Regulators weigh more testimony on work cards

Friday, Oct. 25, 2002 | 11:24 a.m.

CARSON CITY -- Casino employees are entitled to privacy rights on the information stored in state files gathered in the investigations for work cards, civil and workers' rights organizations said Thursday.

Gary Peck, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union for Nevada, said law enforcement agencies should not have "unbridled access" to the files to allow them to go on "fishing expeditions" to build criminal cases.

The investigative files might include information on a person's debt or sexual preference and law enforcement agencies have no right to this information, he said.

His comments were made to the state Gaming Commission, which is considering a regulation to start a new system of issuing casino work cards in January. The commission will take more testimony at its November meeting in Las Vegas and take a final vote on the regulation in December.

The 2001 Legislature approved a law overhauling the work card law to make it uniform statewide, allowing a worker to move from casino to casino without getting a new card at each place of employment and extending the work card to five years.

Peck conceded he did not know of one case of abuse by law enforcement involving a gaming employee but he said he was worried about "potential future abuses."

Under the present system, Clark and Washoe counties conduct the background investigation of those seeking work cards. This would continue but all of the information would be sent to the state and kept at least six years under the proposed system.

Gaming officials said law enforcement authorities already have access to the criminal records of people applying for work cards. But Peck and Tom Stoneburner, director of the Alliance for Workers Rights, said employees should be protected from a large "degree of intrusion" by law enforcement agencies.

Todd Westergard, an official with the state Gaming Control Board, said law enforcement agencies have had access to this information in the past. In most cases, the law enforcement agencies want to check if a person has a work card, and for his or her address or telephone number. Westergard and others said they usually don't ask for other information.

Control Board Chairman Dennis Neilander said the law allows access by law enforcement. He said he didn't want the regulation to "usurp legislative authority."

Stoneburner said available information should be limited "solely to the administration of the gaming card."

Laura Mijanovich, Northern Nevada coordinator for the ACLU, said she was worried that law enforcement agencies would misuse the information.

Peck also suggested that the present regulations allow the state gaming regulators unfettered discretion in conducting their investigations and in making their decisions.

He said the state regulators can deny an applicant for a work card for no reason. And they are allowed to investigate any part of an individual's background, he said.

Neilander said he would be willing to listen to Peck's complaints but he added this has been in the law since 1977. He said Peck would have to take his case to the Legislature.

Neilander said he can't remember a case where a work card was denied for no reason. He said the reasons listed in the law are traditionally cited in issuing a denial.