May 24, 2012

Office Pools: Good, Clean Fun or Legal Pitfall?

Each year, March Madness promises three weeks of excitement and hoopla for fans of college basketball. For the nation's employers, the annual tourney brings with it an estimated $1.2 billion in lost office productivity, according to a survey by Challenger, Gray & Christmas Inc. Employees across the nation will not only follow games on television or online, but also participate by wagering in office pools. While most human resources managers may not consider this form of gambling to be a problem in the workplace, it nevertheless poses a number of legal concerns and risks.

First of all, though these popular office pools may build camaraderie among colleagues, they are illegal under Illinois law. The state's gambling statute, as codified in 720 ILCS 5/28 et seq., sets forth in Section 28-1 that a person commits gambling when he or she:

     (1) Plays a game of chance or skill for money or other thing of value, unless
           excepted in subsection (b) of this Section; or…
  
     (6) Sells pools upon the result of any game or contest of skill or chance,
           political nomination, appointment or election…

Gambling under subsection (6) is punishable as a Class A misdemeanor, with a subsequent conviction being punishable as a Class 4 felony.

Furthermore, the employees participating in an office pool are not the only ones vulnerable to prosecution under Illinois law. Employers who knowingly permit gambling in the workplace may be subject to prosecution under section 28-3 (Keeping a Gambling Place), which states the following:

A "gambling place" is any real estate, vehicle, boat or any other property whatsoever used for the purposes of gambling other than gambling conducted in the manner authorized by the Riverboat Gambling Act. Any person who knowingly permits any premises or property owned by him or under his control to be used as a gambling place commits a Class A misdemeanor.

Another area of concern involves the subject of unfair labor practices. By allowing employees to solicit bets from each other, an employer may relinquish the right to object to other solicitation activities, such as union organizing.

Protect Yourself with a Formal Policy

In order to combat a potential lapse in office productivity, as well as minimize the risk of prosecution related to office pools, an employer may choose to draft a formal policy that includes the following:

  • A clear definition of gambling
  • Emphasis on the illegality of gambling
  • A statement expressing the negative impact that gambling can have on employee productivity
  • Integration of the gambling policy with the company's progressive disciplinary program

Such a policy should always be enforced consistently and evenhandedly.

Ultimately, the odds of criminal prosecution based on an office pool may be low. After all, most law enforcement officials have more on their minds than $5 bets during March Madness. However, if an employer wants to minimize the specter of legal liability, it may be wise to include gambling on the company's list of prohibited workplace conduct.

© 2010 Much Shelist Denenberg Ament & Rubenstein, P.C.

About the Author

Much Shelist is a full-service business law firm based in Chicago. Since our founding in 1970, and as we have grown to approximately 85 attorneys, we have nurtured a collaborative culture that emphasizes sophisticated, senior-level attention to client matters, combined with a collegial, creative atmosphere that allows us to deliver the highest level of service to every client. In addition, we are firmly committed to remaining independent, thus creating an environment of stability for our clients and our attorneys.

We serve as...

312-521-2000

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.