Lynnae is a journalist covering the intersection of technology, culture, and gambling. She has more than five years of experience as a writer and editor, with bylines at SlashGear and MakeUseOf. On the iGaming side,...
Read Full BioThe operators of High Street gaming shops are coming under fire after reports that staff bonuses at some of these slot machine venues are linked to how much money customers lose while gambling.
According to a report from The Guardian, the operators of Adult Gaming Centers (AGCs) throughout the UK are allegedly rewarding employees based on player losses. These revelations have prompted a fresh round of criticisms from lawmakers and those advocating for more stringent gambling regulations.
The report focuses on the bonus structure at Merkur, a German-owned company that’s one of the UK’s largest High Street gaming operators. Shop managers can take home as much as 80% of their yearly salary based on performance-related pay. Most of these bonuses reportedly depend on what an internal document describes as “controllable profit,” a measure that includes net revenues, in other words, the money customers lose.
Critics say these incentives create a conflict of interest that undermines responsible gambling commitments and puts vulnerable players at greater risk. While these bonus programs do include targets related to safer gambling, critics argue that linking pay to player losses may discourage staff from intervening when customers are losing a great deal of money.
Earlier this year, Merkur Slots was fined almost £100,000 after the UK Gambling Commission found it had failed to keep “consumers safe from harm” by allowing a customer to gamble for more than five hours without intervening to minimize harm.
Lawmakers Call for Greater Oversight
In response to the report, Members of Parliament (MPs) sharply criticized the practice, saying it sends the wrong message about the industry’s commitment to safer gambling.
Former Conservative leader Iain Duncan Smith called the arrangement “appalling,” saying it appeared to be “an incentive not to intervene” when customers lose significant amounts of money.
Labour MP Dawn Butler said, “The payment of these bonuses seems to completely contradict statements from these companies about their commitments to social responsibility.” At the same time, Labour MP Alex Ballinger said the bonus structure “shows a complete lack of responsibility and the urgent need for greater regulation.”
Merkur voiced its strong disagreement with accusations that its bonus structure was at odds with player protection goals. Attorneys representing the company said that new compliance and training targets added to the program in January of this year have led to “more interactions with customers” and reinforced its commitment to safer gambling.
Broader Questions About Incentives & Responsibility
This isn’t the first time questions have been raised about industry pay structures and whether they align with responsible-gambling objectives. Previously, concerns surfaced in the online betting sector, where customer-retention bonuses and VIP programs were linked to harmful play.
The UK Gambling Commission introduced new rules in 2020 that restricted these programs for high-spending customers. According to a report released in July, these rules have reduced the prevalence of VIP programs.
Still, critics say the latest findings from high-street venues point to a broader pattern where commercial incentives clash with player-protection goals. They say even as operators continue to expand responsible-gaming messaging, the financial incentives tied to player behavior remain unregulated.
This new report comes out as the Commission is taking steps to tighten rules on bonus and incentive structures. New changes to the Social Responsibility Code 5.1.1, which go into effect in January 2026, place a cap on wagering requirements and ban the mixing of products within incentives.
