So why aren't unpaid internships in violation of the thirteenth amendment?

[Cleita]

Amendment XIII

Abolition of slavery

Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Yes, there is that 'involuntary' catch-22. But couldn't a good Constitutional lawyer argue that it is involuntary as the intern wouldn't be offered the job if he demanded pay.

I think we need to return to the days when new hires without experience were designated trainees and given a minimum wage for a certain pre-agreed upon training period before being offered full time jobs at full time pay. I think this whole thing of making young and educated, but inexperienced, young people work for free while their parents have to support them is slavery. Period. Add that to the additional burden of paying off student loans, makes this indentured servitude for sure IMHO.

[pinto]

1. I worked in the Public Health sector. We often had support from unpaid, student interns.

Most were majoring in a health care related field, did a 6 month to a year internship getting a feel for possible career opportunities. Willingly and voluntarily, of course. I always felt it was a win / win for all.

[Cleita]

3. Well, I don't see why they can't get minimum wage for those six months.

Face it. If all interns dropped off the face of the earth, you would have to hire someone and probably train them.

[pinto]

12. Like most Counties, we operated under a hiring freeze. We trained the interns as we would a new hire

and were committed to providing as broad a range of experience as possible. It wasn't just a "here, answer the phone and take messages" type deal. We all benefited from the arrangement, imo.

[Cleita]

13. You and I live in the same county and the hiring freeze is because of

all the GOOPers in office running things here. Fortunately, this is a county full of rich privileged kids so I guess it's a solution of sorts, but it sucks in the big picture.

[pinto]

21. Yeah, our budget is is a real GOP boondoggle...as you know.

Just remembered we're neighbors, of sorts.

[HiPointDem]

20. "we all benefited...we trained them as we would new hires..." uh-huh.

[Lionessa]

40. Similar but different, my daughter is getting her Masters of SW and is required

to do unpaid internship under a licensed SW for all four semesters, and she's been working and being paid in the exact same field for over 8 years. So she's effectively working her full time job in the industry, then going to a different department within her company and putting in another 20 free for the one LSW they have.

But without that she can't complete her Master's requirements, so in a way she is getting compensation, just not monetary compensation.

[jwirr]

48. I actually worked in congressman Ed Medvinski's office when in college for the same reason: credits.

[RevStPatrick]

2. Now you're just being silly!

My company has had a string of unpaid interns from Korea.

They are here to learn English, among other things, and they help us out by doing things that we might not get done otherwise. In exchange, they are learning conversational and written English in a real world context, in addition to the classroom context. It's win-win-win situation. The students win because they get another avenue for their studies, the company wins because we have extra nice people around who add to the environment and do some tasks that may not get done otherwise, and the world wins because people from different cultures spending time together bring those cultures closer to each other.

Nobody is being coerced.

[TBF]

5. When 50% of folks graduating can't get a job just exactly how are they NOT

being coerced?

At least an internship gets them a foot in the building. Paying folks for labor - how silly.

[Cleita]

14. Oh, those foot in the door aren't even our graduates but Koreans

as the poster alluded to.

[4th law of robotics]

33. Without a college education you are not qualified for many jobs

does that mean employers are forcing you to go to college?

There are many jobs that the government requires you become certified in XYZ often at your own expense and on your own time before you can work there. Is the government enslaving those workers?

[TBF]

70. With capitalism most of us are victims -

and we have nothing to lose but our chains.

Don't even get me started.

[Cleita]

6. It's still morally wrong. Kids who don't have parents to support them, will miss out on the

opportunities they should be able to compete for. Working for nothing except some chimera of benefits is still slavery. I was a trainee in several companies. We got minimum wage and a promise of a job if we passed our probation period, the training period. At least we could pay the rent and eat until then and I still met people from all over the world who were training with me. I really think this is another form of corporate welfare, this time on the backs of young people who don't have much choice in the matter.

[cali]

7. it's morally neutral.

and it's beyond ridiculous to call internships slavery.

Oh, and many non-profits have internships. Btw, I bet most interns come from well heeled families.

[Cleita]

10. Yes, they would have to come from well heeled families who can afford

this, making the opportunity to get experience in a field unavailable to the not so well heeled.

[HiPointDem]

22. if most interns come from well-heeled families it's still morally bankrupt.

[coalition_unwilling]

53. How is it 'morally neutral' if the only kids who

can participate are 1%er or 10%er kids?

Seems like yet another system to enforce class privilege.

[Cleita]

56. Yes, it is. I'm surprised more don't see that. n/t

[redqueen]

153. +1

[cali]

4. uh, because as you point out, it's not involuntary. Period.

And frankly, I think internships can be just fantastic.

[Cleita]

8. Yes, as long as they are paid internships, I agree.

But kids who don't have parents that can afford to pay for them, miss out in the opportunity. It's just more corporate welfare. I know a lady in town who only hires interns. Once their internship is up, she fires them and gets another unpaid one. It's a false statement on her bottom line of what it should cost to run her company, a throwaway newspaper in this case.

[pipoman]

84. But is there value in what the intern receives?

People pay to learn, huge sums..in many ways an internship is more applicable to learning than class time...there is value in some unpaid internships..it is school.

[Cleita]

86. Shouldn't this be done through the auspices of a university then

rather than through the whims of a corporation?

[yewberry]

92. Universities don't necessarily have classes needed by blue-collar workers.

When you see your state U offering QMED endorsements for Oilers or a TIG weld certification, let me know.

[Cleita]

97. But community colleges often do offer classes like this.

Think about it. Not everyone has to go to four years of college to learn something. This is where community colleges fill the gap. But once they supposedly learn what they are supposed to, shouldn't they be paid?

[yewberry]

110. Some do. However,

there are fields that assert that people don't learn what they are supposed to until they have some experience. They are not employable in their field until they do.

You may not see it, but you are suggesting that people who are one step away from a career job should pay an educational institution for something they can get for free (or even as a paid internship.)

[Cleita]

113. Working for free is not a way to run a working class society.

Yes, apprenticeships are often needed but the apprentice needs to be paid for his living expenses. Whatever the learner does, it still enhances the profits of the company and you will never convince me otherwise.

[yewberry]

119. Apprentices are paid.

Interns are or are not. There's a big difference.

It's a long game. Interns do not necessarily provide value in the short term; in fact, they are a drain in the short term. Interns do no work that regular employees would not do as part of their normal routine. I have had employees ask me to please not send any more 'green beans' for a while, just for the break. Internships can be an actual burden, because it takes work to supervise and train.

Long game: we need to be able to hire qualified employees, so we provide an internship program. Those interns, however, may choose to take the creds we just made possible somewhere else, in a field in which it is actually difficult to find workers. Where's the enhanced profit? We just need to have the people we need.

[MADem]

121. +1,000 nt

[Cleita]

123. I don't know why you believe this.

"Green beans" are exactly that. Those who are green but paid have to compete with the more experienced employees and they will rise and fall according to their abilities and ability to learn quickly. It seems that the unpaid "volunteers" are a burden especially to those who are stuck with them.

[yewberry]

127. Again, negative.

Interns compete with no one. They are not employees, paid or unpaid. They are only there to learn and gain experience. They perform no work and provide no benefit.

Let me reiterate: Interns are not employees, and cannot be employees. They do not have the credentials to be employees. They will not rise or fall according to their abilities.

Interns are Interns. They are released when their internships are over.

[Cleita]

88. Then shouldn't it be within an institution of learning?

When I did student teaching, which I was roundly criticized for, it was within that framework. I didn't walk into any classroom as an intern without an institution of learning behind me, credits and grades to be earned toward a degree. Really, I can't believe intelligent DUers can't see the difference.

[pipoman]

91. So grades and degrees

are what really makes a difference? I believe that actual experience is every bit as important and valuable as degrees and grades. If someone came to me asking to learn from me they can either go through the application process to get a job when I am needing help and I will always hire the best person for the job, or if they have no experience and couldn't make the cut, but just want to learn, they can come in and I may teach them even though I don't need them there to do the work. Doing the work however is the only way for them to learn. I have never used any unpaid interns, but my training is valuable.

[Cleita]

99. I agree and I always found that actual experience was more

interesting to a future employer if I were able to tell them that I was earning etc., etc., from that employer and if they paid me a little more, I would work for them. I can't do that if I'm not paid.

[alphafemale]

9. oh fer fucks sake

internships are a privilege. they're for wealthy kids who don't have to worry about a paycheck.

hasn't anyone told you ANYTHING?

[Cleita]

11. Exactly. They don't feel the squeeze with daddy's trust fund set

up for them. But they will have the advantage over someone not so privileged as usual, who might have as good an education and be maybe even more capable than the rich kid.

[pinto]

16. Lots of our interns were students with some kind of scholarship support, lived in dorms,

held second jobs and gave what time they could to an internship. We flexed schedules as much as possible to help make it work. I think framing the issue as a class issue is off-base.

[former9thward]

15. Most internships are illegal under current Labor Department regulations.

If they are doing work that someone else would be paid then the internships are supposed to be paid. The Labor Department generally ignores this because they have other issues on their plate and it is known this is a widely accepted practice.

[pinto]

18. Didn't realize that. If so, our County probably paid interns. So I'm off base in the assumption they

were unpaid...duh.

[former9thward]

62. You may not be off base at all.

As I said rarely does the Dept. of Labor investigate these matters so employers, public and private, routinely violate the law.

[Curmudgeoness]

17. I am not sure if it is voluntary or involuntary,

but since it is one of the few ways to get into some professions or companies, I lean toward involuntary.

But for argument's sake, let's take the Constitutional part our of the conversation. It should be illegal. There is no reason that anyone should be working for nothing but "experience". And from what I have seen when working places that had interns, the experience is useless unless you consider the network of people you come in contact with----making coffee, filing, doing all the grunt jobs that no one else wants to do---this is not work experience in the field you have chosen. It is just a way to get someone to do work in your organization for free.

[Cleita]

25. I'm glad you see it as an injustice of sorts and I'm amazed at the

number of DUers who seem to think it's fine. I believe it's because most people haven't known a different way and it has become institutionalized like homelessness. Just because it's legal doesn't make it right or even a smart way to run a society. It takes an old crone like myself to bring up the fact that there was once a better way. I'm really horrified at the workplace abuses going on today that are legal. When I entered the work force back in 1958, we had plenty of laws to protect the workers.

[Curmudgeoness]

26. I am also astonished by the comments and opinions I see

which is why I had to chime in. I am older too, and maybe it is just a generational thing. Maybe younger people have been convinced that this is just "the way things go". Sad commentary.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

27. Yes, some of the firms that hire unpaid "interns" could very well afford to pay them

I'm talking about major newspapers and TV networks, Wall Street brokerage firms, etc.

Now if, say, the interns were actually writing stories or producing TV shows or learning how to manage an account, then you could say that it was on-the-job training. But they're mostly making coffee, sorting mail, and Xeroxing.

I first became aware of this system when I attended two Ivy League schools for graduate school. I was beginning to wonder whether there would be a place for me in teaching, so I started hanging around the placement offices. There were internships available in some places that might have been a good match for my skill set, but ALL of them were unpaid AND required paying living expenses in either New York or DC.

Who can do that but rich kids?

I'd say that some unpaid internships really are internships. Student teachers really get classroom experience, for example, but they're not trainees, because few of them go on to work in the districts where they did their student teaching.

However, M.D. interns are paid.

[Cleita]

30. Good point. I did a semester of student teaching, but it was when I WAS STILL AN

UNDERGRADUATE STUDENT! I did get paid...in classroom credits toward my degree if I had gotten it. And yes doctor interns get paid as well as residents and graduate students going for PhD's in many universities get paid because they also teach classes.

[Curmudgeoness]

34. LOL, I also student taught.....

and instead of getting paid, I paid for that privilege. But I will say that it was one of the semesters that I did plan on for my degree.

[RevStPatrick]

51. Now wait a second... So, in other words...

...when you were younger, you did EXACTLY THE THING THAT YOU ARE NOW SAYING IS IMMORAL AND SHOULD BE CONSIDERED UNCONSTITUTIONAL!!!!

Sheesh... the frikkin' hypocrisy just amazes me!

[Cleita]

55. I got credits and I was an undergraduate. Cheesh, it was part of my class load, a big

difference. Also, I didn't take over the class. The teacher was my teacher and she was always present when I stood in front of the class in her place. She gave me my grade and my homework along with my department head. It wasn't a job. Really get a grip on your straw men. They are shedding illogic all over the place.

[LibDemAlways]

104. When I was a student teacher in 1974, I did take over a teacher's

classes for an entire semester. I planned and delivered all the lessons, graded all of the papers, and handled a myriad of behavioral issues. The teacher sat in the back of the classroom and read. She was paid and received full benefits. I didn't get a dime.

This was after I had already earned a BA and was completing units toward a credential. I considered it patently unfair then, and it still grates to think about it.

[Cleita]

106. I would have been pissed too if I were a grad. You were right.

I wasn't a grad.

[HiPointDem]

80. As the poster says, student teaching is a requirement for a teaching degree. You get

credits for it and a degree at the end of it. And it used to be the case that pretty much guaranteed some kind of job somewhere.

For unpaid internships you get nothing concrete in return, just the chance it might lead to paid employment somewhere down the line.

[yewberry]

89. That's not necessarily the case.

For unpaid internships you get nothing concrete in return, just the chance it might lead to paid employment somewhere down the line.

In some industries, internships are the only hope of getting qualified people. I work in a field, a very old industry, and it's hard to find people to do the work. There is, at least in one part of the field, a group for whom internships are required before they can work in their field, similar to the way teachers do student teaching. The industry requires the internship, though it's not part of degree. This is a blue-collar job, and there is no degree involved, but there are credentials that the industry itself demands. The organization I work for has both paid and unpaid internships.

The last time we needed to hire people in this group, we needed 15 people; we got 8. This is for a career-track job starting above $20/hour. Every former intern who applied was hired, though some former interns chose to go work for someone else. We have nothing concrete saying that interns our interns will stay and work for us.

edit: typo

[NYC Liberal]

35. Well, in some (or many) places, it IS illegal for unpaid interns to do work

that would normally be done by a paid employee. The purpose of an internship is learning and perhaps meeting and making connections with people in the field in which you'd like to work.

Of course, I realize that this may not always be enforced, but it is the law in many cases.

[Curmudgeoness]

36. And who is watching the hen house?

This is a case where the only person who would blow the whistle is the intern. And that is a situation where they would be burning all the bridges that they are trying to build, so they will not complain.

The unpaid intern system is abused and no one is holding the responsible parties accountable for it.

[NYC Liberal]

38. No disagreement there at all.

And often the people who get screwed worse are not the unpaid interns, because if they're well-off enough that they don't have to work for money then they may simply enjoy the work. No, in the end it's the people who depend on a paycheck who get screwed when unpaid labor is brought in to replace their jobs. If a company uses many unpaid interns to do work then they sure aren't going to want to keep paying the people who are now doing less work because of it.

[HiPointDem]

136. It's federal law. But reported often breached and seldom enforced unless interns choose to go

to court.

Have the paperwork look good & no one will come checking up unless there are complaints.

And interns don't want to complain because they might be blackballed in those prestigious industries they're trying to get a foothold in.

[NYC Liberal]

145. Yep. And as I said in another reply, often it's not the interns who get screwed

but the paid employees whose jobs they replace who get screwed.

[HiPointDem]

147. Both get screwed. As do workers generally.

[MADem]

19. If they were paying for the help, they'd get someone in less need of training.

The whole idea is that the trainERS put up with screw ups, a baseline of zero, and an absolute learning curve in exchange for training the trainEES. If money were to change hands, they'd demand competence out of the box, they'd automate, and they'd have no need for the extra hands.

It's not slavery--slavery involves no choice in the matter. If a youngster wants money for labor, they can go work a summer job at a clam shack or a resort hotel. If they want experience to build a career and an opportunity to make connections, they go for an internship.

[HiPointDem]

24. any company will have to train a new hire to some extent. however, it's assumed that a college

grad will need less training than a hs grad, etc. this is supposedly one of the reasons for hiring college grads over hs grads.

yes, slavery is involuntary. this is "voluntary" service in a tight labor market. in a different market, people wouldn't be volunteering for unpaid work in hope of getting a paid post.

so it's coercive, though "voluntary"

[MADem]

50. That's life. When times are tough, situations change.

Back when jobs were going unfilled, no one was crying foul when employers offered company cars and all sorts of absurd perks to get underqualified people on the payroll. It's simply supply and demand. It's not coercive. It's simply what it is--a function of the (un)employment cycle. No one is forced to sign up for it.

It sucks that people aren't getting the company car and the at-your-desk back massage at lunch and the extra three days vacation these days, but that's the nature of the job market right now. It stinks. It's hard. The go-getters are the ones who are going to do better than those who sit back and wait for a job to come to them. No one is forced to be one of those go-getters. I wish I had a magic wand to provide a job for everyone who wanted one--that's not happening, either.

A company will teach an employee how to operate a machine, do a task, manage an account, and they will pay them to sit their ass down in front of a machine or in a crappy cubicle and do that job, punching in and out at the start/end of the workday. That's an actual job--not an internship, though.

Internships teach people how relationships work--it's a very different animal. The interns, also, are not needed--they do stupid shit, that makes it easier on the others in the office, but if they weren't there, life would go on and everyone would make their own copies, run their own errands, answer their own phones (or answer their co-workers' phones and lie for them like an intern would) and deliver their own mark-ups instead of sitting on their asses chatting on the phone and playing solitaire on the computer.

The intern is a witness to the machinations of an office. They see the pecking order, they keep their eyes and ears open, they watch how the game is played, they make connections with others working in the offices of the allies and enemies of their boss. The reason the political ones are so competitive is because the interns learn things one never learns in a government or history class. That is what they get out of it. The work they do, by and large, is entirely inconsequential. In the corporate world, it's a primer for business dealings. In a government internship, it's a How To re: how the game is played.

I am not talking about "unpaid jobs," here. I'm talking about internships. If someone is doing work that isn't ordinarily done by others in the office, absent the presence of the intern, that's a different issue altogether.

People have been volunteering for unpaid political internships for a long, LONG time--in good economies and bad. It's not about the money, it's about the connections, the insider knowledge, the references, the relationships. The intern, if he or she plays it right, gets as good as he or she gives.

The fact is, most political offices run just fine without an intern. Having one is a bonus if they are a go-getter and willing to do the scut work. They make connections, decide if they like the cut-throat nature of the biz (many hate it up close) and have a leg up when it comes time to apply for an actual job--assuming they do well in their internship. In a good corporate internship, the same situation should apply.

In Ireland, they have a scheme where they will place people on the dole in corporate as well as government/public service internships, where the intern is taught aspects of the business--it is a TRAINING scheme, and the work must be meaningful, not xeroxing and errand-running, and continuously supervised (the trainee is not left on his/her own), and it lasts nine months to a year (that's it--no more). The employee gets an extra fifty euro in their dole check (all paid by the government) to offset commuting and lunch type costs. The employers pay nothing, they have to apply to the government for an intern, guarantee that they aren't replacing a paid worker, and submit to surprise inspections. It is a way for a large pool of unemployed young people to get a resume bullet and a reference for the future. It is a way for employers to try before they buy and see if a person fits in their organization if they anticipate a future need for employees owing to expansion or retirement within the ranks. The interns don't have to take a job--they can stay home and still get their dole check but when the economy takes an upturn, those with recent experience and a reference or three are in better position to be hired than someone who has been sitting home playing XBox for two or more years.

[HiPointDem]

52. it's not "life" at all. it's the capacity of power to manipulate the terms of survival in a world

where it owns the means of survival.

[MADem]

66. Ah, so you prefer the "Goodness of their hearts" model, then?

Here, let me take on a kid I don't want, don't need, and will also have to assign someone to oversee, AND pay them wages for very little to no value received...out of the goodness of my heart?

The employer doesn't get much if anything out of an internship--it may take a small load off the lowest level employees and make it easier for them to schedule their vacations, but an intern is hardly "equal" to a regular employee and is out the door by the time he or she starts to get any good. It's a fair exchange, an internship is--training in a specified career field in exchange for the resume bullet and validated references. And in more cases than not, these days, it's part and parcel of post-secondary education.

It's not just about "power." Not all internships are conducted in places where people throw their weight around. That's a rather obvious paradigm, though not always valid. It's not all about Poor Pitiful Pearl vs. The Mean Old Bossman. That abused women's shelter or children's daycare center or public school classroom is hardly the place where the bullies of industry are working.

I personally think it's a good idea that people working with children have some amount of supervised training before they're given the responsibility on their own, and I don't think the taxpayers should have to pay them to learn the ropes, either. Same goes for doctors, dentists, anyone who can hurt you with a sharp instrument. Should we start paying kids doing their practicums in vocational school money to learn how to take apart an engine, as well?

By your logic, we should pay people to go to university or postgraduate school, which is nothing more than an extended internship in a slightly more formal classroom setting. Poor Mitt RMoney wouldn't have had to cash in his stocks if the taxpayers of Massachusetts had only paid him for his double "internship" at Harvard University!

This sounds more and more like it's coming from a place where children get paid ten dollars for every "A" they get in school. Real life never used to work that way, either.

If people don't want to learn how to conduct themselves effectively in these fields in the setting where these professions are undertaken, they can always take a short-term approach, take any old paying job in retail or food service, and wait for when times are flush and try to get in their desired profession in a paying position when people are in a hiring mood.

[HiPointDem]

71. I recognize the terrain for what it is & call it by its rightful name. Which is not "life," but

manipulation of the powerful to crush the majority.

The employer gets a lot out of an internship. They get free labor. If it didn't benefit them, they wouldn't do it. Because unlike the laborers, the *employers'* participation is not coerced.

You can call it by some benign name if you like; I won't.

[MADem]

75. Yeah, those powerful manipulators at the Feeding and Homeless Shelter!

They really do a good job of ripping off those social service interns! And those interns get absolutely NOTHING out of the experience--like, say, finding out if they have the stomach and compassion for direct action support of the least of our brethren!

It's not "free labor" when most of the time is spent in training--but you have a false paradigm entrenched in your mind, and no one is going to disabuse you of your tightly held notions. Have fun with them.

[HiPointDem]

79. of course it's free labor. since when did employers not train paid staff? you act like by training

the slaves that are going to work for them for free these employers are doing them a big favor out of the goodness of their hearts.

those workers wouldn't be there if the employer didn't get more value than they put in.
the free work ought to satisfy them, but nooooooo, they want us to pretend they're big humanitarians, too!

nice chunk of grade A baloney you're serving there.

have fun rationalizing the new slave system your own self. i'll stick with my "entrenched notion" that in a capitalist economy people should get paid for working and not be coerced into working for free in hopes of employment down the line -- let alone have that given institutional sanction by the government.

[MADem]

111. By the time the interns are "trained," they are finished their internship.

That's the part you are sort of glossing over. Most internships are six months, and it takes six to nine months to get reliable work out of anyone doing a complex task in a corporation. Hell, even in the military they tell you that for the first six months, you can blame any fuck up on your predecessor!

You can stay mad about this all; you want, it's not going to change the existing paradigm, which is that people who have proved that a) They can show up every day on time for six months; b) They can demonstrate a capacity to understand the corporate culture and perform specified duties under supervision; c) They can fit into the workcenter environment and behave in a way that meets the standard of the business world; and d) They can provide the names of people who will be willing to vouch for their suitability are a better bet to be hired than some kid who comes in with a big fat "nuthin'" on their resume.

The truth is, a corporation is just as likely to hire a kid with any old "Insert Desired Degree" WITHOUT an internship, if the kid has work experience (as a garbageman, a short order cook, a fast food worker, a supermarket checker, a night janitor, ANYTHING) and can demonstrate that he/she showed up for work on time over a sustained period of time, was given increased responsibility over time, and can produce good references that suggest a decent work ethic. The truth is, though, that some kids don't want to dirty their hands with that kind of crappy work anymore. It's too HARD. They want the suit coat and the corner office with the fancy fern plants on day one. That's just not happening, though. It's not likely to for some time--if ever.

[JonLP24]

132. Sorry for the off topic post

but I wanted to say I was never told that when I was in the military and your predecessor is always blamed no matter how long you're in. If it is somewhat high profile fuck up, Company Commander chews out the First Sergeant, First Sergeant chews out Platoon Sergeant, Platoon Sergeant chews out your Squad Leader then it comes to you. Let me say, no one likes getting in trouble for something they didn't do and the stress & anger shows when they're punishing you. I could understand what you say being true somewhat in basic training & AIT but that is generally 3-4 months(AIT could be longer, usually Intelligence type of jobs are up to a year).

[MADem]

134. I'm talking about assuming command--if there are deficiencies that were not addressed in the

turnover, one can usually get out of being blamed by sloughing it off on one's predecessor. After six months, though, one is usually expected to "have the bubble" and can no longer pass off a lack of knowledge or a material deficiency on a poor turnover.

[JonLP24]

140. I see what you're saying

but it doesn't mean you don't get in trouble. Usually the only times they let you get away with stuff is if you're very new and it is things like not having a unit crest for your beret which is usually taken care of the first day. Also not having your name & rank stitched on your Kevlar vest and cat-eyes on your helmet--they gave you a much longer grace period for that. With other things, it all depends. Squads, units, bases all do things differently and punishments or corrective action vary. If you show up missing a spot shaving, even a few years in, sometimes you're told to go back and shave for something you learn the first day at Reception. Other times you have to carry a razor in your pocket or so. Other times you get "smoked". Sometimes you get corrected out of ignorance. I remember one time when we were in either Cedar I or Cedar II, I can't remember as 99% of the time we drove past it to CSC Scania which is essentially a truck stop. This was early 2007 and we were in line for the DFAC, I went to clear my weapon but didn't pull the trigger and this guy that watches the barrel got so mad he said something along the lines, "You're not going to kill someone in my DFAC!". I arrived in theater in July '06 and we were based in Camp Arif Jan, Kuwait which is like a metropolitan city compared to most bases, CENTCOM is largely based there, and they gave out the no trigger pull order after instances of bullets being fired into the barrel. I'm not sure exactly why but they concluded that wasn't a good idea. I told the Sgt. watching the barrel this and he said something like, "Nope. Tell the rest of your guys". Which I did and they were like, "Huh?" but did it anyways to avoid the drama. Never had an issue at any base for several months not pulling the trigger until I went to Cedar I or II.

It's a bureaucracy w/ a lot of office politics and it is frustrating and confusing with constant changes especially with standards and information gets distributed very poorly at times so there is always a period where a lack of knowledge can apply. I know there was long-standing confusion on how the little velcro thing that sticks out on the left side of the upper arm is supposed to be worn on the ACU. I always wore the tab underneath as I was told in basic training (I was in one of the very first BT classes that wore the ACU) but every now and then someone would grab it and stick it straight up. I also seen people "fix" someone by taking their straight up velcro thing and tucking it underneath.

[Cleita]

72. You are making me more and more convinced that kids should

be paid for working no matter what they do. Work is work and it should have value to the person doing it as well as the employer. We know it has value to the employer because if someone else doesn't do it he has to.

[MADem]

74. That's why some places are having a hard time finding kids to work summer jobs,

and they import their workers from Jamaica and Ireland and Brazil...because kids want to get paid for getting that A in school...

[HiPointDem]

82. You're saying that the US is recruiting "kids" from Jamaica to do summer jobs because

American "kids" won't? And American "kids" don't want to work because they want to get paid for good grades?

One hardly knows where to begin.

We could start by looking at the increase in youth unemployment since the recession. Did these "kids" just start wanting to get paid for their A's to the exclusion of summer work since the recession?

What could have led to such a sudden change in mindset, I wonder?

Why don't you tell the one about the welfare queen in a Cadillac, too?

[MADem]

116. I am saying that summer jobs that, in my day, were held by kids in high school and college

from American towns and cities are now held by KIDS who are also attending university and come over during the summer months from Ireland and Jamaica and even Romania (go to any supermarket on Cape Cod in the summer--the Romanians have a lock on those jobs, even with marginal English language skills). These are waitering, dishwashing, cooking, bedmaking, landscaping, summer jobs. These aren't internships--they are paid jobs. They require sweat and movement. Sweat and movement are things that many young kids aren't into, these days. Many of these owners hiring these summer workers would prefer to hire US kids, but those jobs are minimum wage and that's not "good enough."

Someone has to wait on the tourists. Someone does, and they fly in around mid June, live six to ten to an overcrowded cottage, and fly home in September.

You're not reading what I'm writing, so I guess that's enough of that. I'm talking about internships being training, you're going on as if training and shadowing and observing and watching and practicing is actual "work," and you're also going on about grades, which I haven't discussed at all to this point.

I don't agree with you, we'll leave it at that.

[HiPointDem]

130. Yeah, it must be because those lazy americans want to be paid for A's, not because the

employers get a pass on payroll taxes and insurance, not to mention they can work the foreigners harder without them kicking or knowing who to call for help.

Many sponsors and recruiters point out SWT’s cost-cutting tax benefits. Several of their websites include a “tax calculator” that allows them to tally what they save by hiring foreign workers.26 Seasonal Staffing Solutions claims that by hiring five SWT students instead of “regular workers,” i.e. Americans, for the summer season, an employer can pocket an extra $2,317.27

But wait, there’s more, as TV pitchmen like to say. Sponsors also make sure that employers know that despite a widespread impression that the Summer Work Travel program is limited to the summer, the reality is that the program offers “Year-Round Availability.” The pitch of InterExchange is typical: “Because we recruit students from all over the world we can fill positions at any time of year.”28


http://www.cis.org/cheap-labor-as-cultural-exchange-1

Yeah, you leave it at that, & I will keep calling things by their rightful names.

Cheap-labor policies. Slave labor policies. Indentured servitude. Coerced labor.

[MADem]

135. I don't understand why you keep talking about grades. You're the only one in this two way chat

mentioning them. The foreign students do not work "under the table," they come in on work visas and the companies that hire them observe US labor law. But whatever--you have an agenda, and facts be damned.

Like I said, if you don't want to read what I write, there's no point in going on.

And on edit, in response to your "anti-immigration" link, there's this: http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/07/from-serbia-to-cape-cod/242582/

...Though the Massachusetts unemployment rate of 7.6 percent stands well below the 9.1 percent national one, it is still high enough to raise questions about just why Cape businesses are in such desperate need of foreign labor. The reason, according to both the foreign workers and the business owners who employee them, has to do with work ethic. Ceperkovic, for instance, works 70 hours a week doing two jobs ("I got them like this," he says, snapping his fingers), though some foreigners he knows work over 100 hours a week.

....We don't see too many coming in for work," David Oliver, owner of Cape Tip Sportswear Company, tells me when I ask him about the state's 265,600 unemployed residents. Meanwhile, "every day, two or three" foreign students come into his shop looking to add another job to their repertoire. "In general, the foreigners work harder and are much more focused than the American ones," he says.

Along with his mother and brother, Shawn McNulty owns the Lobster Pot restaurant, a Provincetown staple that is the second largest employer in town next to the local government. He employs 34 Jamaicans who work here on the H-2B visa, a non-agricultural temporary worker permit that lasts up to nine months, and for which the federal government has an annual quota of 66,000. Some of the workers he employs have been with the restaurant for well over a decade; they celebrate Thanksgiving together and McNulty considers them "part of our family." Three years ago, the last time there was a shortage of H-2B visas, he hired 30 Americans through a labor firm. On the very first day, McNulty says, he had to let four of them go because they "weren't skilled" or "got into trouble with the cops." That summer, the restaurant considered shutting down its lunch service due to the foreign worker shortage

The annual cap on H-2B visas (there is no limit for J-1s) presents an unusual economic conundrum, in which business is threatened not due to a shortage of customers but a lack of staff. "How can you run your business if you don't know if you're going to get your help?" Joy McNulty, the matriarch of the Lobster Pot, asks. She is quick to add that her foreign employees have the full panoply of taxes and unemployment insurance deducted from their paychecks -- money that, as non-citizens, they can't benefit from. Though McNulty spends countless hours every year filling out immigration forms, a process that she says the government should streamline, she's willing to do "whatever it takes as long as I can keep getting them back."

[HiPointDem]

137. Poor memory you have. Your comments about americans who "want to get paid for getting A's"

started this sub-thread.

MADem (71,473 posts)

74. That's why some places are having a hard time finding kids to work summer jobs,
and they import their workers from Jamaica and Ireland and Brazil...because kids want to get paid for getting that A in school...

And no, the foreigners working in tourist spots don't come on "work visas". If you think so, tell me which "work visa" it is that is given to workers coming from overseas to work in minimum wage jobs.

They come on J1 cultural exchange visas which allow them to work. They're recruited in their home countries through State Department "sponsors," private agencies which charge them fees, sometimes rather hefty ones. And the benefit to employers is that they don't have to pay the taxes they have to pay for american workers, and they don't have to pay for insurance or L&I -- the "cultural exchange" workers have to buy their own insurance.

Which you'd know if you bothered to read the link.

BTW, I thought you were done?

[MADem]

139. I've added a link upthread, and yeah--we're done.

I read your "anti-immigration" link (the words of the outfit that published that article of yours) and their bias is noted. I guess that "Give me your tired, your poor" shit is out the window..!

[HiPointDem]

142. Your cheap labor bias is also noted. And "anti-immigration, pro-immigrant" is the full text of the

quote.

And as legal immigration today is about the same as when Emma Lazarus wrote the poem, I don't think you need to worry about the poor & tempest tossed. At least not in terms of them being able to immigrate.




What I worry about more is why people all over the world are being *forced* to migrate all over the world by the economic & political choices of the global ruling class, not to mention their bloody wars.

[dionysus]

23. because it's voluntary. next?

edit: i don't like the concept that much, but it seems to be fairly common in radio and similar media.

[Curmudgeoness]

28. It seems to be common in a lot of areas, but does that make it right?

It is only "the way things are done" because it is allowed.

[dionysus]

37. right? no.. legal.. yes. isn't that the question of the OP?

[Lydia Leftcoast]

29. Most of which could afford to hire someone to make coffee, Xerox, etc.

Are the interns actually producing programs or appearing on the air? If not, it's just a cheapskate way to get their filing done.

[4th law of robotics]

31. Removing the "voluntary" aspect would outlaw

any sort of volunteer work or traineeships.

Yes, being voluntary is a major factor in differentiating slavery from non-slavery.

[Cleita]

39. When you volunteer, it's not a job.

It's something people, mostly retired people, do to help out like at a hospital. I once worked at a hospital with volunteers from the bored housewives of Beverly Hills contingent. Frankly, they mostly got in the way and we gave them jobs like visiting patients and running errands for them so essentially they worked for the patients.

[4th law of robotics]

41. Volunteering is simply free labor you provide for whatever personal reasons

maybe you're bored, looking to learn more skills, meet people, feel good, give back to the community, etc.

The reason doesn't really matter. You are free to give away your labor if you wish.

[Cleita]

42. Yes, but also volunteers show up when it's convenient for them.

They don't have a job they go to every day. Sure there might be a schedule of sorts, but if they don't make it one day, they won't be missed.

[4th law of robotics]

43. You're free not to show up for an internship as well

you just don't get the benefits associated with that.

Look this whole internships = slavery argument is not really going anywhere. It's not backed by even a very generous interpretation of that law and no one really supports it.

[Cleita]

44. So how should it be framed?

I would say morally bankrupt and socially unjust could be a start and unpaid work is legal slavery even if voluntary.

[Curmudgeoness]

45. You go too far in saying that no one supports it.

And your argument about volunteer work being the same as unpaid internships is comparing apples to oranges....at least for me. I do volunteer work because I know there is a need and I believe in the organizations that I do it for. I am free to leave at any time and there would be no repercussions to that. If someone leaves an unpaid internship, they get nothing for it---not even the ability to use it as a reference (unlike volunteer positions).

People should not have to work for free just to be able to get a job. Even in the time unenlightened times of apprenticeships, the trainee was to get some compensation for their labor---even if it was inadequate and was possibly just room and board.

[4th law of robotics]

46. "People should not have to work for free just to be able to get a job"

Would you consider receiving an education to be work? I would. It isn't easy. And companies can "force" you to do this work, for free, for 4 years or more before you are allowed to work there. For that matter you have to *pay* a considerable amount for the privilege of making yourself eligible for that job with no guarantee of employment and certainly no wages while you're studying.

Is that slavery?

[HiPointDem]

144. No wages? I put myself through my BA & MA by working university jobs. Paid ones.

Cleaning university housing, clerking at the university guest lodging, teaching assistant, research assistant. Plus I worked in a bar part-time as an undergrad.

Universities used to have plenty of paid jobs for those who wanted them. Mostly low-wage, but paid. And when I was in school, most of us worked, at least during the summers. Because not only universities, but big corporations, had summer jobs for students. Paid ones. The same ones they're asking you to do for free today, as "internships." Unbelievable, I know.

Companies now not only ask for a BA, they ask you to work for free with no guarantee of a paid job. Or they tell you *your* BA isn't good enough so they need to hire an h1b holder. You consider that some kind of improvement or victory?

[MADem]

78. That's not true at all. Not even close.

I used to volunteer at a feeding center for the homeless, and I was expected to be there, on time, for my shift, no questions, no excuses. If I couldn't make it I needed to swap out with another volunteer. There was no "Oh well, you won't be missed" attitude and that was made clear to me when I signed up. I would never have failed to show up because I knew they counted on me to get the meals out. Everyone else in the facility felt the same way.

I have a neighbor who volunteers at a neighborhood school. She has regular days and regular duties. If she didn't show up, she would be missed.

The point of volunteering is this--you give of yourself, and you GET SOMETHING in return. I got a sense of satisfaction in helping others, as does my neighbor. Young kids get training and a resume bullet and a couple of names to offer up as references.

If you don't like the "something" that you get as a consequence of volunteering, then don't do it. No one will miss you, in that case, because you've never made the promise to show up. But when you do make the promise, you should show up--it's representative of your character how you behave when you make a pledge to do something.

[HiPointDem]

85. And I've been a volunteer coordinator, and the fact is, while we may "expect" certain things

Last edited Sun Apr 29, 2012, 01:04 AM - Edit history (1)

of volunteers and we may miss them, we don't expect what we expect of paid staff. Furthermore, we are fully aware that whatever labor the volunteer DONATES to our organization is their GIFT, and since it is a GIFT, the organization has no claim to EXPECT IT.

One expects paid staff to show up or call in. One asks volunteers to do the same, but "expect" it? Ha. Volunteers no-show regularly. We don't "expect" our program to run on volunteer labor -- there's always a back-up plan, and any organization that doesn't have a back-up plan is a loser organization. And we don't do phoney internships disguised as "work experience".

Volunteering is fine -- when you have a job or don't need one. As a job substitute, it's coerced labor.

[MADem]

105. If you weren't ready to commit, you weren't accepted for the

duty. The outfit that ran the feeding center where I worked were a bunch of hard asses. No one I knew who worked there ever slacked off, but I would imagine if anyone did, they'd be terminated--volunteer or no volunteer. The work was just too important to deal with slipshod commitment. There were too many people in need, and the place had to run with absolute precision. We all 'got' that, even the people like me who were not managing anything and were just there to mop a floor and slap food on a plate for a couple of months (and I was expected to be there for the period of time I said I'd do the work). Even the 'volunteers' who were interning as part of their college educational experience understood what was expected, and they didn't gripe about not getting paid, either (those kids were learning how to do scheduling, how to keep a kitchen clean, how to deal with restaurants to get foodstuffs from them, how to fundraise and solicit donations, how to work with other community leaders, that kind of thing--and they weren't left alone to do that, they went along with the regular staff as shadows to those kinds of meetings).

The work they did at the fast food joint or the supermarket down the street was where they expected to get paid. The "work" at the feeding center was interning--i.e., learning by watching/listening, and a little bit of supervised doing.

You're entrenched in your "forced labor" view, and that's fine and dandy if it makes you happy. I say it's not "forced" when the very nature of the work is voluntary, supervised, and with a goal of learning, and I'll just not be moved from that POV.

[HiPointDem]

109. People say they'll commit all the time -- then their kid gets sick or they move or they

go back to work -- & it's a bloody volunteer job so they quit.

Because, at the end of the day, YOU'RE NOT PAYING THEM.

You just go on pretending that a volunteer experience is just like paid work, though.

[MADem]

117. Shocker--people quit paid jobs, too!

They often do it without notice, as well. Happens all the time. I've seen it a time or two!

So yeah, a well-managed volunteer job can be just like paid work.

If you need money, the volunteering opportunity is quite obviously not for you, but if you NEED money, you'll be applying at the Red Lobster, not the soup kitchen, now, wouldn't you?

Unless you're unclear on the concept?

[HiPointDem]

125. yes, people quit paid jobs. they quit, no-show, & never show after having signed up to be an

intern a hell of a lot more.

because THEY DON'T GET PAID.

i've volunteered plenty in my life, dear. but never under the pretense of an "internship".

[MADem]

167. Odds are good you never will, either.

They're not for people with a fair bit of mileage on them. They are for young people with little to no work experience who want to understand a workcenter environment under the supervision of an experienced member of staff who will provide training to them.

[Auntie Bush]

32. My son did a medical internship one summer and we thought he was pretty lucky.

Not everyone gets that opportunity to get in some much needed experience,
a plus on his resume. Plus an opportunity to see if he liked the field... he didn't. The Dr he worked for advised him against it...no family life and lots of stress. So the next summer he did an internship in Dentistry. He liked both fields and really didn't know which one he wanted to do. Interning helped him make that decision. An internship should just be considered part of their continuing education. I highly approve of the practice as long as people aren't taken advantage of.

[saras]

47. I don't CARE that it's "win-win". I care that the PROPORTIONS of win are fair. And they're not.

What you do after your internship isn't that different than what you do during it. I can see a pay differential, but not ZERO pay, for someone who is now working full-time, and has to support themselves somehow. You can't get financial aid for internships in the normal world.

[yewberry]

49. I'm seeing this from a different angle than you are.

I work in a field in which internships and apprenticeships are industry standards. The employer doesn't set that standard.

Our trades and crafts workers do have an apprenticeship period, and they are, of course, paid. We're talking about boilermakers, machinists, pipefitters and the like. After a few years, they reach journey-level status.

Another part of the field requires internships. These are not people who are fetching coffee or doing filing, and they are not doing work that we would hire anyone to do were they not there. They are there to learn and gain experience. We are lucky enough (so far) that we can offer a limited number of paid internships, but most are unpaid.

In this industry, most firms have stopped offering internships altogether, because they require oversight, and employers are less and less likely to want to pay someone to do that. Also, there is a risk associated with workplace injury. We have employees whose job it is to oversee internships. We are open to workplace injury claims. We provide the experience interns need in order to able to work in their field, and we hire them when we can, provided they don't go work for someone who can pay them more. Some do.

In short, we provide internships so that people we can hire exist. Blue-collar world is different that white-collar world in some ways.

[Cleita]

54. I have no objection to that way of doing it, that is the apprenticeship part.

My husband, who was European, was apprenticed when he was a teenager to learn a trade, but he did get a small stipend and if he had stayed to become a journeyman, he would have gotten a salary. He chose to immigrate to the States instead and went to college to be an architect. So I know the system, but I still object to the unpaid internships. Also, you are very right about the worker's comp. requirement so your workers deserve some compensation as trainees. I'm really only saying that they should get minimum wage. Also, by working for free they are not contributing to FICA and therefore won't get credit for it for their future Social Security and Medicare. It's really a bad system all around.

Amazingly you will find that if a law is enforced to make these unpaid internships illegal, companies will miraculously find the money somewhere to pay for it. It has happened in the past and will in the future, if we force them to do what they are supposed to do.

[yewberry]

57. You're misunderstanding the relationship.

Interns are not employees or trainees; they are effectively students. Paid internships are effectively scholarships.

Also, it is *not* a workers' comp issue. These folks aren't subject to L&I, but can sue in case of injury.

In the case of our interns, once their internship is over, they can choose to work for us. Or, they can choose to take the training we provided, at cost and risk to us, for FREE, and go work for someone else.

[Cleita]

60. If they are still in school, they are students. But once they graduate, I'm sorry, they are just

unpaid workers.

[yewberry]

61. They aren't workers, paid or unpaid.

They're INTERNS. This is why the word exists. They're not doing work we need them to do.

You said upthread that you had to serve as a student teacher in order to be qualified to teach. You paid your university or college to facilitate that training period.

We provide it for free.

[Cleita]

68. Uhm, no.

When I went to college all state colleges and universities were tuition free to California residents. So I paid no one.

[yewberry]

76. Umm, so then my agency is providing the same opportunity as your college did for you.

Except we're doing it in 2012, and it's not based on residency.

[Cleita]

81. Your agency?

Please explain.

[yewberry]

83. The entity providing the internships, apprenticeships, and jobs.

It's a government entity. An agency.

[Cleita]

87. Okay, thanks!

Last edited Sun Apr 29, 2012, 01:06 AM - Edit history (1)

The government is really being squeezed these days by GOOPers. Think about it. You are being screwed by your own corporate backed government assholes.

[yewberry]

90. You have no idea.

It's not exactly news to me that us union slobs are taking it in the teeth, but thanks so much for the snark re my "own corporate back government assholes!"

[Cleita]

93. I corrected the spelling.

Now are you happy?

[yewberry]

102. I did not take issue with the spelling.

I took issue with the fact that you felt the need to point out to a unionized, government employee that I and those like me are being squeezed, and squeezed hard.

Kinda knew that, thanks, but it's still true that neither the government nor the thrice-damned GOP are responsible for the requirement for some workers to have experience before they can be credentialed. That's the industry and union requirement.

[Cleita]

103. Yes, but back in my day, and I'm an old woman

trainees got some money to survive on to get experience.

[yewberry]

122. I work in an old industry.

Back in your day, my industry was still an old industry. This is the way it's always been.

I spent a big chunk of time last week trying to convince one of my coworkers to retire. He's going to turn 87 soon. 87.
Whether you know it or not, it's always been like this for whole lot of people, and it's not easy to change that.

[Cleita]

124. I don't understand what an 87 year old who has worked all his life

has to do with a 22 year old who is beginning to learn? Both have their merits. Both should be paid.

[yewberry]

152. Obviously.

The point is that it's an old industry. It's not going to change for me or for you.

The 87-year-old is a skilled union employee, credentialed by the Coast Guard, Homeland Security, and the TSA, doing essential work. The 22-year-old is not skilled, not an employee, not necessarily union, not necessarily credentialed, and observes work being performed.

[Cleita]

157. So I guess the 22 year old should be considered a student not a worker.

There is a difference there that many on this thread don't seem to understand. When you are an undergraduate attending an institution of higher learning and part of that learning is actual on the job experience it's not the same as going to a job everyday, with no connection to a college or other learning institution, in order to be an unpaid gopher.

[yewberry]

161. Yes.

Real, meaningful internships do exist.

I completely agree that many if not most internships, particularly those in for-profit industries, are just a way to get unpaid labor. Not all, though.

[pipoman]

98. Well a few things have changed since then...

[Cleita]

100. They sure have and this is what I'm addressing.

Kids are getting screwed today and it doesn't have to be that way. We did it before and we can do it again.

[HiPointDem]

112. Yeah, like today you find Democrats cheering for cheap-labor internships.

[pipoman]

150. Yeah, and Democrats cheering exportation of jobs and job-robbing

'free trade agreements'...The Labor Party is dead.

[HiPointDem]

159. And Democrats cheering for union-busting policies as with the current attack on teachers and

publics workers.

[HiPointDem]

96. They can't file an L&I claim, but they *can* sue. Well, alrighty then!

Do Employers Have to Provide Workers' Comp Insurance to Interns?

Generally, yes, especially if any form of manual labor is involved... Student interns (paid or unpaid) providing non-manual services to a religious, charitable or educational institution (covered under Section 501(c)(3) of the IRS tax code) are exempt from mandatory....

http://womeninbusiness.about.com/od/intern-laws/a/Are-Interns-Covered-Under-Workers-Compensation-Insurance.htm

[yewberry]

115. Negative. This field is not covered by L&I.

I'm trying not to be terribly specific because it would be very easy to know where I work if I gave specifics. There are some fields to which L&I regulations do not apply.

[HiPointDem]

118. which is what the excerpt says. and i posted it because i wonder how many interns know

whether they're covered or not, or that if they're injured they might have to *sue* for medical expenses.

[yewberry]

120. No one in this field is covered under L&I, intern or not. nt

[HiPointDem]

133. you know, your field, which is so super-secret and specialized that you can't tell us what it is,

is kind of irrelevant to the bigger picture.

fact is, no interns hired in non-profits doing non-manual labor are covered.

[NNN0LHI]

58. How about we return to the days when new hires without experience were paid top union scale?

I liked those days a lot better.

Don

[Cleita]

59. When were those days?

I had a union job with the phone company, but I had to spend six weeks in training at $85 a week. Once I passed my "internship" and was hired as a full time employee was when I got union wages, not before. I did make a lot of money after then and I was even given money credit for my years in college so I made a higher hourly wage than many of the women who had been there a few years but were only high school grads.

[NNN0LHI]

64. 1973

Few weeks after I turned 18 got hired in as a full time production worker in a union auto plant making top pay. Graduated high school a couple of months later. Retired 30 years after that.

I knew union cashiers at local grocery stores who I graduated with and they were getting about the same pay and benefits as we were getting.

Don

[rhett o rick]

63. Top Union scale? Link please. I was a new union hire once a long time ago.

I started at the bottom and had to work my way up to "top union scale".

[NNN0LHI]

141. Read my post right above yours for the explanation

[Nye Bevan]

65. I guess those kindly hospital volunteers are slaves too.

It's like the Civil War never happened. We need a new Underground Railroad to save these folk.

[HiPointDem]

101. those kindly hospital volunteers are mostly retirees or non-working spouses

and they're generally doing it because they want to. not recent college grads doing it in hopes of getting a job.

[white_wolf]

67. Sad to see so many DUers defend this pratice.

unpaid internships are pure exploitation.

[HiPointDem]

114. Not merely defending. Exhalting it and pretending it's some kind of philanthropy done for the

good of the poor, inexperienced college grads.

[Cleita]

126. +1000

[Nikia]

69. Poorer students really lose out on this

Even if they receive a large amount of scholarship money going towards tuition, room, and board. While there are some for credit internships, generally the best internship opportunties are during the summer. This is especially true if one's college is not located where there are good opportunties in one's field.
Most scholarship students cannot make it through the school year if they don't work full time for pay during the summer. If a student has to live independently in an expensive city like Washington D.C. or New York City and intern without pay, this is pretty much impossible.
Even with scholarships, poor students also have less of a chance to study abroad. Even if a college, offers financial aid for study abroad, it is usually limited to a smaller number of programs and might not be to the full extent as on campus study. A student abroad student is usually not able to work for pay at all while they are away. International travel and associated expenses are always extra.
Few opportunities for unpaid internships and study abroad definitely make it harder for poorer students, even those with significant financial aid, to break into many fields. I think that poorer students definitely have to consider this when choosing a major and emphasis.

[Cleita]

73. I went to two colleges, one a state college, tuition free back then,

and then I got a scholarship to a private college, however I couldn't have managed either without summer jobs and part time jobs during the school year. However, I never was saddled with loan debt and when I went to work, I got paid, even when I was being trained. That's all an internship is. It's a training period by the corporation in the way they like things done. They are not training you for a job in the same field universally but for a job in their culture the way they want it done.

[LynneSin]

77. But they aren't involuntary

just saying

[Canuckistanian]

94. Well, there's the issue of compulsion

Interns have never filed challenges saying they were forced to work.

Slaves never had much choice.

[Cleita]

95. Interesting proposition.

I wonder, if they would, once they are fed up with not getting paid for what they do?

[Canuckistanian]

107. The problem is...

That the institution of internships have been ensconced in our society as a general societal benefit.

The problem is that the traditional scope of internships is rapidly being expanded to more and more profitable ventures (for obvious reasons).

Internships should be limited to non-profits or entertainment industries only.

[Cleita]

108. Or even narrower than that. n/t

[HiPointDem]

128. Entertainment? You mean like the Disney interns who spent their stint flipping burgers 40 hours

a week?

In a report by Guernica magazine, participants in the well-known Disney intern program admitted that they had been misled into committing to a several-month on-location “internship” with the company, only to discover that they would be spending their summer flipping burgers and working over 40 hours a week. The students did this work for no more than they would make flipping burgers in a non-internship setting, but because the program bears the name “intern,” they accepted the position.

http://www.usatodayeducate.com/staging/index.php/career/opinion-unpaid-internships-hurt-students


Each year, between 7,000 and 8,000 college students and recent graduates work full-time, minimum-wage, menial internships at Disney World. Typical stints last four to five months, but the “advantage programs” may last up to seven months.

Rather than offer traditional summer internships, Disney’s schedule is determined by the company’s manpower needs, requiring students to temporarily suspend their schooling or continue it on Disney property and on Disney terms. The interns work entirely at the company’s will without sick days or time off, without grievance procedures, without guarantees of workers’ compensation or protection against harassment or unfair treatment. Twelve-hour shifts are typical, many beginning at 6 a.m. or stretching past midnight.

Interns sign up without knowing their assignments or their compensation, though it typically hovers near minimum wage... in certain parts of the park, at certain times of day, they comprise more than 50 percent of staff. Their work is identical to what permanent employees do, and there’s no added supervision, training, or mentoring on the job. The internship’s educational component is a three- or four-hour class each week, offering some of the easiest college credits in the land. Students are also encouraged to obtain credit through networking, distance learning, and “individualized learning opportunities.” Many interns do nothing scholastic, given that Disney doesn’t require it and that twelve-hour shifts are exhausting enough.

Like other employers, Disney has mastered how to rebrand ordinary jobs as exciting opportunities. “We’re not there to flip burgers or to give people food,” a fast food intern told the Associated Press. “We’re there to create magic.” Should the magic fail, the program at least seems to promise professional development and the prestige of the Disney name. Yet training and education are afterthoughts: the kids are brought in to work. Having traveled thousands of miles and barely breaking even financially, they find themselves cleaning hotel rooms, performing custodial work, and parking cars in the guise of an academic exercise. A small number of College Program “graduates” are offered full-time positions at Disney. The housing is designed to scale the program to massive proportions, where the savings of not employing full-timers, who demand benefits and have unions, kick in. Mandatory communal housing, the cost of which is deducted from their paychecks, may make the experience fun and memorable, like college, but it also looks like a term of indenture: living on company property, eating company food, and working when the company says so.

http://www.guernicamag.com/features/perlin_5_1_11/

[onenote]

148. what is the difference between an unpaid internship and volunteering?

My wife works for a charitable organization. They offer unpaid internships during the summer. But they also have unpaid volunteers who do many of the same tasks.

Is one a slave and the other not?


BTW: my wife herself started out as a volunteer at the organization where she now works. She did so for the specific reasons of getting some experience in the field and making connections that might, in turn, help her get a paid job with the organization. Which, indeed, is exactly what happened. In essence, she did exactly what many interns do for exactly the same reasons and the organization gave her the opportunity for exactly the same reason most organizations offer unpaid internships.

Finally, I recently served on a committee that provides "scholarships" (or "stipends&quot to students to assist them during unpaid internships with government agencies. These internships provide these students with immeasurable benefits in terms of exposure to these agencies and the issues they administer. Most of the interns don't do any real "work" that would be done by a paid employee. Generally, they just "shadow" a paid employee, attending meetings, reading material, and learning about the job.

[JonLP24]

129. No idea

but couldn't we ask the same for college athletes? I know many may not consider them real workers but plenty of people make big money around them. Coaches, ADs, conferences w/ their huge TV contracts. Broadcasters, newspapers, television like ESPN. Also they may improve the school indirectly as enrollment at VCU went up significantly after they made the Final Four. Also economics considers the NCAA a cartel so there is a business aspect to it even when the only reason the contests take place are by unpaid workers(can't have a basketball game without basketball players).

Not making argument to pay college athletes, wondering out loud if you could ask the same question while stating the case that they are workers that generate revenue for the business of their school and the overall business of the NCAA.

[HiPointDem]

131. Yep, we could. In their case, however, they often get a full ride on tuition and living

expenses -- scholarship, at least the "stars". So you could say they get paid.

[JonLP24]

138. I guess you could

but scholarships are for one-year and the NCAA and its teams will(and have) protest 4-year scholarships loudly. Why? Just like NFL and NBA teams, they bring in new players the next year, hold a training camp & then cut players. Also with opportunity cost (you miss out on something else while doing the thing that you are presently doing) the incentive isn't there to engage in very challenging and time consuming majors when you have to be talented enough to receive a scholarship for the next year and also training for a professional career. Also w/ games & practices the time isn't there especially when there are travel games on school nights. They also have a laundry list of things they're not supposed to unlike other scholarship students, I laughed when they were talking about "character issues" for an Ohio State player who got in trouble for selling his own personal property. They are featured in ads for free, jerseys are sold with their number that they don't collect, and the NCAA Football video game series - while they don't use real names(you can easily download them from someone who did the hard work of thousands of players) the players featured have the same numbers, height, weight, skills, as the real players.

Realistically would that be considered "paid" if they had some labor rights as all Americans? They don't even get workman's comp if they get injured. If a player gets inured severely enough and doesn't get their scholarship renewed, they are responsible for expensive medical bills.

[HiPointDem]

143. I'm fully on board with the injury issues & believe that the amateurism of college athletics

is basically a farce, as the athletes = money-makers for colleges/universities, especially the big ones, with no guarantees at the end of their participation.

I am uniformed about the 1 year/4-year thing. I assumed that if they were on the team, they were getting some kind of scholarship or assistance.

[JonLP24]

146. They are

It is one year at a time so they have to make the cut or transfer to another school that wants them in order for it to continue. I pointed that out because a lot of people (not saying you) are under the impression it is for 4-years when it is 1-year at a time. Sorry if I came across as contrary to that scholarship point.

[Cleita]

155. You apparently know nothing about college athletes particularly in the big

universities. I worked at UCLA at one time and trust me the major sports teams, notably football and basketball, were treated like kings. What they didn't get in actual money they got in the best of everything, housing, recreation, trips, dining, clothes and I mean everything.

[JonLP24]

162. What is it I don't know?

I didn't say they didn't get housing or clothing allowance(though NCAA restricts type of housing and who can provide the housing, athletes must show receipts from clothing allowance). I agree that there are ways they are treated better than other students but there are ways they are treated worse. We can sell whatever is rightfully are own personal property. We can have lunch with Deion. Anyways, I gather your answer to my question is "No".

Is your, what seems like, disagreement over that the laborers aren't paid? Those payments are considerably lower than they would be if the NCAA didn't have that monopsonistic rule but instead the vast majority of the wealth is distributed to the coaches, ADs, colleges, conferences, and the NCAA.

So your question was if unpaid interns violated the 13th Amendment. I asked if the question could be asked of college athletes. It probably doesn't violate it and neither does college athletes though both or maybe not both receive benefits. Athletes probably receive more as long as they get their scholarships renewed and don't get hurt. It many ways though, the college athletes thing bothers me more because the NCAA restricts colleges ability to compete for athletes, therefore suppressing wages of the laborers while denying them labor rights all Americans enjoy(did I mention they don't get workman's comp if they get hurt?), while colluding with other competing school sports programs to maximize revenue. Interesting, in any other market besides sports, this would easily be considered anti-trust violations and therefore illegal.

I don't know enough about unpaid interns to make a case but even if they're fetching coffee or running errands, they should be compensated IMO. The thing that makes the athletes different is they're the labor force rather than someone learning the ropes. It is like, you can't run an airplane business without pilots. You can't run a basketball season without basketball players but we don't expect pilots to be happy with unlimited airline miles, clothing, housing, and food allowance.

[Ms. Toad]

149. Slavery? really?

The discussion of whether interns should be paid or not is a good one, but calling it slavery seems to me to trivialize the shameful history of slavery in this country - in which people were torn from their homelands, bought and sold, beaten, raped, and murdered, and forced to work extremely long hours (often under the threat of more vioence), in inhuman conditions, without compensation.

Somehow, that doesn't seem at all similar to me to a bunch of rich kids (as seems to be the general consensus in the thread) having the luxury to be able to work unpaid in a company that might just give them (or lead to) a well paid job in the future.

So - as I said, it is a good discussion about whether the (non)compensation structure should be changed so it is not only the wealthy who can take advantage of this opportunity. But it seems disrespectful to me to portray it as slavery.

[Cleita]

156. Yes, let's not trivialize another set of slaves suffering by comparing them to a new

set of slaves just because they aren't suffering in the same way. I heard the same argument when I compared the way we make our undocumented workers illegal it's no different than the Nazis making Jews illegal. Oh, the pearl clutching over comparing a bunch of Mexicans to the Holocaust!

Get a shovel!

[Ms. Toad]

158. Slaves have a very specific history in this country

and there are still real slaves in the United States in the sex trade. Human beings bought and sold as animals to be put to whatever use their "owners" wish.

Yes, it is insulting to compare voluntary (as in, they have the freedom to walk out) unpaid interns to the people who risk their lives if they attempt to leave.

ETA: You went beyond generically comparing them (which would be bad enough); you started the discussion suggesting the constitutional amendment which prohibits ownership of human beings might be applicable to these voluntary internships. As I said, you have valid concerns - but it is wage and labor laws that are applicable not a constitutional amendment to prohibit ownership of other human beings.

[Cleita]

160. I guess everyone missed my point.

This amendment could be a way of addressing that those wage and labor laws need to be improved. However, after reading the replies on this thread, perhaps serfdom would be a better word.

Serf:
1. A member of the lowest feudal class, attached to the land owned by a lord and required to perform labor in return for certain legal or customary rights.

2. An agricultural laborer under various similar systems, especially in 18th- and 19th-century Russia and eastern Europe.

3. A person in bondage or servitude.

I believe #3 would apply. A person in bondage or servitude is not bought and sold but is required to perform a service for no pay until the terms of his bondage or servitude is fulfilled.

However, smarter pundits than me have said we are descending into economic feudalism. So what are we going to do about it and what tools available to us are we going to use to get there?

[Posteritatis]

163. If "everyone" misses someone's point, that generally suggests the point itself is wrong. (nt)

[Cleita]

164. And I guess you are an authority on this.

[Ms. Toad]

165. As an attorney -

I can tell you that suggesting that internships violate the 13th amendment would not even pass the laugh test (The informal way some of us refer to deciding about whether we risk professional sanctions by filing a case. If I can't make the argument with a straight face, the court or opposing counsel would probably be justified in seeking professional sanctions against me.).

The problem you face trying to put this in the forced labor category is that the internship isn't forced.

It is an opportunity (and a foot in the door) to rich kids who can afford not to work - no force there. And the fact that poor kids can't afford to give up paying work to do an internship really puts the other work they are doing (which they are coerced into doing because they can't afford not to) more in the category of coercion than internships. There is de facto discrimination based on economic status - but that is not a protected class (so no constitutional issue there, either).

There are, as some people pointed out, wage and labor laws which limit the kind of work which can be done by interns without pay. A more productive approach would be to enforce (and perhaps beef up) those laws. But it isn't a constitutional matter.

[Cleita]

166. I know there is a lot of economic and social injustices that wouldn't pass the laugh test.

That doesn't make them any less reprehensible. I agree we need to enforce and pass laws to address it. If it's not a form of slavery it is a form of indentured servitude.

[Posteritatis]

151. Dammit, I lost four IQ points just reading that OP. (nt)

[Cleita]

154. I guess you didn't have many to begin with if you

think people should work for nothing so the corporations can get even richer and more powerful.