Wild cards

Bartenders say a raft of new work card rules is drowning them in sorrows

By Larry Wills

Before you make fun of your neighborhood bartender for giving you a six-inch head on your beer, consider this:

That guy could work for the CIA.

Liquor dispensers, long under intense scrutiny for criminal records, now face another hurdle to keep their jobs. Clark County and the city of Las Vegas require new nongaming cards for bartenders, bar owners, managers and key employees in a blizzard of background checks.

"It's outrageous," the Nevada ACLU's executive director, Gary Peck, says of the new cards. "They were supposed to simplify the process."

Allen Lichtenstein, general counsel for the ACLU, agrees. "This community has gotten things so backward," he says. "Jobs are gifts to be given out by government."

Not only is getting a job more difficult, it's a lot more expensive. Last year, Metro Police issued work cards for $35. This year, the Gaming Control Board took over gaming card checks and the cost went to $75. Liquor servers have long been required to get a health card--originally $12, now $35--which entails a TB test and a movie urging workers to wash their hands in the bathroom. And they've had to attend an alcohol awareness class at a cost of $20, teaching them not to serve drunks.

Now, local governments are adding another $45 to the process for fingerprinting and a local criminal background check. That's $175 to pour a glass of beer. But look at those hands on the spigot. Mr. Clean would be proud.

"It's ridiculous," Terry Greenwald, secretary-treasurer of Bartenders and Beverage Local 165, says of the new card that also applies to cocktail waitresses and porters. "They're trying to come up with gimmicks to keep their revenue. It's a money-maker for a lot of people. It's also a way to keep track of people."

He criticizes the new card, in a departure from earlier practices, since it is not permanent. "They didn't have to renew it every couple of years."

And, he says, for those working at casinos the checks are duplicative. "Casinos check backgrounds. They're sometimes too picky." Bartenders working for major properties face credit checks and other inspections to ensure their trustworthiness in handling money.

Greenwald says he's asked the union's attorney to investigate the validity of the new card.

But Cinda Loucks, director of Metro's Fingerprint Bureau, says the local cards serve a good purpose. "We want to make sure anyone serving alcohol has a criminal history that is clean," she says. Metro confines itself to local criminal histories, since the Gaming Control Board's background checks are confidential, thanks to FBI policy. "Gaming Control can't share with Metro," she says. A separate FBI background check by Metro would cost the applicant another $45.

Presumably, a bartender working at an establishment without slot machines could avoid the gaming card and his only criminal checks would be on local activities, thanks to the limitations of the nongaming card process. Those working at bars with slot machines--which means most of them in Las Vegas--would be subject to Gaming Control's FBI check.

Loucks says the local process only takes an applicant about two hours, much less time than when Metro issued gaming cards. "We're doing pretty good. There's a crowd, but it's manageable."

Jim Difiore, who oversees licensing for the city's finance and business services, insists an employee doesn't face a tough challenge in getting the cards. "The process, in reference to Metro, the health and TAM [alcohol awareness] cards, can all be done in one day. The application can reveal past citations, DUIs or serving alcohol to minors. The owner will be able to say, 'Because of your past, I don't want you.'"

And Difiore insists the training can pay off. "If a bartender does serve an intoxicated person, he may be liable for a citation, the bar owner as well." And, he says, the nongaming card gives inspectors another tool when checking out employees at a bar. "In virtually every inspection, there is at least one person who doesn't have at least one of these cards."

But Lichtenstein worries about the government's role in deciding who is fit to work in a bar and who isn't. "It serves no useful purpose to have a work card for a bartender. Why do we need an FBI check?"

The nongaming card came out of legislation passed in the last Legislature, which gave blanket authority to the Gaming Control Board and allowed local governments to enact other checks on certain professions. That, ironically, was the result of lobbying efforts to simplify the card process, removing casino employees in nonsensitive jobs from background checks.

"ACLU waged a campaign to roll back the requirements for workers in Nevada," Peck recalls. "It was a big fight to get rid of work card requirements." Checking backgrounds in the alcohol industry was meant to be limited to liquor distributors, not bartenders and related jobs. "I don't think cocktail waitress should be required to have FBI background checks."

"The gaming board claimed authority over any aspect of an applicant's background," Peck says of the legislative hearing last year. For example, credit card debt could make someone more susceptible to criminal behavior. "That could lead to marital history, sex orientation and big medical bills. It's government that's inefficient and has run amok. The work card and the gaming card are money-making schemes for government."

And it leaves job-hungry workers wondering if a mistake they once made may condemn them to the unemployment line.

"It's a right for people to work in a given trade without having to get government permission," Peck says.