UPDATE: Be sure to read PARC’s response to my concerns in my most recent post.

A few weeks ago, Northeast Partners in Amphibian and Reptile Conservation (NEPARC) sent out a request with the title: “NEPARC is Seeking a Social Media and Outreach Specialist Internship (Volunteer)!”

I was intrigued, not because I need a new job, but because the announcement sounded fishy. For one, unpaid internships are bad news in general, but it also sounded a lot like what I call a pseudo-internship.

Pseudo-internships are positions that organizations label as internships but are really not internships at all. These positions usually arise when an organization identifies a specific job they would like to see accomplished but are unable (really just unwilling—more on that in a minute) to either 1.) hire a one-time contractor, 2.) pay an employee to pick up the work, or 3.) find a benevolent volunteer.

In addition to violating labor law (more on that in a minute), these pseudo-internships, when unpaid, have the pernicious and unintended consequence of perpetuating inequality and disadvantaging poor folks, especially young poor folks who are trying to begin their careers.

The reason is that internship experience has real value as currency on resumes. You are more likely to get hired for a job or accepted to a graduate program with one or two relevant internships under your belt, because hiring/admission committees recognize the value of real-world experience. That is, assuming the internship was legit, and not a pseudo-internship.

The problem with unpaid pseudo-internships is that it shifts the burden of living expenses and other external costs onto the “intern.” So, unless your parents are paying your rent or you are otherwise independently wealthy, you are faced with either 1.) working two jobs simultaneously, 2.) going into debt to work for free, or 3.) avoiding unpaid internships. The result is that unpaid internships are out of reach to working-class folks.

But, it gets worse. The proliferation of unpaid interships makes paid internships super competitive. And when a bunch of great resumes come in for a paid position, chances are the top candidates will already have an unpaid internship as a resume line. Thus, unpaid internship effectively make paid internships equally unattainable for poor folks.

Fake internships like NEPARC’s compound the problem because the intern doesn’t even receive specific training to make the financial burden worthwhile (more on that below).

 

So, I wrote to NEPARC:

 

“Hi NEPARC organizers,

I wanted to say that I really appreciate all you do. I also wanted to share a perspective as a first-generation college student concerning this position. 

Unpaid positions like these are huge disappointments to low-income students. I love herps and would have loved a position like this, but those of us without independent wealth or family support cannot afford to even entertain the idea of unpaid internships. It is even more of a heartbreak realizing that kids who can afford to work for free will be able to use positions like this to build their resume and stack the deck even more toward inequality in applying for subsequent positions. In addition to being a disappointment, it also send the signal that NEPARC is not interested in poor folks and undermines the organization’s commitment to inclusion. It also send the signal that NEPARC doesn’t value its own work or conservation in general if it is not worth paying someone even a minimal stipend to do the work.”

 

I didn’t want to be the kind of Slacktivist that complains without offering to help, so I added:

 

“I realize NEPARC likely does not have a budget for this position. At minimum wage, 10 hours/month for 4 months is ~$600. I will commit to a donation $200 to help fund a stipend, if you all will use it as leverage to help raise the rest of the funds. Let me know if this is something you all would be willing to do.

Again, thanks for all of your hard work!

Best,

Andis”

 

…and the response was:

 

“Dear Andis,

Thank you for your comments.  I will make sure to bring this up with the Steering Committee over our next conference call.

Regards,”

 

My hope was that the NEPARC folks would instantly see the negative effects of their good intentions and either take me up on my offer or find another means to accomplish their outreach goals. After all, I’m a grad student and I’m willing to pony up to make this position ethical, it seems like their Board would jump on the fundraising potential given their fiduciary and ethical responsibility to the organization.

Hell, I would even have been happy if they just took the word “intership” out of the announcement and leave it as “volunteer.”

Instead, I got a mass mailing in my inbox a few days ago with the same title: “NEPARC is Seeking a Social Media and Outreach Specialist Internship (Volunteer)!”

 

So, it seems that even in full knowledge of the problems with pseudo-internships, NEPARC is not only unwilling to make an ethical move, they are completely willing to turn down a donation to help them do it.

Don’t get me wrong, I love NEPARC, and I don’t think their intentions are bad—rather I think that they still don’t grok the gravity of the problem. Having been a director on multiple non-profit boards, I can empathize.

 

But in addition to the ethical problem, there is a legal problem associated with pseudo-internships that should make the NEPARC board very wary.

A few years ago, the Department of Labor, recognizing the ethical and economic problems of unpaid internships, cracked down on the practice by establishing criteria for internships and setting penalties for employers that violate the rules. Although the Republican administration weakened the criteria last year, the legal foundation remains. The old criteria included:

• The intern and the employer understand that there is no expectation of compensation during the internship and no job guarantee thereafter.
• The internship provides similar training to that given in an educational environment—like clinical training.
• The internship is tied to the intern’s formal education program through integrated coursework or academic credit.
• The internship is aligned with the academic calendar.
• The intern’s work complements—rather than displaces—paid employees’ work and provides significant educational benefits to the intern.

And the new criteria:

• Both parties understand that the intern is not entitled to compensation.
• The internship provides training that would be given in an educational environment.
• The intern’s completion of the program entitles him or her to academic credit.
• The internship corresponds with the academic calendar.
• The internship’s duration is limited to the period when the internship educates the intern.
• The intern’s work complements rather than displaces the work of paid employees while providing significant educational benefits.
• The intern and the employer understand that the internship is conducted without entitlement to a paid job at the internship’s end.

Nowhere does NEPARC’s position description mention any form of training, nor certainty of academic credit, and no alignment with the academic calendar. This position fails even the extremely loose new rubric.

Regardless of the legal definition, internships are supposed to be intentionally and explicitly educational—the educational benefits of an internship should not be just the by-products of providing free-labor, which is the only angle the NEPARC position takes in the “Benefits to the Volunteer Intern” section.

A position description for an internship should focus solely on what the employer will provide to the intern in terms of trainings to develop hard and soft skills. It is painfully clear that the NEPARC description is directed entirely at what the organization wants to get out of the internship, NOT what they intend to provide. For example, a quick scan of the “Qualifications” section makes it clear that they want someone who already has outreach and communications experience. Unless NEPARC has a professional communications person on staff to offer higher-level training (They don’t.), there is no way they could even offer a learning environment if they accept an applicant with “advanced experience handling professional social media account; previous development of social media marketing… [and] a background in media relations skills, advertising, building audience engagement…” This position description is not written for an intern, it is clearly written for an independent contractor, whether the NEPARC board realizes it or not.

 

Bottom line:

We MUST stop trawling for free-labor under the guise of “internships.” It is questionably legal and definitely unethical. Even worse, it entrenches inequality, keeps poor-folks out of the field, and send a clear message that the organization doesn’t value its own work.