keeps enough developers to keep shirking the poor
- some_random 2y ago
  People can absolutely be forced into working immoral jobs by muh capitalism, but some of you are way too enthusiastic about it. Someone doing blue team work for MGM after getting laid off in 2022 is one thing, a Staff Addiction Engineer looking to try a new industry in 2019 is another completely. Secondly, I agree that we should be hiring good people out of these industries, but there are a lot of people who just aren't going to be comfortable with that.
  - malux85 2y ago
    > but there are a lot of people who just aren't going to be comfortable with that. Actual LOL - who? I’ve worked at enormous orgs, Google, to medium sized orgs, to startups over my 20 year career, as a senior dev, engineering lead, CTO and now founder, I have hired and mentored hundreds, maybe close to 1000 engineers, hiring managers, project managers, and this has never ever been an issue, in one case we hired 20 engineers from Betsson, a huge (~400M/y) gambling company in Malta into a much larger organisation (non-gambling), and nobody from senior management, middle management or engineers ever even raised this point. I think you are uncomfortable with it, and are projecting that starry-eyed wishful and naive thinking onto others by saying “a lot of people aren’t going to be comfortable with that” I have 20 years experience working in 9 different countries, all with very different cultures, that says otherwise, nobody has ever mentioned it.

meiraleal 2y ago

You might not easily find another job after

amonith 2y ago
Maybe it's a country thing but here in Poland no one would care. Various forms of gambling are legal under supervision of authorities so legal companies exist around that. Unlike porn it wouldn't really be an embarrassing topic on an interview. Lots of interesting technical stuff to deal with in such a job.
- gamepsys 2y ago
  I would be equally embarrassed if either of those were on my resume. I'd have similar levels of embarrassment with alcohol, firearms, cannabis or politics. You don't want your resume to suggest you are controversial in anyway. Maybe 80% of the people you run across will be cool with it, but it only takes one person in a company to veto your resume and there are usually 3+ people that look at a resume with veto power. It'll close doors for sure.
  - amonith 2y ago
    Interesting topic because I wouldn't want to work with those 20% who reject people based on n-th level relationship to anything controversial. I get not wanting to deal with people who run these things but employees? Those "anti-political" places typically mean a specific side (depending on your country that may anti-right in western countries and anti-left in eastern). When I worked in the office before 2019 we had all kinds of people there. It was kind of beautiful in a way. Straight up communists discussing stuff with conservatives without any heat. Isolation breeds extremism. It's true that it would close doors but man until the market takes that choice away from me I don't want to open those, and I say that as a guy who never worked with any of this even indirectly. And to be fair - not having experience with those things also closes doors, just different ones.
    - meiraleal 2y ago