Ask HN: Is it acceptable not to pay interns? | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: Is it acceptable not to pay interns?

5 pointsjackman00210 comments

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/28/your-money/28interns.html?em

Many people who were interview seem to suggest that they would hire paid workers but instead chose to use unpaid workers. Their reasons vary, but many seem to highlight the inherent value in unpaid labor.

Without a structured internship (weekly or biweekly meetings, goals, referrals, valuable introductions, ect) it seems these interns are getting very little in return.

How would you handle an unpaid intern? Would you accept unpaid labor?

View on HN

Something to think about: sometimes free labor means you're populating your future industry with kids who can afford to not get paid, and this may lead to aristocracy trumping meritocracy.

It was long the practice in medicine that not only did you serve your internship for free, indeed you paid for the privilege. At some point there was a collective realization that this was contributing to, or percieved to contribute to, a good-ole-boy network instead of the meritocracy one wants of doctors. So interns, and other resident physicians, are paid.

It's unacceptable to lie to potential interns about what they can expect, but if someone thinks they're getting some acceptable non-monetary value for their time and effort and wants to so the work, I don't see a moral problem.

Whether having unpaid people help with your work is good or bad is something else. They're going to cost you your own time and effort, so you need to know if you're shooting yourself in the foot by skimping on payroll.

One thing is for sure: unpaid internships are probably illegal nine times out of ten. Employers are legally required to pay interns at least minimum wage if they fit the definition of an employee. Given the way most startups use interns, they would be considered employees.

According to the Department of Labor, if an intern's work benefits the company, then the intern should be treated as an employee. There is a six factor test, more on this here: http://www.clark.edu/student_services/employment/documents/L...

A related point, I think paying employees only with stock options is also illegal for a startup. The stock options likely don't have much value in a startup, and also the employee may lose the stock options if they quit (or are fired) prior to their vesting date.

So, both interns and employees should at least be paid minimum wage unless the company literally cannot even afford paying minimum wage. That said, the company will probably only have a legal problem if the underpaid intern/employee files a complaint.

It certainly wouldn't be considered socially acceptable here in New Zealand, even ignoring the fact that you'd almost certainly be prosecuted if you tried it.

For some reason it appears to be tolerated in the U.S. despite it apparently being illegal in many cases. Mark Cuban was whining about this recently: http://blogmaverick.com/2009/09/05/want-an-unpaid-internship...

I would not accept unpaid labour but I have had unpaid interns, they simply were only allowed to learn. As soon as someone did something remotely productive we would compensate them for it.

That about sums it up.

Following that rule is also how you can stay in compliance with labor laws (at least in the U.S.).

Besides the legal issues, you get what you pay for. Really, if I was doing work (especially if I can see it making someone else a pile of money) and I wasn't being paid for it, I wouldn't be motivated to put any effort into it and you'd probably find it cheaper to just pay someone instead.

FWIW: I read somewhere that for some industries, unpaid internships are becoming The Norm for getting your foot in the door for certain types of things and it is becoming difficult to make it into some of the more powerful jobs (in certain industries) without having this on your resume. The piece I read criticized this practice as being a new fangled way to keep the upper class in power because the people who can afford to take a full-time job which pays nothing at all are generally going to come from a rather privileged family background. It was cited as a sneakily exclusionary practice, a la Jim Crow laws.

I have had that experience with many companies. Often times in financial companies it will be up to the discretion of a partner to decide if they would like to pay interns.

I interviewed with two different offices of a large brokerage (shall remained unnamed but they were purchased by BoA). One office told me I would get school credit for filling orders. The other office offered to pay me for doing market analysis. It seems the difference lies in how much they value an interns service.

Often, people don't see the long-term consequences of such choices. That lack of broader perspective always reminds me of the Aswan Dam. It accomplished all of its stated goals and was, therefore, a "success" as measured by the stated goals. But it had a few minor little unexpected side effects, like causing a schistosomiasis epidemic, increasing the amount spent on fertilizer for farms by like 600%, etc. ad nauseum.

I get labeled a bleeding heart idealist by a lot of people. I remain frustrated at my inability to adequately explain that my views are typically rooted in something deeply practical. A short explanation: I basically believe in "karma" -- but I don't think there is necessarily anything mystical to it. Just because people frequently can't trace the effect back to its root cause doesn't mean there is no such relationship in reality.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com