sound crazy?


A new casino set to open in Atlantic City, N.J., has announced it will set term limits for its front-line staff. When employees' terms run out, they'll have to go through the hiring process again. The casino says the policy will keep its service fresh. Others say the company is taking advantage of a tough job market.

From bellhops to dealers, employees of the new casino, called Revel, will be hired for terms from four to six years. After that, they have to reapply for their jobs and compete against other candidates.

Revel declined to make anyone available for an interview. In a written statement, the company asserts that its employment policy will help it "attract the most highly professional people who are inspired by a highly competitive work environment."

But it's an unusual way to go. Many who work in employment law or advocacy say they've never heard of anything like this before.

"What they've done here is set up a system that puts their good performers through a gauntlet of having to compete with people who have no record of performance," said Alice Ballard, a prominent Philadelphia employment attorney.

Ballard says anyone can be fired from his or her job. But she thinks the casino's policy is more problematic.

"Why would you take your good performers and put them through that competitive process," she asks, "if you aren't trying to get rid of a good performer for some other reason?"



The new Revel casino, which sits along the boardwalk in Atlantic City, has drawn criticism for its employment policies.

Ballard thinks that "other reason" is probably age. To her, this reapplication process looks like a low-profile way for the casino to regularly weed out older employees.

On the other hand, there's a logic to Revel's thinking, according to Brian Tyrrell, a professor of hospitality management at Stockton College in New Jersey. To make his point, he quotes a famous hotel executive.

"I think it was Hilton who talks about 1,000 points of contact with the guest, and how that is what the guest remembers, in terms of the service delivery experience," said Tyrrell. "They want to have a high degree of control over that."

Tyrrell thinks the reapplication policy will motivate people to move up in the company — because management positions won't require people to reapply. He also says Atlantic City desperately needs new jobs, and the employment insecurity imposed by Revel may be a price worth paying.

Atlantic City casino employee Jeff Payne sits in the living room of the comfortable house he bought with his earnings. He has been with Caesars for 23 years. Now, he serves drinks in the high-roller lounge.

"How can you buy a car if you don't know you're going to have a job?" Payne asks. "You want to refinance your home; you want to buy a home. I mean, these have always been decent jobs, good-paying jobs, sustaining jobs. But my concern is, you get this job — and then you have no job security."

Payne, a union member, says the new jobs aren't what were promised when gaming came to Atlantic City.

But a lot of people laid off from casinos in Atlantic City in the past few years still haven't found work. He says that even with Revel's tough hiring policy, those people probably will apply.

Damned stupid idea. Not exactly designed to attract the best and brightest.

If the government did that I think many many people would loose their otherwise protected sanctaury of permanent employment.

For government jobs, I agree......

I don't know. The military is a government job. So is fire and police. In fact all law enforcement and over 98% of all fire presonell.
Next problem, Credit! Who is gonna loan money to these people knowing in less than the term of the loan they'll have to apply for their job all over again.
Last you would need to reget your job at least once to be vested in any penson plan maybe more depending on the plan. So it's likely there won't be much in the way of benefits for anyone below management level. Who by the way won't be subject to this rule.
Funny thing, Christie ramed the casino through with a 281 million dollar tax break to Revel to create good paying (LONG TERM JOB'S). Sounds like he failed on both. Everyone on FOX loved the idea.
Wonder how he's gonna explain that to the voters.


Anybody else see a patern?

Hehe... yeah job security now a days is a myth, plain and simple... The best part is when they come in tell you that from 60 hours a week youre going to go to 35 hours a week and its take it or leave it... However it is what it is... I described the correlation between happiness and productivity... The store I run goes from 18k over in profit a week to -4 to -5k a week. They feel it is because they have unruly employees who need to be weeded out. Either way, again job security is a myth in this day and age, regardless of performance.

Basically they are making the ones who would otherwise shine be pre occupied with knowing they may be out of a job soon and their turn over will increase ten-fold, or people will consider the casino temporary and will not bother to give 110% of themselves since when you really think about it, it all comes down to favoritism and who likes who from my experience.

-swordfish

Exactly right Sword & Rob! Been their done that. Those in the buisness want to know how you get the host staff (One group actually mentioned in the article) to sign non compete non disclosure forms if they know their gone in 4 or 6 years? They can't work in the industry within a set distance from the casino holding the document's. Usually 100 miles and 2 years. Can you say "restraint of trade"? You can only enforce those agreement's on people fired for cause. A re-apply policy is not cause, steeling or excessive absence is a cause. For a casino company they don't know much about their guests. People are finicky! They like their own host. They want to see a familiar face. I hope this end's as one of the most epic failiers in history and I hope they go bankrupt as a result.

In the modern age of Corporate America only one thing matters...........$$$$$$. Cutting right to the chase, this all about phasing out higher paid employees with ones that can do the same job for a lesser salary.
Great idea if you own the casino, bad idea if you are employed at one. Job security is a thing of the past, no one really cares about you, but it's a 2 way street, an employee will seek a job with a better pay potential.
Don't we see this in major league sports, players not staying with the team in favor of going free agent for a better contract, and the owners looking for the same quality player that demands a lesser contract.
I would guess ones opinion would be on what side of the fence they straddle. Being an "Occupy" supporter, be easy to know where I stand.