Companies abusing Interns

doctorg

So, I joined a company as an intern a few months ago to learn about different things!

First this is an unpaid internship and I have to work from 9 to 6 with 1 hour lunch monday to friday.

So when I got there I found that the company has more interns than employees and they are getting interns to do all their work without even paying them a penny.

This can hardly be legal??

Because I could open a company and make a fortune without having a single employee.

PS: They I they didn't get me to sign any contract so, there is basically no proof that I am working there.

Bandara

But you knew it was unpaid when you took the position ? And you I presume took it because you wanted experience?

Your getting more experience than you could have hoped for as the company is using interns in the day to day running as against just glorified office runners.

I don't see what the issue is, you have no contract so you can leave for another intern job.

Surely both sides are getting exactly what they wanted out of the agreement?

You are getting invaluable experience.

ToxicPaddy

doctorg wrote: »

So, I joined a company as an intern a few months ago to learn about different things!

First this is an unpaid internship and I have to work from 9 to 6 with 1 hour lunch monday to friday.

So when I got there I found that the company has more interns than employees and they are getting interns to do all their work without even paying them a penny.

This can hardly be legal??

Because I could open a company and make a fortune without having a single employee.

PS: They I they didn't get me to sign any contract so, there is basically no proof that I am working there.

It's kind of a vicious circle tbh.

You can't get a job without experience and you can't get experience without getting a job. So the only step usually available is getting an internship.

Yes there are some companies abusing the whole job bridge and internship scenario but there isn't a lot you can do, so make the most of what you do there, learn as much as possible and then start applying for paid employment elsewhere. Put it down to experience and hopefully if you ever get into a position where you have your own business in future, try and not to do the same.

If they are Jobbridge internships then yes there are restrictions on the number of Jobbridge interns to employees

http://www.jobbridge.ie/EmployerEligible.aspx
Number of Full Time Employees* Number of Internships
1-10 employees 1 internship place
11-20 employees 2 internship places
21-30 employees 3 internship places
30 + employees 20% of the workforce to a maximum of 200 internships whichever is the smaller

If they are unpaid internships then I guess an element of let the buyer beware comes into play.

Do you feel you are getting valuable experience?

ironclaw

If you take a job that you know you won't be paid to do then frankly I see no grounds for complaints (Unless they are breaching Health & Safety legislation etc) 9 to 6 with a full hour of lunch is pretty cushy to be fair and no weekend / out of hours work I presume? I feel many people who take an unpaid internship feel bitter as they are working but failing to see the experience 'compensation' and really only care about the money in their back pocket. Internships should add to your CV well beyond what €9 an hour would ever do for you. Seriously, would you prefer a great prospect of a job or maybe €3000 in your bank account after 6 months?

If a persons mentality is just about the money then you should reconsider your life and job choices.

dbran

Hi

Interns are not really free in reality. First of all you have to have sufficient space and equipment for them to work with ie a PC, or a desk, phone line etc. Then you have to spend time to supervise and train them and potentially be in a position to take over when they leave to get paid jobs.

I am sure there are people who may exploit the situation but in reality in the short term, the experience gained is easily worth the time invested.

I know when I was looking for my first job I would have gladly worked for free just to get something other then "Chinese Delivery Guy" to have on the CV. When you are looking for the real first job this will stand to you.

dbran

JD Dublin

I have hired 2 interns, with mixed results for me and for the interns.

The first guy got a paid job from his intership, but he left the next job after 3 months, aqnd left the industry I work in altogether.

The second guy never signed up with FAS properly - he wanted to do a 3 day week and I wasn't keen on that. Eventually he left as he asked for a full-time job on full-time wages. He got another job after me so he has fared okay too.


OP if you are interested in working in the industry you interning in then you should stick around, get the experience and you will get a proper job soon.

bbam

Hammertime wrote: »

But you knew it was unpaid when you took the position ? And you I presume took it because you wanted experience?

Your getting more experience than you could have hoped for as the company is using interns in the day to day running as against just glorified office runners.

I don't see what the issue is, you have no contract so you can leave for another intern job.

Surely both sides are getting exactly what they wanted out of the agreement?

You are getting invaluable experience.

I have a problem with this sort of program.. Companies like this are running their business on free labour supplied by the state. this substantially lowers their operating costs, increases their compeditiveness compared to companies paying staff..
the companies payine staff can no longer operate in such an environment and Lay staff off in an effort to keep going.. And may even eventually close.

The net result is the in terns gain "valuable" (i dout its that valuable) experience and others loose their jobs.. this is not a progressive scheme.

Graham

Given pg633's link to the limits on the full-time/inter ratios, I can't imagine there are many(any) companies being run on free-intern labour.

Is there any evidence of a company laying off full-time staff because they've been replaced by interns?

Gloomtastic!

Graham wrote: »

Given pg633's link to the limits on the full-time/inter ratios, I can't imagine there are many(any) companies being run on free-intern labour.

Is there any evidence of a company laying off full-time staff because they've been replaced by interns?

Not all companies will employ interns through Jobsbridge with it's ratios. Sectors such as the media and fashion have always had people wanting to get their foot in the door and willing to work for nothing while being supported by the Bank of Mum and Dad.

Graham

Gloomtastic! wrote: »

Not all companies will employ interns through Jobsbridge with it's ratios. Sectors such as the media and fashion have always had people wanting to get their foot in the door and willing to work for nothing while being supported by the Bank of Mum and Dad.

I can't see many media/fashion companies canning full-time staff as a result though.

Go-getting individuals have been offering to 'work for free' for years to gain experience, particularly to break into certain industries. As I see it, the job bridge program is an assisted equivalent.

JD Dublin

bbam wrote: »

I have a problem with this sort of program.. Companies like this are running their business on free labour supplied by the state. this substantially lowers their operating costs, increases their compeditiveness compared to companies paying staff..
the companies payine staff can no longer operate in such an environment and Lay staff off in an effort to keep going.. And may even eventually close.

The net result is the in terns gain "valuable" (i dout its that valuable) experience and others loose their jobs.. this is not a progressive scheme.

Sorry but I have to jump in here - what you are coming out with is soft-left drivel. People have their free will, they choose to do these jobs, it's not compulsory. There are loads of jobs available, like office cleaning, that pay the minimum wage, so why not do that? Don't waste your time interning if that is your view.

But wait - in 1 years time you will still be cleaning offices - nothing wrong with that by the way - whereas the intern may have taken the first steps in a career.

bbam

JD Dublin wrote: »

Sorry but I have to jump in here - what you are coming out with is soft-left drivel. People have their free will, they choose to do these jobs, it's not compulsory. There are loads of jobs available, like office cleaning, that pay the minimum wage, so why not do that? Don't waste your time interning if that is your view.

But wait - in 1 years time you will still be cleaning offices - nothing wrong with that by the way - whereas the intern may have taken the first steps in a career.

i'm way past the intern stage myself and I can see why people would take it as an experience builder..
however.. cheap/free labour is not good for any market, bottom line is it provides a subsidised advantage for one business over another.


I know of one MN who had a few rounds of redundancies and now has interns supporting the same work, under re-branded position titles.
Eliminate a number of engineers, replace with interns who will take direction from one co-ordinating engineer to do the same tasks.

Graham

bbam wrote: »

I know of one MN who had a few rounds of redundancies and now has interns supporting the same work, under re-branded position titles.
Eliminate a number of engineers, replace with interns who will take direction from one co-ordinating engineer to do the same tasks.

If that's the case, I've no doubt there will be cases taken under current employment laws. It would be very hard for a multinational to hide the fact that this is how they operate.

Apart from anything else it wouldn't make business sense for anything but the most basic work. Interns wouldn't have the experience required for anything else and if they did they wouldn't be hanging around too long in an intern position.

JD Dublin

bbam wrote: »

i'm way past the intern stage myself and I can see why people would take it as an experience builder..
however.. cheap/free labour is not good for any market, bottom line is it provides a subsidised advantage for one business over another.


I know of one MN who had a few rounds of redundancies and now has interns supporting the same work, under re-branded position titles.
Eliminate a number of engineers, replace with interns who will take direction from one co-ordinating engineer to do the same tasks.

Look are you trying to tell me that someone who qualifies for JobBridge - 6 months on the live register - and a graduate, who is prepared to work for Social Welfare plus 50 Euros per week - can replace a qualified engineer?

Think about it. Any position that is filled by an intern has a supervision element to it, as typically they have little or no experience. The intern is a lot slower than an experienced person would be. So how can an experienced engineer be replace by such a person?

The Corinthian

Internships can be extremely important to anyone who has little or no commercial experience and is starting on their career. Given this they can also be effectively of little or no benefit to the intern, and simply used as a source of cheap labour.

Speaking as someone in the IT sector, an example of the former would be as a developer, whereby the intern learns not so much the technology but how actual commercial projects are run (colleges are hopeless at this). An important factor, and IMO the responsibility of the employer, is that there is an ethical obligation (in return for what is in essence free labour) to expose the intern to experience that will be beneficial to them in the long term.

Probably the best example of the latter relates to that last point. An intern enters an IT firm, looking to go into development. Instead, they're given some data-inputting role, using an in-house propitiatory system. That internship is completely useless to them and irrelevant to their future career.

So while there's an element of caveat emptor in this, we do live in a society where we do make an effort to regulate and prevent such abuses - that's why pyramid schemes are illegal.

My guess is that JobBridge is presently poorly regulated and thought out - we saw the same clusterfsck when the Student Summer Jobs Scheme was introduced in the late nineties; the first year or two of that were just an unmitigated scamfest. They'll probably tighten it up as the various abuses are discovered, over time.

This is not to say that interns have no responsibility to avoid exploitation, but there's a role for regulation there too so that it's not too easy to exploit them.

Peterdalkey

The Corinthian wrote: »

Internships can be extremely important to anyone who has little or no commercial experience and is starting on their career. Given this they can also be effectively of little or no benefit to the intern, and simply used as a source of cheap labour.

Speaking as someone in the IT sector, an example of the former would be as a developer, whereby the intern learns not so much the technology but how actual commercial projects are run (colleges are hopeless at this). An important factor, and IMO the responsibility of the employer, is that there is an ethical obligation (in return for what is in essence free labour) to expose the intern to experience that will be beneficial to them in the long term.

Probably the best example of the latter relates to that last point. An intern enters an IT firm, looking to go into development. Instead, they're given some data-inputting role, using an in-house propitiatory system. That internship is completely useless to them and irrelevant to their future career.

So while there's an element of caveat emptor in this, we do live in a society where we do make an effort to regulate and prevent such abuses - that's why pyramid schemes are illegal.

My guess is that JobBridge is presently poorly regulated and thought out - we saw the same clusterfsck when the Student Summer Jobs Scheme was introduced in the late nineties; the first year or two of that were just an unmitigated scamfest. They'll probably tighten it up as the various abuses are discovered, over time.

This is not to say that interns have no responsibility to avoid exploitation, but there's a role for regulation there too so that it's not too easy to exploit them.

Very well put. There is an obligation on all three parties, the organisers, the inern, and the host company to make it work as intended. Just because some companies/organisations abuse it does not make the scheme any less worthwhile. In the case of the abuse/misuse, it is up to the intern and Jogbbridge to report and react.
Interns have a responsibility to look out for themselves, they should not be expecting someone else to nanny them! All they need to do is put their hand up!

edanto

@doctorg, would you be able to clear up the question about the number of interns at your firm that are part of the Jobbridge scheme, if any?

From your description, it sounds like the owners/managers are taking the mick with the number of interns, but your stay/go decision comes down to how valuable the experience is for you, and what else you could be doing with the time?

There's no legal limit to the number of interns/volunteers that a company can take on [except for govt schemes as above], but if someone's taking you for granted then you have the usual three options Exit/Voice/Loyalty.

doctorg

edanto wrote: »

@doctorg, would you be able to clear up the question about the number of interns at your firm that are part of the Jobbridge scheme, if any?

From your description, it sounds like the owners/managers are taking the mick with the number of interns, but your stay/go decision comes down to how valuable the experience is for you, and what else you could be doing with the time?

There's no legal limit to the number of interns/volunteers that a company can take on [except for govt schemes as above], but if someone's taking you for granted then you have the usual three options Exit/Voice/Loyalty.

Sorry for the delay in getting back!

theres about 5 full time employees and 4 interns.!

doctorg

dbran wrote: »

Hi

Interns are not really free in reality. First of all you have to have sufficient space and equipment for them to work with ie a PC, or a desk, phone line etc. Then you have to spend time to supervise and train them and potentially be in a position to take over when they leave to get paid jobs.

I am sure there are people who may exploit the situation but in reality in the short term, the experience gained is easily worth the time invested.

I know when I was looking for my first job I would have gladly worked for free just to get something other then "Chinese Delivery Guy" to have on the CV. When you are looking for the real first job this will stand to you.

dbran

LOL

Well here it seems interns are pretty much free!. We just have our computers and a desk but thats been here the whole so no cost to them. I got no training, just told to do XYZ which was in my skill set

ironclaw

doctorg wrote: »

LOL

Well here it seems interns are pretty much free!. We just have our computers and a desk but thats been here the whole so no cost to them. I got no training, just told to do XYZ which was in my skill set

The very presence of a staff member has associate cost. Insurance, cleaning, desk maintenance, IT support, phone lines etc etc. That all costs money. Its actually a very thin line, the company may actually be losing money having you onsite unless you are delivering value for the company.

edanto

doctorg, would you know if any of the interns are on the jobbridge scheme? Are you on it yourself? The reason for asking is that only the Jobbridge scheme has rules about the max number of interns.

Which will you choose between Exit, Voice or Loyalty?

doctorg

edanto wrote: »

doctorg, would you know if any of the interns are on the jobbridge scheme? Are you on it yourself? The reason for asking is that only the Jobbridge scheme has rules about the max number of interns.

Which will you choose between Exit, Voice or Loyalty?

I don't quite know what that scheme is!

I am not on it. I am not anything! :P

bhclexilip

bbam wrote: »

i'm way past the intern stage myself and I can see why people would take it as an experience builder..
however.. cheap/free labour is not good for any market, bottom line is it provides a subsidised advantage for one business over another.


I know of one MN who had a few rounds of redundancies and now has interns supporting the same work, under re-branded position titles.
Eliminate a number of engineers, replace with interns who will take direction from one co-ordinating engineer to do the same tasks.

that is Intel Ireland for you, hiring in one department while making people redundant in another, they keep on getting away with it by phasing the redundancies so they don't have to release it to the media.

wmpdd3

The only thing I can add to this is a conversation I had with a colleague. She found a dream position within a company and for them to agree to a major project.
During the costing she included a assistant in I T
This was shot down and she was told to cut that cost.
She suggested an intern and the figures added up, but the PR dept advised against advertising the position as unpaid as it made the profitable company look mean. So the internship was advertised as 'paid'.
As it turned the payment was 80 euro per week...to be cut from somewhere else in the projects budget.

I think companies are using internships to cut payroll costs and those companies that are a seen as milkers will be remembered as such.