This is confusing... looking at it from the "if I was the target audience" perspective:
General idea: unpaid work is a strange idea, but I didn't have anything else planned - why not?
Looking at the blog: 20h/week - that's cool, they're not expecting any actual work done. "Manage relationships with merchandise providers" - wait what? "help negotiate new licensing agreements" - phone monkey? "manage workflow of merchandise production from end to end" - doing actual work? with responsibilities??
I'm confused about who they're looking for. It looks like they need unpaid salespeople / junior account managers. But if someone can do the sales / manager position with ~1-month training and be useful for the other 2 months... I'm sure s/he can find a better position which actually pays commission.
They're looking for people who are competent, but who are either naive, terrible at selling themselves to an employer, or vastly underestimating their ability to find a good paid position.
According to the admins, Conde Naste's legal department cleared them, but I'm not sure. It looks like this could get ugly. The reddit community has a nasty habit of lashing out hard when they don't like something, but it usually blows over after a week or two. However, I've never seen it in the case where there could be legal action.
Why the hell isn't Conde Nast simply paying interns?
Guess: because they're actually really not OK with having interns (go! having an HR department!) and so the only way for the Reddit team to synthesize headcount was in this under-the-table fashion.
I don't see why anyone would share care about the details of internship contract, unless they personally involved. I see no problem with unpaid internships -- i never did one, nor would I offer one. Unless of course I was losing money on the deal and I was doing it to just be nice.
How is an unpaid internship different than becoming involved in an open source project?
How is an unpaid internship different than helping a professor with their research?
How is an unpaid internship different than volunteering at a soup kitchen or some other nonprofit?
>I don't see why anyone would share care about the details of internship contract, unless they personally involved.
Depresses pay. Tilts the workforce towards those who come from wealthy parents. Raises barriers to entry to career switching which decrease economic flexibility
There are gray areas, but on the last point, nonprofits are treated differently than for-profit corporations for labor-law purposes. In particular, nonprofits have a lot more leeway for soliciting volunteers than for-profit corporations do.
You commit to those things in an unofficial way. Someone might blame you if you stop being involved, but that's entirely your decision. If you're actually at work on the other hand, you start having responsibilities, deadlines and people depending on your work. Even if you cannot be held responsible for some actions, your contract will say you are most of the time. Any contract puts you in an official position, recognised as such by law. You cannot do whatever you want anymore.
simple, unlike those other ones, unpaid internships eliminate entry level jobs in the industry. Why should a company pay you $7-10 bucks an hour, if they can get someone to do it for free?
Just pay them minimum wage if that is all you can afford. This trend of kids being forced to take an unpaid internship for college credit is really hurting kids who pay their own way through school or just need to have a paying job in the summer for one reason or another. Really, in the grand scheme of things it can't cost much to pay minimum wage and I think better work will get done.
Regardless of the letter of the law, I don't see why anybody should be upset about this. Laws intended to keep people from taking unfair advantage of others who willingly agree to the arrangement are often horribly broken in that they treat a variety of situations where all parties receive benefits which are satisfactory to them as exploitative.
It also discriminates towards people of means. If I had rich parents, I could afford to work there for nothing. As a person who paid for myself, I'd be unable to have done that at the start of my career
They have to treat them like that in many situations... If you're in a situation where you don't have much choice, the employer will say "testify that you're doing the work because you want to and get $1/h we give you, or you can go". It's hard to trust anyone who's already agreeing to do something not generally acceptable, because they gain something else from it. And for them the current situation is more important than the general justice.
On the other hand, it's easier to say that a job which benefits the employer needs to be paid. There might be situations where it's not really needed, but it would be hard to find a situation where it hurts anyone. So why not enforce it?
I believe the commenter on reddit is mistaken. If you're doing an internship for class credit (as is indicated in reddit's blog post), it can be unpaid.
Note: I'm not a tax lawyer, so don't quote me on this.
It has to not seem like a sham class, though, at least if anyone actually investigates it. Just the fact that you get course credit isn't really enough; it also has to be mainly educational, not just a job relabeled as a class. Here's the federal government's six-part test for it: http://www.dol.gov/whd/regs/compliance/whdfs71.pdf
The idea of an unpaid internship is abominable. Most interns in these positions need money desperately to pay their student loans (or maybe their living expenses???).
While it may not be illegal, it still generates a foul stench that reflects poorly on the founders of the company.
I'd be more than happy to stand with a group of interns to help them protest this madness. Give me a sign and I'll stand on the street corner with you demanding justice.
Bottom line, the "haves" are not willing to give (even a little) to the "have-nots".
Unpaid internships are very common. As I understand it if you get course credit they don't have to pay you, hence the "we're legally required to ask you for a Letter of Credit".
Under this definition, my internship at the Massachusetts Statehouse was illegal unpaid labor.
This opportunity looks like a bad deal to me, I wouldn't do it personally, but trying to criminalize voluntary exchanges is no good in my opinion. Someone proactive about learning and making connections could benefit A LOT from this sort of thing and gain a lot more than $7/hour in value. Not my cup of tea, but I can see how it'd make sense for someone and I don't like seeing two people forbidden from a voluntary exchange they both think would work well for them.
[+] [-] viraptor|16 years ago|reply
General idea: unpaid work is a strange idea, but I didn't have anything else planned - why not?
Looking at the blog: 20h/week - that's cool, they're not expecting any actual work done. "Manage relationships with merchandise providers" - wait what? "help negotiate new licensing agreements" - phone monkey? "manage workflow of merchandise production from end to end" - doing actual work? with responsibilities??
I'm confused about who they're looking for. It looks like they need unpaid salespeople / junior account managers. But if someone can do the sales / manager position with ~1-month training and be useful for the other 2 months... I'm sure s/he can find a better position which actually pays commission.
[+] [-] alex_c|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jokermatt999|16 years ago|reply
http://www.reddit.com/r/blog/comments/c7vdo/call_for_interns...
According to the admins, Conde Naste's legal department cleared them, but I'm not sure. It looks like this could get ugly. The reddit community has a nasty habit of lashing out hard when they don't like something, but it usually blows over after a week or two. However, I've never seen it in the case where there could be legal action.
[+] [-] vaksel|16 years ago|reply
I'm sure the admins attitude of "If you think it is illegal, don't apply." isn't going to help them either.
[+] [-] tptacek|16 years ago|reply
Guess: because they're actually really not OK with having interns (go! having an HR department!) and so the only way for the Reddit team to synthesize headcount was in this under-the-table fashion.
[+] [-] tedunangst|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] smackfu|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dantheman|16 years ago|reply
How is an unpaid internship different than becoming involved in an open source project?
How is an unpaid internship different than helping a professor with their research?
How is an unpaid internship different than volunteering at a soup kitchen or some other nonprofit?
[+] [-] gte910h|16 years ago|reply
Depresses pay. Tilts the workforce towards those who come from wealthy parents. Raises barriers to entry to career switching which decrease economic flexibility
[+] [-] _delirium|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] viraptor|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] vaksel|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jpdbaugh|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Zak|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gte910h|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] viraptor|16 years ago|reply
On the other hand, it's easier to say that a job which benefits the employer needs to be paid. There might be situations where it's not really needed, but it would be hard to find a situation where it hurts anyone. So why not enforce it?
[+] [-] kwyjibo|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tvon|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] justinph|16 years ago|reply
Note: I'm not a tax lawyer, so don't quote me on this.
[+] [-] _delirium|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] vaksel|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] proee|16 years ago|reply
While it may not be illegal, it still generates a foul stench that reflects poorly on the founders of the company.
I'd be more than happy to stand with a group of interns to help them protest this madness. Give me a sign and I'll stand on the street corner with you demanding justice.
Bottom line, the "haves" are not willing to give (even a little) to the "have-nots".
[+] [-] tlrobinson|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] vaksel|16 years ago|reply
lots of info in this comment:
http://www.reddit.com/r/blog/comments/c7vdo/call_for_interns...
[+] [-] smackfu|16 years ago|reply
Man, those guys are dicks.
[+] [-] lionhearted|16 years ago|reply
This opportunity looks like a bad deal to me, I wouldn't do it personally, but trying to criminalize voluntary exchanges is no good in my opinion. Someone proactive about learning and making connections could benefit A LOT from this sort of thing and gain a lot more than $7/hour in value. Not my cup of tea, but I can see how it'd make sense for someone and I don't like seeing two people forbidden from a voluntary exchange they both think would work well for them.
[+] [-] vaksel|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] scott_s|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] brown9-2|16 years ago|reply
not to be pedantic but these aren't proposed labor laws, they are already definitions used by the Department of Labor.