The intern's rise and fall

‘Efficiency savings’ is a peculiar phrase; one that has recently been twirling on the tongues of many government officials and chief executives. But how can they really do more with less?

The answer lies in the dazzling rise in the use of internships. Many bosses are now using unpaid interns where paid jobs would otherwise be needed.  Such a scheme brings handsome savings for any enterprise, leaving employers puffing on their cigars with satisfaction.

Yet there is a catch: this system is not legal. According to the National Minimum Wage (NMW), the minimum rate that should be paid for services rendered is £5.80 an hour.

Thus, working as an unpaid intern at a for-profit company equates to illegal slave labour. Many private sector companies try to skirt around such legal barriers by the claim that interns are essentially volunteers and so they cede their right to payment because they are choosing to work for free.

This may be so of charity work, where people join up not to line their own pockets but to alleviate the suffering of others; though it is not the case for interns who are only ‘volunteering’ in a bid to increase their chances of obtaining an advantage over their peers in a competitive jobs market.

Because of the government turning a blind eye, this system sharply benefits those who have successful parents, who can use their parent’s connections to obtain the ‘impressive’ internships, and their bank accounts to subsidise working for free. This means the interns are not just chosen on merit or by their ability to perform a job, but by their capacity to pay for it. In an age where social mobility is a creed of all political parties, the system of unpaid internships can be seen as one its greatest obstacles.

Why is it then that unpaid internships are condoned and are even maintained? Three myths have been elaborately spread by the beneficiaries of free interns in order to shroud the subject and cloud the public’s perception of internships.

The first myth is the public view that a system of free internships benefits the wider economy. On the surface the argument appears to hold some weight. It does indeed allow all forms of work to be done by youthful, qualified and energetic workers, lowering the cost and raising the quality of production dramatically.

But in the long term it would have a negative impact on the economy as it excludes those more able to do the job but are labouring already under student debts. As Dominic Potter, director of Internocracy, points out “it damages the reputation of these industries and makes it difficult for them to recruit from the broadest pool of talent”.

The second myth is that interns are in fact paid in the currency of experience. By living and working in a real office environment they are allegedly picking up the essential skills to become an effective employee. Yet, according to a survey made by the University of Westminster, this is an idealistic view to take.

The survey claims 90 per cent of UK students have at some point worked for free and 60 per cent find that the experience is in no way beneficial. Horror stories permeate websites such as Interns Anonymous of exploitation and subjection of highly qualified graduates to menial jobs.

One Ivy League student, as mentioned in the New York Times, claimed she spent her three-month unpaid internship at a magazine packaging and shipping meaningless apparel photos to fashion companies; another graduate was said to have been told to clean the office floors.

The experience gain for the intern is minor in comparison to the employers’ acquired advantage from having highly qualified graduates doing complex and difficult tasks without having to pay the price for their services.

The third myth used in defence of unpaid internships is that if they were paid, there would be far fewer places for them on offer. This is an attempt to maintain a favourable status quo by those who fear having to pay for their research help and their complimentary coffee service. The reality is that companies would not offer internships in the first place if they were not already highly beneficial as it would go against their mantra to maximise profit. In many cases minimum wage for the intern is still a great bargain compared to paying a starter salary for someone to do the equivalent work...

So what is to be done? The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) have advocated a £2.50 per hour “training wage”. This is a step in the right direction, but does not go far enough. It may just result in giving firms a licence to burden the intern with more menial jobs under the guise of “training” whilst giving them the moral high ground and legitimising their actions.

The real solution lies in an active government enforcement of the minimum wage. This will give young people from all walks of life the chance to take part in internship schemes. The businesses would profit greatly from this much larger roster of skilled individuals to choose from.

In addition businesses will still benefit from the availability of cheap, skilled labour while simultaneously enhancing their image by promoting social mobility. In this way skill and intellect will be the sole criteria for those taking internships, and the ranks of interns will not just be filled by those in the lucky position of having generous parents.