Five former employees of Harrah's Ak-Chin Hotel & Casino have filed a lawsuit after being terminated from their positions, an action they claim was wrongful. The employees were previously accused of colluding with gamblers to manipulate an electronic craps game known as Roll to Win, according to FOX 10 Phoenix. They are seeking a jury trial and allege discrimination and retaliation as part of their wrongful termination.
In the summer of 2022, Harrah's introduced Roll to Win, a new type of electronic craps game that, according to the casino, required less training due to its automated nature. However, the plaintiffs claim that the lack of thorough training contributed to their inability to detect and prevent cheating, leading to substantial financial losses for the casino. "They come to me, and they only, only five minutes to show me. No training at all," one of the plaintiffs, Susan Samons, told FOX 10 Phoenix.
After an investigation by Harrah's, nearly 20 table games dealers were accused of colluding with players, which the plaintiffs vehemently denied. "In the back of my mind, I knew I did nothing wrong," Mariah Henry explained in a statement obtained by FOX 10 Phoenix. The Ak-Chin Tribal Gaming Agency subsequently suspended the dealers without pay, a move later contested by the employees' legal representation, which argued inadequate training by Harrah's.
The case has drawn attention to the training practices and the accountability of casinos when introducing new gaming technologies. Meanwhile, the plaintiffs, some of whom are immigrant women and minorities, according to Hang Upon Abuse, express their distress over the loss of their livelihoods and the impact on their families. "“We don’t have to lie. It’s the truth. What happened to us, why are we lying? We have already experienced the pain that we have now. Why do we have to lie? We have to tell the truth so that they learn not to do the same thing, the same thing to other people," Mary Grace Abon said, as per Hang Upon Abuse. For now, the casino has declined to comment due to the ongoing litigation, and the motion to dismiss the case by claiming sovereign immunity was denied by a judge.
