Despite the high rates of PG that have been detected among casino employees, past research actually has found that casino employees are more likely to decrease than increase their gambling after beginning their jobs. For example, in Shaffer et al.‘s (1999) study of U.S. casino employees, the authors asked the employees directly how their gambling had changed since they began working in a casino, and 55.4% claimed their gambling had remained the same, 29.3% claimed it had decreased, and only 15.2% claimed it had increased.
Similarly, Shaffer and Hall (2002) surveyed 6,067 employees from six different U.S. casinos, with two follow-up questionnaires administered one and two years later, and determined that over the two-year span of the study 22.6% of the sample had shifted to a more improved gambling status on the SOGS scale, while only 11.6% had shifted to a more disordered status.
Additionally, in Dangerfield‘s (2004) study of Alberta casino employees she asked the employees directly how their employment had affected their gambling, and 51.1% claimed it had not affected their gambling, 28.9% claimed it had decreased their gambling, and 20.2% claimed it had increased their gambling. 2.7 Workplace Influences Working in a casino inevitably subjects casino employees to a variety of influences that potentially could precipitate such increases or decreases in gambling participation.
Much of the research into these workplace influences has been conducted by Hing and Breen (2007, 2008a, 2008b), who identified a litany of such influences in a series of qualitative studies undertaken in Australian casinos. One study involved interviews with several dozen managers of gambling facilities (2007); one involved interviews with nearly 200 casino employees, gambling venue managers, and gambling counsellors (2008b); and one involved six case studies of employees who had become problem gamblers while working in casinos (2008a).
The authors divided the influences they identified into nine categories: close interaction with gamblers, frequent exposure to gambling, the influence 19 of fellow employees, the influence of management, the nature of the work, the hours of the work, the frequent exposure to gambling marketing and promotions, RG training of the staff, and other RG strategies in the venue (2007, 2008a, 2008b).