When someone shares with you something of value, you have an obligation to share it with others.
Wednesday, 3 February 2010
Only 121 out of 5,000 casino applicants rejected
The Casino Regulatory Authority (CRA) has come out to clear the air over who is allowed to work as a croupier or cashier in the casinos of the two integrated resorts.
The Casino Regulatory Authority (CRA) has come out to clear the air over who is allowed to work as a croupier or cashier in the casinos of the two integrated resorts.
Responding to queries from The Straits Times, it said it has rejected 121 applications for the compulsory licence needed for those who want to work on the gaming floors.
This was out of nearly 5,000 applications the two resorts had forwarded to the CRA after having done their own checks on the candidates.
Of the 121, CRA spokesman Vivian Heng said that 104 were ‘found to have not fully declared their crime or crime-related antecedents’.
Internet chatrooms and forums have been abuzz since ST broke the news last Monday that Marina Bay Sands (MBS) and Resorts World at Sentosa (RWS) have let some casino workers go after their licence applications were rejected.
Worried employees wondered if the axe would fall on them next, and asked that the CRA be more transparent in its criteria. On Tuesday, a dozen of them turned up at Deputy Prime Minister and Home Affairs Minister Wong Kan Seng’s meet-the-people session in Bishan to plead for a second chance.
A 23-year-old MBS dealer told ST: ‘CRA should have clear rules. Now my colleagues with everything from traffic offences to shoplifting records are worried that they will lose their job soon.’
Another MBS dealer, 28, said he is ‘very worried’ because he failed to declare a shoplifting offence committed at age 13.
But a check through the application form showed that applicants were told to declare any brush with the law they, their spouse or children have had.
This was regardless of whether they had been convicted, had the charges dismissed or whether the charges or offences ‘happened a long time ago’. It applies also if the offence resulted in the performance of community service or probation.
What is not relevant: traffic summonses.
The CRA makes it clear on the form that ‘failure to disclose any such involvement will be taken into account in assessing the applicant’s character, honesty and integrity’.
It also points out that it is an offence to provide false or misleading information to the CRA. Punishment is a fine of up to $50,000 or a jail term of up to two years, or both.
Among other information the CRA sought were financial data about the applicant and immediate family members, such as appearances in bankruptcy court, whether they hold assets here or abroad, and if they have recently moved huge sums of money in or out of Singapore.
Mr. Felix Ling, chief consultant of gaming consultancy Platform Asia, said the authority can be expected to maintain tighter controls in the beginning as organised cheating schemes and scams are common in new casinos.
He added: ‘The authority is probably concerned about building an image of a ‘clean and fun’ gaming landscape in Singapore, making IR casinos yet another uniquely Singapore experience.’
Gaming industry experts say it is best to come clean given that it is easy to counter-check information in a small and efficient country like Singapore.
Among those who did not do so was a rejected RWS dealer who told ST previously that he had just one conviction for selling fake DVDs. On further probing, he later admitted to having committed a string of offences, including indecent exposure.
Asked later why he did not disclose his offences in full, he said: ‘I cannot remember everything.’
However, a 26-year-old dealer, who wanted to be known only as Tom, said he declared everything - including his arrest for selling fake DVDs when he was 14 - and got rejected anyway.
He said: ‘The Government encourages companies in Singapore to hire ex-convicts, but now they rejected me. And I am not even an ex-convict.’
CRA’s Mrs Heng made it clear that it did not automatically rule out ex-offenders, but would consider the nature of the offences and whether they have stayed away from crime.
‘But this review cannot be at the expense of the security and integrity of the casino environment.’
Mrs Heng said the two casino operators are aware of the suitability criteria. They select those they wish to employ after sifting out those considered unsuitable based on the information declared.
Several casino workers had claimed that resort staff told them to ‘try their luck’ even after they admitted to being undischarged bankrupts.
Asked if it gave such advice, an MBS spokesman declined comment and would say only that it was an ‘equal opportunity employer’.
But RWS senior vice-president of human resources Seah-Khoo Ee Boon denied the charge, saying: ‘We have not been able to find any basis for their claim of having been ‘encouraged’ to apply, or exactly what they had communicated during the hiring process.’
For those who want a second shot, Mrs Heng said the CRA has an appeal process in place ‘and there have been many appeals’.
2 comments:
Only 121 out of 5,000 casino applicants rejected
Lim Wei Chean & Jessica Lim
01 February 2010
The Casino Regulatory Authority (CRA) has come out to clear the air over who is allowed to work as a croupier or cashier in the casinos of the two integrated resorts.
Responding to queries from The Straits Times, it said it has rejected 121 applications for the compulsory licence needed for those who want to work on the gaming floors.
This was out of nearly 5,000 applications the two resorts had forwarded to the CRA after having done their own checks on the candidates.
Of the 121, CRA spokesman Vivian Heng said that 104 were ‘found to have not fully declared their crime or crime-related antecedents’.
Internet chatrooms and forums have been abuzz since ST broke the news last Monday that Marina Bay Sands (MBS) and Resorts World at Sentosa (RWS) have let some casino workers go after their licence applications were rejected.
Worried employees wondered if the axe would fall on them next, and asked that the CRA be more transparent in its criteria. On Tuesday, a dozen of them turned up at Deputy Prime Minister and Home Affairs Minister Wong Kan Seng’s meet-the-people session in Bishan to plead for a second chance.
A 23-year-old MBS dealer told ST: ‘CRA should have clear rules. Now my colleagues with everything from traffic offences to shoplifting records are worried that they will lose their job soon.’
Another MBS dealer, 28, said he is ‘very worried’ because he failed to declare a shoplifting offence committed at age 13.
But a check through the application form showed that applicants were told to declare any brush with the law they, their spouse or children have had.
This was regardless of whether they had been convicted, had the charges dismissed or whether the charges or offences ‘happened a long time ago’. It applies also if the offence resulted in the performance of community service or probation.
What is not relevant: traffic summonses.
The CRA makes it clear on the form that ‘failure to disclose any such involvement will be taken into account in assessing the applicant’s character, honesty and integrity’.
It also points out that it is an offence to provide false or misleading information to the CRA. Punishment is a fine of up to $50,000 or a jail term of up to two years, or both.
Among other information the CRA sought were financial data about the applicant and immediate family members, such as appearances in bankruptcy court, whether they hold assets here or abroad, and if they have recently moved huge sums of money in or out of Singapore.
Mr. Felix Ling, chief consultant of gaming consultancy Platform Asia, said the authority can be expected to maintain tighter controls in the beginning as organised cheating schemes and scams are common in new casinos.
He added: ‘The authority is probably concerned about building an image of a ‘clean and fun’ gaming landscape in Singapore, making IR casinos yet another uniquely Singapore experience.’
Gaming industry experts say it is best to come clean given that it is easy to counter-check information in a small and efficient country like Singapore.
Among those who did not do so was a rejected RWS dealer who told ST previously that he had just one conviction for selling fake DVDs. On further probing, he later admitted to having committed a string of offences, including indecent exposure.
Asked later why he did not disclose his offences in full, he said: ‘I cannot remember everything.’
However, a 26-year-old dealer, who wanted to be known only as Tom, said he declared everything - including his arrest for selling fake DVDs when he was 14 - and got rejected anyway.
He said: ‘The Government encourages companies in Singapore to hire ex-convicts, but now they rejected me. And I am not even an ex-convict.’
CRA’s Mrs Heng made it clear that it did not automatically rule out ex-offenders, but would consider the nature of the offences and whether they have stayed away from crime.
‘But this review cannot be at the expense of the security and integrity of the casino environment.’
Mrs Heng said the two casino operators are aware of the suitability criteria. They select those they wish to employ after sifting out those considered unsuitable based on the information declared.
Several casino workers had claimed that resort staff told them to ‘try their luck’ even after they admitted to being undischarged bankrupts.
Asked if it gave such advice, an MBS spokesman declined comment and would say only that it was an ‘equal opportunity employer’.
But RWS senior vice-president of human resources Seah-Khoo Ee Boon denied the charge, saying: ‘We have not been able to find any basis for their claim of having been ‘encouraged’ to apply, or exactly what they had communicated during the hiring process.’
For those who want a second shot, Mrs Heng said the CRA has an appeal process in place ‘and there have been many appeals’.
‘The appeals will be carefully assessed.’
Post a Comment