These are just from the past month, and many more are vague about salary. As the kids say, this is why we can't have nice things. Or professional respect.
Keep fighting the good fight, bowling ball! Send a polite letter - no swearing - with a link to the Department of Labor's rules regarding unpaid internship.
Yes! we should be shaming. The ads you shared for Scalar are shocking. The other two, to be fair, do appear to offer some money, and thus are not so bad, assuming they are not making the interns work full-time.
Wow, the Scalar office definitely deserves to be shamed. Their actions truly are shameful. They might not care if other architects know that they operate this way but you would think they would at least be worried about clients catching wind of their not paying people who would be working on their projects. I would imagine some of their commercial clients at least would have concerns about this violating Department of Labor rules.
Wait - so these clowns at 'Scalar Architecture' seem to have enough work to be advertising multiple "positions" but cannot afford to pay their employees.
Mr. Julio Salcedo-Fernandez, Principal of Scalar Architecture, appears to be an Associate Professor at CUNY's School of Architecture. I wonder if they have a policy against their faculty members violating Federal Labor laws.
I'm surprised that, beside random threads like this, we don't have a group yet which identifies and calls these firms out, alerts the Department of Labour, warns these firms and tells them they're being watched. It would help protect interns from abuse and those planning to work for free and more importantly, shine light on this situation.
there was something similar a decade ago and it was hacked I think. it exposed the cycle of exploitation constantly, but was meant for firm review. something like Inside Architecture?
If you can not pay people properly you shouldn't have or pretend to have an office.
If you are an intern that is willing to work for free, at least give your time away to a worthy organization such as Architecture for Humanity, Project H, Scale Africa or one of the many other countless not-for-profit organizations where designers serve people in need. I'd argue that you'll learn more from one of these firms in terms of design and business acumen than from an enterprise that needs employees but can't afford to pay them.
medusa, I absolutely agree. I spend a few hours volunteering every month - which is different than working uncompensated for a for-profit enterprise. olaf said it succinctly - if you can't pay, you're not a viable company. If you do bring in profit and you're not paying employees, you're clearly performing an illegal act and deserve to be called out.
I have contacted the US firms and told them that if they don't remove their posting or alter it to reflect a paid position, I will be reporting them. And stipends do NOT count, because if you're paid anything at all (in almost all cases, in almost all jurisdictions - none that would apply here), you become an employee, with all of the protections any regular employee should have, including minimum wage.
Volunteering in architecture can be bullshit at times.
I'm currently working on one of these "volunteering projects" (which normally I'd rather bathe in acid than do) and it seems it is only US not getting paid for our services. The engineers, the GC, and everyone else is still getting paid for their "volunteering" efforts. Even organizations like "architecture for humanity" goes through it - the only ones not getting paid are the architects yet the engineers, the GCs, and the subs all get paid. Kind of defeats the purpose. It's kind of a sham but even people like medusa knows this.
med, nobody's forcing you to volunteer. I know it can be bullshit but at the same time, there's something to be said for volunteering - say 1% of your working time - to a good cause. My experience has been similar to yours - other professions getting paid while we're asked to provide for free. The flip side of the coin is that you (or I) don't actually know that others aren't also volunteering, albeit on different projects. As a rule, however, I agree that we don't stand up for ourselves when it comes to fee.
Med, I agree with you. I've encountered both paid and unpaid architects in the pro-bono design world (unpaid more often than not). But you've got a lot of kids fresh out of college, that for whatever reason, want to work and not get paid (rich parents? drug money? won the lottery?). In this case, my advice is simply to focus their efforts on endeavors that will have positive social outcomes rather than lining the pockets of an unscrupulous business owner.
I've been seeing that as non-profits gain more traction and are able to provide quantifiable results, they are proving that this sector is a viable business model, therefore they are able to justify getting paid through grants, donations, sponsors, strategic partnerships, etc. There are already several well-established architects who are having success with this model, including Bryan Bell and Teddy Cruz.
Pro-bono typically conjures up images of homeless people and third-world poverty, but these projects are probably in the minority, although they receive the most press. The majority of these projects can be found in your own backyard and, a lot of times, the design fee is something that can be subsidized through the same funding models as the actual construction. Believe it or not, sometimes it is easier to justify a fee to a non-profit client than to a private-party client because the simple fact that there is need gives an inherent value to your work and expertise.
Frankly put, we should find every criminal employer and cite them directly to the US Department of Justice with Carbon Copy (CC not BCC) to U.S. DoL and also each applicable state's justic and labor department. AIA needs to aid in putting a crackdown on unpaid internship. In fact, we should clearly make it flat out illegal for unpaid internship when it comes to for-profit entities.
There should be steep penalty for for-profits wrongfully exploiting unpaid internships. If not, the option of unpaid internships should cease to exist in regards to for-profits. Making it simple and clear... if you are a for-profit then you shall pay employees.... no exceptions.
This way, employers do not side step legal responsibilities to save a buck. Until changes, if they do in the legal code, some points need to be plainly put. This maybe somewhat preaching to the choir... here but the point needs to be moved across the profession.
There is one thing to be a fair and reasonable employer and it would be reasonable if unpaid internships were not wrongfully exploited but in this professional field, it is a sad state of affairs that too many employers proportionally engage in wrongful use of unpaid internship as a side-step of rightfully paying employees.
Since it can not be fairly and properly done by EVERYONE, it probably shouldn't be an option for a for-profit. It is one thing for volunteering for a non-profit. For-profit entities really should not need unpaid internships. For most cases, they don't if they make millions a year in profit. The point is charging more for your services than what it costs to do your services. Business 101. That means part of pricing fees for services or goods is to take account of what it costs which includes costs of training your employees. Factor in float and use statistics to analyze how much time it takes and the work load and charge accordingly. If the work load is low, you layoff staff or you increase price for services if you need to. Just like stores may adjust prices. You price with the ebb and flows of supply & demand. You adjust what you do and optimize. Optimize does not mean having slaves or indentured servants. In the U.S., indentured servants is largely outlaws along with slavery. If you can't, your business fails. Guess what, close the business before engaging in wrongful practices. If you don't know how to run a business, DON'T run a business until you have the knowledge and skills to have a reasonable chance in running a business. There is no guarantee of success. However, there is being equipped with the fundamental knowledge and skills to be competent in leading a business starting with a small business to a larger business with more complexity.
The cost of training employees is part of the cost of doing business and yes, you take it into account in pricing to make a profit as to how much contribution margin you build into your pricing of services to a client per project just like goods. Your "goods" is your service and that is what the client is paying for so to speak.
I know it isn't exactly the same but the point is figuratively.
I can’t believe I’m seeing this. Cities or nonprofits are one thing but for-profit is just that for everyone involved. Who in the F do these guys think they are? Seeking to be involved with architecture is a dream of ours and that dream should not be exploited by some thought to be F dream firm saying “come dream here for free”. In this case architecture is a business and they should be reminded of this in any way you guys choose. Let it fly!
'Stipend' doesn't cut it either. It seems that employers are trying to obfuscate by offering stipends, but very few if any understand that internship (in N. America) is by definition an academic experience acquired as part of credit towards a degree:
If you're stupid enough to work for free you have only yourself to blame. The employers may be assholes for exploiting a horrendous labor market but ultimately we are responsible for our own decisions. No rational person is going to pay for something if they know they can get it for free. The starving artist mindset of this profession is the problem.
Geezertect, you make a valid point - There are two parts to an architect’s brain, the right side is for architecture and the left side is for business, if the left side isn’t working - you are functionally brain-dead.
The counterpoint is that these firms should not be fishing in these waters without live bait. It may or not be legal with stipends and such but it is surely unethical and should be reported to AIA. While it remains that interns should not be biting on bare hooks, someone can still get snagged.
look, understand what the aia is doing and what it can functionally do:
what the aia cannot do is revoke someone's license because of unpaid employment. nor can they revoke a business license or take any other legal action. they don't have legal standing to do so.
what they can do is speak out on the issue (which they have). they can take steps to censure their own members (the payment of all employees is, in their code of ethics, prohibited. violation of this could cause a member to have their membership revoked. publicly. they have, since 1995, had every winner of a major national award sign a declaration that the firm they represent does not engage in unpaid employment of any kind). and they can help advocate at the state level.
where the grey line is: how much should the aia (as a whole, unified voice) be speaking out against the practice or actively helping bring legal action against members who are caught violating the law. personally, i do think we can speak out more forcefully. but i don't think it's their role to be a legal arbiter in individual cases. we can help refer someone to the proper legal authorities or such but really, a professional association should not be making a legal case (it's the same for people accused of practicing without a license - we can help someone making a claim by referring them to the proper state authority and, if a member, we can strip them of that.)
btw - i think filing a complaint with the state will get much better results than filing with the DOJ. the feds are not going to go after 'firm xyz' over 1-2 people not being paid, especially if they were aware those were the conditions going in. they would get involved if it were a larger company and the practice much more systemic. at the state level though... you might get somewhere.
Aug 24, 14 4:53 pm ·
·
In other words, the federal 'nexus' to get the involvement of Federal is much higher than the state because the Federal government appropriation for money of the DOJ is less than the amount typically afforded to by State's DOJ. The Federal DOJ doesn't have the resources for small matters of firms that are largely operating in one state (maybe two at most... and yet employee count is less than 50 or 100. Bigger firms or firms of big name starchitects... maybe.
Well, lets get legal then - During the recession the US Department of Labor did direct focus to this issue and did employ enforcement…some states did too. The laws governing this matter are federal and the guidelines that they use are based on a 1947 Ruling by The Supreme Court. There is a lot involved but basically there are 6 criteria where all 6 must be met to meet unpaid standards:
The training, even though it includes actual operation of the facilities of the employer, is similar to what would be given in a vocational school or academic educational instruction;
The training is for the benefit of the trainees;
The trainees do not displace regular employees, but work under their close observation;
The employer that provides the training derives no immediate advantage from the activities of the trainees, and on occasion the employer’s operations may actually be impeded;
The trainees are not necessarily entitled to a job at the conclusion of the training period; and
The employer and the trainees understand that the trainees are not entitled to wages for the time spent in training.
“If all of the factors listed above are met, then the worker is a “trainee”, an employment relationship does not exist under the FLSA, and the FLSA’s minimum wage and overtime provisions do not apply to the worker. Because the FLSA’s definition of “employee” is broad, the excluded category of “trainee” is necessarily quite narrow. Moreover, the fact that an employer labels a worker as a trainee and the worker’s activities as training and/or a state unemployment compensation program develops what it calls a training program and describes the unemployed workers who participate as trainees does not make the worker a trainee for purposes of the FLSA unless the six factors are met.”
The problem is there has to be a complaint from an intern to trigger an investigation and interns fearing reprisal or lost opportunity to continue-on with the firm impedes authorities from doing anything about it.
I agree that the AIA can’t do anything legally, it’s an ethics thing clearly and I think they do care and would at least fire a round, if only over their head, which may be the only thing that can be done about it.
richard - yes. generally, the feds in this kind of situation are looking for someone 'to make an an example of'. a company that has a clear cut violation and is big enough to put the fear of whatever you worship into other, similar companies. smaller firms are definitely 'similar companies'.
carrera - this practice has gone on for a very, very long time, in many iterations over time. it's not right, i'm not excusing it, but i am trying to understand the motivations for why people continue to take it. sometimes it genuinely is a kind of artistic 'worship'. you love firm 'x''s work so much you'll do whatever to be a part of it. the law isn't going to change that relationship because those people, unless they become severely disillusioned, are never going to turn firm 'x' in. the cousin to these firms are the self-deluded 'stars in waiting' who think their work is so amazing that simply providing an opportunity to come bask in their awesomeness should be enough for anyone to be contented by. these are the ones i hope karma bites in the ass.
what we've seen over two major recessions in less than 10 years, the latter with such devastating consequences to the firms, is much, much more cynical in nature. some (and i'm going to contend it's a very small minority) firms are definitely trying to take advantage of entry level people who desperately needed experience by coercing them to work for free. these are the ones i hope get turned in. what they're doing is preying on fellow professionals pure and simple. karmic justice alone isn't enough of a punishment...
Aug 24, 14 10:16 pm ·
·
Technically, anyone can file a complaint but it needs to be substantiated with evidence. Reprisals like employers firing someone for filing a complaints due to illegal actions of the employers is grounds for lawsuits like wrongful termination, fines and so far. If only the courts really had the stomach to drop the hammer on thoses deserving serious penalty.
Ultimately, those effected by such MUST speak because legally to open a lawsuit case, you must have legal standing.
It needs not matter who initiates an investigation but the effected parties must open the matter to the federal courts to initiate legal action and get due compensation.
lol, Dude should have read his own email... and how is he referring to it as a "job", that's just pure slavery.... pretty sure that forbes editorial wasn't too far off.
This really ruins the firm for me. I used to really like their designs...
Mar 20, 15 1:48 am ·
·
It's Japan so it isn't any of our business in the U.S. It maybe perfectly legal there so it really might be beyond our ability to do anything other than make noise.
It's none of our business in the same way that we should turn a blind eye to the slave children making our cheap t-shirts in Pakistan because hey, they're not our kids.
In other words, you couldn't be more wrong. But thanks for coming out.
Mar 20, 15 2:08 am ·
·
It isn't something we have a legal leg to stand on. They can just shoot you literally. Go to Japan and make your noise and you just might have your head cut off with a katana.
Go to Pakistan and make noise, they just might shoot you with their AK-47s so what are you going to do? Best keep your nose out of other country's business because their, you have no right. They can just execute you without hesitation and the President isn't going to save your butt because you're dead.
Get the point?
U.S. doesn't dictate how things happen beyond its borders. All you can do is make noise... isn't going to change a damn thing.
Mar 20, 15 2:25 am ·
·
Very simple, those with the power to make change aren't here and aren't listening to your mouth.
I call on Archinect to better vet the positions posted on the job board. Here's a sample of current, vaguely worded postings for 'interns.' There may be more.
Archinect could implement a simple check-box with a few choices for the question of salary - for example 1) commensurate w/ experience; 2) volunteer (non-profit org); 3) stipend (non-profit org); 4) paid internship.
Holy shit, Balkins, do you ever listen to yourself? You missed my point entirely. I'm not talking about the legal issue, I'm referencing the ethical issue of not paying somebody for their work.
I'm speechless. Good job.
Mar 20, 15 2:42 am ·
·
Ok. Regarding the ethic issue of not paying somebody for their work, what do you expect us to be able to do regarding the issue in the current discussion not the ancient old stuff. I was talking about the discussion over the last day or so.
Regarding the other job posting issue... ok.
I agree that firms that wants someone to work for them for more than 10 hours a week should pay. In fact unpaid positions should not ever require more than 10 hours a week of anyone's time and should be no more than 3 months in length and always for academic credit. If someone has to spend more than 10 hours a week, they better pay and I think we legally should limit under law for profit entities (at least at the state level) under architect law possibly and make it applicable statute that applies to not just architects but also those exempted from architectural licensure to be subject to fines and applicable other sanctions in addition to the general agencies responsible for enforcement of labor law.
10 hours a week should be the max anyone should be required to work for a for-profit entity unpaid for a max of 3 months. Volunteering for non-profits is entirely a separate issue and volunteers should be entirely elective of how many hours a volunteer wants to spend.
After all, an unpaid intern should not have to devote so much time of their day that they can not have a paying job.
We need to make those legal changes. Penalty that can be civilly administered by licensing boards (to those licensed and those exempt from licensure as they are technically subject to the licensing boards to a more limited degree) and the department of labor. This is one thing that should be fairly done by both licensed architects and unlicensed designers that employs people. This way, exemptions can't be used to skirt issues. We can easily invoke that under our architect laws even if it takes longer to get the departments of labor of states on board. Fair labor practices in our professions.
We should recognize building design of exempt buildings is architecture even though they may not constitute 'unlawful practice of architecture' because it wouldn't be unlawful if we follow the rules.
That would be something we should apply to law and be one provision that can be skirted by using the exemption in the architectural licensing laws.
We can debate the specific number of hours per week and whether it be 3 months or more or less.
What is sad and funny (funnysad), is that these adds for "employment" exist b/c there are that many stupid people out there willing to work for free thinking that it is in their best interest for them. All these applicants hoping to go off to college for architecture, especially these Ivy league schools, need to take a hard look at what is being offered on the job boards. Instead they are consumed with the grandeur of being some starchitect in a field they really no nothing about politically. I was and am guilty of it too when I was fresh outta high school.
If you think you're smart you should probably listen, just a little, to why this profession sucks. If you don't have ins in the industry, it is a very steep and rough hill to climb, even if you're some amazing designer. No one is going to give you a hand up unless it is through nepotism.
Hiring managers, principals, and bosses will hire you because you worked for free, not b/c that was the noble thing to do, but b/c they themselves know you are spineless bitch, and you will plow the fields like the ox that is going to market next spring.
Are we still shaming non-paying employers?
I should be sleeping but just ran across this bullshit:
http://archinect.com/jobs/entry/99076783/intern-architect
http://archinect.com/jobs/entry/98502879/design-intern
http://archinect.com/jobs/entry/98611560/intern-architect
http://archinect.com/jobs/entry/97655434/interior-design-intern (yay, $1k/mo. in Brooklyn!)
These are just from the past month, and many more are vague about salary. As the kids say, this is why we can't have nice things. Or professional respect.
Keep fighting the good fight, bowling ball! Send a polite letter - no swearing - with a link to the Department of Labor's rules regarding unpaid internship.
Yes! we should be shaming. The ads you shared for Scalar are shocking. The other two, to be fair, do appear to offer some money, and thus are not so bad, assuming they are not making the interns work full-time.
I'd imagine that if you already have these skills, you're either not an intern (and thus deserve to be paid), or already employed:
Ridiculous.
Wow, the Scalar office definitely deserves to be shamed. Their actions truly are shameful. They might not care if other architects know that they operate this way but you would think they would at least be worried about clients catching wind of their not paying people who would be working on their projects. I would imagine some of their commercial clients at least would have concerns about this violating Department of Labor rules.
Wait - so these clowns at 'Scalar Architecture' seem to have enough work to be advertising multiple "positions" but cannot afford to pay their employees.
Fuck them.
Mr. Julio Salcedo-Fernandez, Principal of Scalar Architecture, appears to be an Associate Professor at CUNY's School of Architecture. I wonder if they have a policy against their faculty members violating Federal Labor laws.
Does the DoL have some type of tip line for these types of violations?
Their work sucks too. Id bet most of those "interns" can do better work.
I'm surprised that, beside random threads like this, we don't have a group yet which identifies and calls these firms out, alerts the Department of Labour, warns these firms and tells them they're being watched. It would help protect interns from abuse and those planning to work for free and more importantly, shine light on this situation.
accesskb why not start one? it could be like the architectural version of the antibullying folks profiled earlier this year in The Online Avengers...
there was something similar a decade ago and it was hacked I think. it exposed the cycle of exploitation constantly, but was meant for firm review. something like Inside Architecture?
If you can not pay people properly you shouldn't have or pretend to have an office.
If you are an intern that is willing to work for free, at least give your time away to a worthy organization such as Architecture for Humanity, Project H, Scale Africa or one of the many other countless not-for-profit organizations where designers serve people in need. I'd argue that you'll learn more from one of these firms in terms of design and business acumen than from an enterprise that needs employees but can't afford to pay them.
medusa, I absolutely agree. I spend a few hours volunteering every month - which is different than working uncompensated for a for-profit enterprise. olaf said it succinctly - if you can't pay, you're not a viable company. If you do bring in profit and you're not paying employees, you're clearly performing an illegal act and deserve to be called out.
I have contacted the US firms and told them that if they don't remove their posting or alter it to reflect a paid position, I will be reporting them. And stipends do NOT count, because if you're paid anything at all (in almost all cases, in almost all jurisdictions - none that would apply here), you become an employee, with all of the protections any regular employee should have, including minimum wage.
Medusa you are a Genius!
Volunteering in architecture can be bullshit at times.
I'm currently working on one of these "volunteering projects" (which normally I'd rather bathe in acid than do) and it seems it is only US not getting paid for our services. The engineers, the GC, and everyone else is still getting paid for their "volunteering" efforts. Even organizations like "architecture for humanity" goes through it - the only ones not getting paid are the architects yet the engineers, the GCs, and the subs all get paid. Kind of defeats the purpose. It's kind of a sham but even people like medusa knows this.
med, nobody's forcing you to volunteer. I know it can be bullshit but at the same time, there's something to be said for volunteering - say 1% of your working time - to a good cause. My experience has been similar to yours - other professions getting paid while we're asked to provide for free. The flip side of the coin is that you (or I) don't actually know that others aren't also volunteering, albeit on different projects. As a rule, however, I agree that we don't stand up for ourselves when it comes to fee.
Med, I agree with you. I've encountered both paid and unpaid architects in the pro-bono design world (unpaid more often than not). But you've got a lot of kids fresh out of college, that for whatever reason, want to work and not get paid (rich parents? drug money? won the lottery?). In this case, my advice is simply to focus their efforts on endeavors that will have positive social outcomes rather than lining the pockets of an unscrupulous business owner.
I've been seeing that as non-profits gain more traction and are able to provide quantifiable results, they are proving that this sector is a viable business model, therefore they are able to justify getting paid through grants, donations, sponsors, strategic partnerships, etc. There are already several well-established architects who are having success with this model, including Bryan Bell and Teddy Cruz.
Pro-bono typically conjures up images of homeless people and third-world poverty, but these projects are probably in the minority, although they receive the most press. The majority of these projects can be found in your own backyard and, a lot of times, the design fee is something that can be subsidized through the same funding models as the actual construction. Believe it or not, sometimes it is easier to justify a fee to a non-profit client than to a private-party client because the simple fact that there is need gives an inherent value to your work and expertise.
Here is another one trying to exploit students:
LINK
Frankly put, we should find every criminal employer and cite them directly to the US Department of Justice with Carbon Copy (CC not BCC) to U.S. DoL and also each applicable state's justic and labor department. AIA needs to aid in putting a crackdown on unpaid internship. In fact, we should clearly make it flat out illegal for unpaid internship when it comes to for-profit entities.
There should be steep penalty for for-profits wrongfully exploiting unpaid internships. If not, the option of unpaid internships should cease to exist in regards to for-profits. Making it simple and clear... if you are a for-profit then you shall pay employees.... no exceptions.
This way, employers do not side step legal responsibilities to save a buck. Until changes, if they do in the legal code, some points need to be plainly put. This maybe somewhat preaching to the choir... here but the point needs to be moved across the profession.
There is one thing to be a fair and reasonable employer and it would be reasonable if unpaid internships were not wrongfully exploited but in this professional field, it is a sad state of affairs that too many employers proportionally engage in wrongful use of unpaid internship as a side-step of rightfully paying employees.
Since it can not be fairly and properly done by EVERYONE, it probably shouldn't be an option for a for-profit. It is one thing for volunteering for a non-profit. For-profit entities really should not need unpaid internships. For most cases, they don't if they make millions a year in profit. The point is charging more for your services than what it costs to do your services. Business 101. That means part of pricing fees for services or goods is to take account of what it costs which includes costs of training your employees. Factor in float and use statistics to analyze how much time it takes and the work load and charge accordingly. If the work load is low, you layoff staff or you increase price for services if you need to. Just like stores may adjust prices. You price with the ebb and flows of supply & demand. You adjust what you do and optimize. Optimize does not mean having slaves or indentured servants. In the U.S., indentured servants is largely outlaws along with slavery. If you can't, your business fails. Guess what, close the business before engaging in wrongful practices. If you don't know how to run a business, DON'T run a business until you have the knowledge and skills to have a reasonable chance in running a business. There is no guarantee of success. However, there is being equipped with the fundamental knowledge and skills to be competent in leading a business starting with a small business to a larger business with more complexity.
The cost of training employees is part of the cost of doing business and yes, you take it into account in pricing to make a profit as to how much contribution margin you build into your pricing of services to a client per project just like goods. Your "goods" is your service and that is what the client is paying for so to speak.
I know it isn't exactly the same but the point is figuratively.
I can’t believe I’m seeing this. Cities or nonprofits are one thing but for-profit is just that for everyone involved. Who in the F do these guys think they are? Seeking to be involved with architecture is a dream of ours and that dream should not be exploited by some thought to be F dream firm saying “come dream here for free”. In this case architecture is a business and they should be reminded of this in any way you guys choose. Let it fly!
What the fuck is the AIA doing about this? Oh wait, they probably support this.
Does ZHA pay?
'Stipend' doesn't cut it either. It seems that employers are trying to obfuscate by offering stipends, but very few if any understand that internship (in N. America) is by definition an academic experience acquired as part of credit towards a degree:
http://archinect.com/jobs/entry/88761472/architectural-intern
http://archinect.com/jobs/entry/106853442/architectural-marketing-intern
http://archinect.com/jobs/entry/100960551/intern-architect
http://archinect.com/jobs/entry/101243753/intern-architect
http://archinect.com/jobs/entry/105786207/intern-architect-fall-14
If you're stupid enough to work for free you have only yourself to blame. The employers may be assholes for exploiting a horrendous labor market but ultimately we are responsible for our own decisions. No rational person is going to pay for something if they know they can get it for free. The starving artist mindset of this profession is the problem.
Geezertect, you make a valid point - There are two parts to an architect’s brain, the right side is for architecture and the left side is for business, if the left side isn’t working - you are functionally brain-dead.
The counterpoint is that these firms should not be fishing in these waters without live bait. It may or not be legal with stipends and such but it is surely unethical and should be reported to AIA. While it remains that interns should not be biting on bare hooks, someone can still get snagged.
look, understand what the aia is doing and what it can functionally do:
what the aia cannot do is revoke someone's license because of unpaid employment. nor can they revoke a business license or take any other legal action. they don't have legal standing to do so.
what they can do is speak out on the issue (which they have). they can take steps to censure their own members (the payment of all employees is, in their code of ethics, prohibited. violation of this could cause a member to have their membership revoked. publicly. they have, since 1995, had every winner of a major national award sign a declaration that the firm they represent does not engage in unpaid employment of any kind). and they can help advocate at the state level.
where the grey line is: how much should the aia (as a whole, unified voice) be speaking out against the practice or actively helping bring legal action against members who are caught violating the law. personally, i do think we can speak out more forcefully. but i don't think it's their role to be a legal arbiter in individual cases. we can help refer someone to the proper legal authorities or such but really, a professional association should not be making a legal case (it's the same for people accused of practicing without a license - we can help someone making a claim by referring them to the proper state authority and, if a member, we can strip them of that.)
btw - i think filing a complaint with the state will get much better results than filing with the DOJ. the feds are not going to go after 'firm xyz' over 1-2 people not being paid, especially if they were aware those were the conditions going in. they would get involved if it were a larger company and the practice much more systemic. at the state level though... you might get somewhere.
In other words, the federal 'nexus' to get the involvement of Federal is much higher than the state because the Federal government appropriation for money of the DOJ is less than the amount typically afforded to by State's DOJ. The Federal DOJ doesn't have the resources for small matters of firms that are largely operating in one state (maybe two at most... and yet employee count is less than 50 or 100. Bigger firms or firms of big name starchitects... maybe.
Well, lets get legal then - During the recession the US Department of Labor did direct focus to this issue and did employ enforcement…some states did too. The laws governing this matter are federal and the guidelines that they use are based on a 1947 Ruling by The Supreme Court. There is a lot involved but basically there are 6 criteria where all 6 must be met to meet unpaid standards:
The training, even though it includes actual operation of the facilities of the employer, is similar to what would be given in a vocational school or academic educational instruction;
The training is for the benefit of the trainees;
The trainees do not displace regular employees, but work under their close observation;
The employer that provides the training derives no immediate advantage from the activities of the trainees, and on occasion the employer’s operations may actually be impeded;
The trainees are not necessarily entitled to a job at the conclusion of the training period; and
The employer and the trainees understand that the trainees are not entitled to wages for the time spent in training.
“If all of the factors listed above are met, then the worker is a “trainee”, an employment relationship does not exist under the FLSA, and the FLSA’s minimum wage and overtime provisions do not apply to the worker. Because the FLSA’s definition of “employee” is broad, the excluded category of “trainee” is necessarily quite narrow. Moreover, the fact that an employer labels a worker as a trainee and the worker’s activities as training and/or a state unemployment compensation program develops what it calls a training program and describes the unemployed workers who participate as trainees does not make the worker a trainee for purposes of the FLSA unless the six factors are met.”
The problem is there has to be a complaint from an intern to trigger an investigation and interns fearing reprisal or lost opportunity to continue-on with the firm impedes authorities from doing anything about it.
I agree that the AIA can’t do anything legally, it’s an ethics thing clearly and I think they do care and would at least fire a round, if only over their head, which may be the only thing that can be done about it.
richard - yes. generally, the feds in this kind of situation are looking for someone 'to make an an example of'. a company that has a clear cut violation and is big enough to put the fear of whatever you worship into other, similar companies. smaller firms are definitely 'similar companies'.
carrera - this practice has gone on for a very, very long time, in many iterations over time. it's not right, i'm not excusing it, but i am trying to understand the motivations for why people continue to take it. sometimes it genuinely is a kind of artistic 'worship'. you love firm 'x''s work so much you'll do whatever to be a part of it. the law isn't going to change that relationship because those people, unless they become severely disillusioned, are never going to turn firm 'x' in. the cousin to these firms are the self-deluded 'stars in waiting' who think their work is so amazing that simply providing an opportunity to come bask in their awesomeness should be enough for anyone to be contented by. these are the ones i hope karma bites in the ass.
what we've seen over two major recessions in less than 10 years, the latter with such devastating consequences to the firms, is much, much more cynical in nature. some (and i'm going to contend it's a very small minority) firms are definitely trying to take advantage of entry level people who desperately needed experience by coercing them to work for free. these are the ones i hope get turned in. what they're doing is preying on fellow professionals pure and simple. karmic justice alone isn't enough of a punishment...
Technically, anyone can file a complaint but it needs to be substantiated with evidence. Reprisals like employers firing someone for filing a complaints due to illegal actions of the employers is grounds for lawsuits like wrongful termination, fines and so far. If only the courts really had the stomach to drop the hammer on thoses deserving serious penalty.
Ultimately, those effected by such MUST speak because legally to open a lawsuit case, you must have legal standing.
It needs not matter who initiates an investigation but the effected parties must open the matter to the federal courts to initiate legal action and get due compensation.
BIG pays its interns 2k/m, 1.6k after taxes.
with 60-90 hr weeks.
Recent via Olly Wainwright
lol, Dude should have read his own email... and how is he referring to it as a "job", that's just pure slavery.... pretty sure that forbes editorial wasn't too far off.
Bump...
Ridiculous
There is actually a whole thread dedicated the absurd working conditions at SANAA, but it's from 2011. http://archinect.com/forum/thread/105001/working-at-sanaa
I guess some firms never change.
This really ruins the firm for me. I used to really like their designs...
It's Japan so it isn't any of our business in the U.S. It maybe perfectly legal there so it really might be beyond our ability to do anything other than make noise.
It's none of our business in the same way that we should turn a blind eye to the slave children making our cheap t-shirts in Pakistan because hey, they're not our kids.
In other words, you couldn't be more wrong. But thanks for coming out.
It isn't something we have a legal leg to stand on. They can just shoot you literally. Go to Japan and make your noise and you just might have your head cut off with a katana.
Go to Pakistan and make noise, they just might shoot you with their AK-47s so what are you going to do? Best keep your nose out of other country's business because their, you have no right. They can just execute you without hesitation and the President isn't going to save your butt because you're dead.
Get the point?
U.S. doesn't dictate how things happen beyond its borders. All you can do is make noise... isn't going to change a damn thing.
Very simple, those with the power to make change aren't here and aren't listening to your mouth.
I call on Archinect to better vet the positions posted on the job board. Here's a sample of current, vaguely worded postings for 'interns.' There may be more.
Archinect could implement a simple check-box with a few choices for the question of salary - for example 1) commensurate w/ experience; 2) volunteer (non-profit org); 3) stipend (non-profit org); 4) paid internship.
http://archinect.com/jobs/entry/123274936/summer-architecture-internship-2015
http://archinect.com/jobs/entry/117651486/architectural-intern-spring-2015
http://archinect.com/jobs/entry/121423744/intern-architect
http://archinect.com/jobs/entry/119050432/exhibition-design-graphic-design-intern
http://archinect.com/jobs/entry/121574763/design-intern
http://archinect.com/jobs/entry/119809837/spring-design-internship
Holy shit, Balkins, do you ever listen to yourself? You missed my point entirely. I'm not talking about the legal issue, I'm referencing the ethical issue of not paying somebody for their work.
I'm speechless. Good job.
Ok. Regarding the ethic issue of not paying somebody for their work, what do you expect us to be able to do regarding the issue in the current discussion not the ancient old stuff. I was talking about the discussion over the last day or so.
Regarding the other job posting issue... ok.
I agree that firms that wants someone to work for them for more than 10 hours a week should pay. In fact unpaid positions should not ever require more than 10 hours a week of anyone's time and should be no more than 3 months in length and always for academic credit. If someone has to spend more than 10 hours a week, they better pay and I think we legally should limit under law for profit entities (at least at the state level) under architect law possibly and make it applicable statute that applies to not just architects but also those exempted from architectural licensure to be subject to fines and applicable other sanctions in addition to the general agencies responsible for enforcement of labor law.
10 hours a week should be the max anyone should be required to work for a for-profit entity unpaid for a max of 3 months. Volunteering for non-profits is entirely a separate issue and volunteers should be entirely elective of how many hours a volunteer wants to spend.
After all, an unpaid intern should not have to devote so much time of their day that they can not have a paying job.
We need to make those legal changes. Penalty that can be civilly administered by licensing boards (to those licensed and those exempt from licensure as they are technically subject to the licensing boards to a more limited degree) and the department of labor. This is one thing that should be fairly done by both licensed architects and unlicensed designers that employs people. This way, exemptions can't be used to skirt issues. We can easily invoke that under our architect laws even if it takes longer to get the departments of labor of states on board. Fair labor practices in our professions.
We should recognize building design of exempt buildings is architecture even though they may not constitute 'unlawful practice of architecture' because it wouldn't be unlawful if we follow the rules.
That would be something we should apply to law and be one provision that can be skirted by using the exemption in the architectural licensing laws.
We can debate the specific number of hours per week and whether it be 3 months or more or less.
You think it's legal to cut someone's head off with a katana in Japan?
What is sad and funny (funnysad), is that these adds for "employment" exist b/c there are that many stupid people out there willing to work for free thinking that it is in their best interest for them. All these applicants hoping to go off to college for architecture, especially these Ivy league schools, need to take a hard look at what is being offered on the job boards. Instead they are consumed with the grandeur of being some starchitect in a field they really no nothing about politically. I was and am guilty of it too when I was fresh outta high school.
If you think you're smart you should probably listen, just a little, to why this profession sucks. If you don't have ins in the industry, it is a very steep and rough hill to climb, even if you're some amazing designer. No one is going to give you a hand up unless it is through nepotism.
Hiring managers, principals, and bosses will hire you because you worked for free, not b/c that was the noble thing to do, but b/c they themselves know you are spineless bitch, and you will plow the fields like the ox that is going to market next spring.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.