The question of internships frames something of a litmus test in architecture – although they tend to indicate more about the hiring firm than the hire. Exploited labor or necessary rite-of-passage? It’s a debate that’s been raging for decades almost exclusively through this binary, even as the context in which it’s been waged has transformed considerably. While certain practices have moved to institute fair compensation into their intern programs, life for many architecture interns today remains a struggle.
More than a decade ago, commenters on Archinect’s forum listed compensation figures at prominent firms that, when converted to hourly wages, were startlingly low ($1.72 an hour, for example). Another thread from 2005, tellingly titled “Paid Internships and Other Fairy Tales”, included comments like this one, from Archinect user Steven Ward, “If we place no value on the skills we have developed, why should the public at large?”
Flash forward to today and the conversation remains largely the same – divided between camps that view internships as exploitative, on the one hand, and those that believe them a valuable aspect of architectural training, on the other. Julia Ingalls penned a feature last summer that noted some recent movements by those in the former constituency. The Royal Institute of British Architecture established a mandatory minimum wage for architecture students in 2011, for example. In the United States, the National Council of Architectural Registration Boards began efforts to phase out the title “intern” altogether, although, as Ingalls noted, without “specific initiatives to set a minimum wage, or to address the issue of recompense among whatever architects seeking licensure will officially be called.”
If you don’t like it, then leave the field.Then, on the other hand, there are, and have been, the architects – like Peter Eisenman, infamously – who contend that internships serve a special role, not just in terms of providing training, but also in enabling foreign workers to skirt visa issues, for example. Many others, however, maintain the practice of taking on unpaid interns for their own practical reasons (their own lack of funds, in the case of emerging or experimental studios) or simply because that was what they did, what has always been done, etc. To those clamoring for representation and even organization of interns, many in this camp would likely say, “If you don’t like it, then leave the field.” And, for what it’s worth, many are – although establishing a clear causal link between drop-offs from the field and bad internship experiences would be difficult.
Despite appeals to certain practicalities – on both sides – the debate has remained largely framed in ethical terms. In the process, this ideological division remains in a deadlock. But while the conversation about internships in architecture has stayed pretty much the same since it was discussed in 2004 on Archinect, the world in which a young architect becomes educated and enters the profession has greatly changed, with housing costs rising dramatically alongside living costs, tuition, average debt, and all sorts of less-quantifiable-but-real expenses like expectations of tech-ownership.
The world in which a young architect becomes educated and enters the profession has greatly changedI recently spoke with a friend of mine who graduated from a top-tier architecture school in California last year before moving to New York to work, as an intern, for a very prestigious international firm. She gets a stipend – a few hundred short of $2,000 a month – so her job sits somewhere between unpaid and paid, even if the work (and hours) are the same, if not more, than your average job.
“I get into the office around 10 and leave around 10,” my friend told me. “So around 12 hours – but they make us clock only 8.” That comes to about $7.50 per hour of labor – far better than the Archinect user who wrote on the forum a decade ago, but significantly below the New York City minimum wage (currently $9, with a new bill signed on April 4, 2016 that will raise that to $15 over the next few years).
Life in any city, let alone New York City, incurs more costs than just rentHer stipend is also more than $1,500 short of the average rent for an apartment in New York ($3519 as of February, 2016, according to RentJungle). And, of course, life in any city, let alone New York City, incurs more costs than just rent: a monthly subway card ($117), utilities ($148), internet ($54). There’s also food, which is more contingent on the individual, but considering that groceries in New York City are estimated to be 28% to 39% more, on average, than the rest of the country, it’s a lot. Let’s say you spend $200 a month on groceries in some other part of the country – because, hey, you’re a broke young architect who can exist off junk – in New York, you can expect to pay $260.
In other words, my friend, who works 60-hour weeks at an international company, is actually $1,931 in the red at the end of each month. And that’s assuming she hasn’t had a single beer, seen a movie, taken a cab, gone to a concert, visited an exhibit, or purchased a book. It’s assuming she’s on her parent’s medical insurance or Medicaid (and doesn’t have preexisting medical costs). It’s also assuming she has a working computer (if the firm doesn’t provide one) with up-to-date software. And it’s ignoring the debt she almost certainly accrued from an education that was considered essential for her to even get her foot in the door – on average, $40,000 for a young architecture graduate today, with first payments usually expected within six months of graduation.
To be an architect today, you are expected to either be born wealthy or to commit to a life of debtWhat does all this mean? In short, to be an architect today, in the eyes of many firms, you are expected to either be born wealthy or to commit to a life of debt. You’re also at tremendous disadvantage if you’re a woman: without even considering wage discrimination, a woman can expect to pay an average of $1,351 per year more than a man just for essential services and goods – what’s known as the “woman tax”.
More broadly speaking, the general unaffordability of this mainstay of an architect’s “training” greatly reinforces preexisting inequities in architecture along class, race, and gender lines. To be an architecture intern in a city like New York is feasible only for the most privileged, yet we continue to pretend that it is a marker of commitment. (Of course, you don’t have to go to one of the most expensive cities in the world to become an architect – but these economic patterns correspond to many other global cities, which, unfortunately, house a disproportionate number of prestigious firms).
Who would want to join a profession that ignores the very realities it's supposed to understand best?This isn’t the architectural field we should desire: predominantly filled with wealthy men – but it also may be frankly untenable. I mean, who would want to join a profession that ignores the very realities it's supposed to understand best? Who wants to join a profession that is structurally inhospitable to anyone besides the children of the elite? Who can?
Interested in more on the economics of architecture? Take a look at some of the features from the special March 2016 coverage, Money.
Writer and fake architect, among other feints. Principal at Adjustments Agency. Co-founder of Encyclopedia Inc. Get in touch: nicholas@archinect.com
32 Comments
Fuck firms that have real billable projects and exploit interns in this way. Every effort of even the least trained employee helps move projects forward in some way. Interns that don't value their self worth and contributions to a firm and allow this to happen in the first place are just as much to blame.
Grrrrr. Any firm that expects an employee to work 12 hours but actually tells them to clock out after eight needs to be named and shamed and hosed down with a big bucket full of Fuck You.
Tell their clients - the ones paying the bills that allow the partners to live lavishly - that the partners lie routinely and encourage their employees to lie too. Report the firm to the U.S. Department of Labor and whoever the NYC (or whatever city) equivalent is. Tell their consultants that the firm is unethical in their business practices so they shouldn't expect the firm to act lawfully or ethically in any disputes over payment that might eventually develop.
Not paying employees - and doing it openly! - means that a firm is not a success in this business, and we don't need that kind of bullshit further tarnishing our already flakey, prima donna reputation.
"Who wants to join a profession that is structurally inhospitable to anyone besides the children of the elite? Who can?"
The Architecture field is not glamorous and I frankly I do not think that the children of the elite is working 60 hour a week. They probable have the RA as a show of achievement then they will own their firm, have experienced people under them, pass by now and again to design something and socialize to get more jobs.
But to return to the point of the post, the people that complain are the workers that are doing the leg work. They probably did not have to complain before because the cost to live on your own is at an all time high.
I found this on your site: by J. James R. Apr 22, 11 3:09 am
"Between the early 1960s til the mid 1970s and even the early 1980s, wages grew from about $17.00 to $19.00 with a peak around ~$19.80 during the late 1970s. From about 1982 til 2002 with an average wage of ~$17.30, wages were largely in decline with a low in 1985 of around ~$16.00. Even today, we're barely at 1981 level of wages at around $17.60. If we adjust purely for CPI, then people who regale us with tails about making $4.50 an hour in 1972 as interns should bit their tongues. That salary is equivalent to roughly $45,000 today excluding overtime or bonuses. None of these figures account for taxes."
I agree with Eisenman
architecture is like the Marines or SEALS(OMA, BIG or Zaha) it necessarily takes tough love to create a fully functioning architect - most just don't have it
Ill say it again...you can't be for a mandatory 3-10 year "internship" and then wonder why the demographics of the profession mirror the demographics of privilege. It's common sense, and it is not only about pay scales but also the lack of job security and the culture of jumping from firm to firm to fulfill hours.
In architecture it is very rare that the older/established generation wants to help, mentor, and develop the up and comers. It is a vicious cycle of, "I went through the shit to get here now you do the same." It is one of the many things that destroys the profession from within. Attorneys and doctors don't do this shit, they have practices where partnerships are available and encouraged and seen as a way to grow and profit as a group - the young are not seen as a threat or a liability.
I agree with xenakis that everybody needs to get in the trenches but I totally disagree that it needs to be unpaid/underpaid to learn valuable lessons.
My advice to anybody considering an internship - GET PAID! Fuck anybody that doesn't have the decency to cover your living wage - this is a profession not a ditch digging operation. Sack up.
Lawyers are not required to have any work/internship experience prior to bar exam and licensure. That's the difference. They are treated as adults.
And despite the fact that law school is even more expensive than arch school there is far greater diversity, and a far higher number of grads that become licensed lawyers than arch grads that become licensed archs...
where is duo dickenson when you need him?
why does your image that goes with the cost of a macbook pro not feature a macbook pro?
Architecture is a broken profession. The depth of this problem won't begin to revel itself until the younger generation moves in, or really, doesn't. Many younger have already left the profession for tech jobs.
@xenakis the problem with your comparison to Marines/SEALS is that they are properly compensated for the work they put in.
Donna Sink
Grrrrr. Any firm that expects an employee to work 12 hours but actually tells them to clock out after eight needs to be named and shamed and hosed down with a big bucket full of Fuck You.
That's exactly what they made us do as 3D Maya Artists at a certain video game studio I worked at - we would clock out at 8hrs, then go back in and work another 4 hours - 2 years later, they got sued for non-payment of OT and I got this big lump sum payment that I used to add to my savings when I wasn't working during the recession - that was the silver lining.
Zaha in all due respect was real hard on interns - same with OMA - every week was "hell week" 4 days and nights - no sleep - in the SEALS hell week is only once - and no pay or in the case of OMA, only a stipend
Donna
Also the Video Game company that made us clock out after 8hrs and work till 11pm got shamed by Wired magazine - "Road to Hell" article - then Hillary Clinton got involved when she was Senator of NY
architecture is like the Marines or SEALS(OMA, BIG or Zaha) it necessarily takes tough love to create a fully functioning architect - most just don't have it.
That's completely beside the point.
I've always worked hard, some places I've been pushed harder than others. But I've always made a living wage. Boot camp is one thing, economically exploiting your employees is bullshit. I'm in favor of publicly shaming companies who don't pay their interns. The pressure to change the culture needs to come from within the profession.
I wish that the smaller firms that paid well got more media attention.. But no, it's the slave drivers that constantly get the wired profiles and genius media love..
You use far too many comas.
Your math is also ridiculous. No young person in architecture in New York is paying $3500 for rent. I have far too many friends paying $800-$1200 range. This keeps your example in the black. I have also never heard of a friend using their own computer at any big name NYC firm.
James, you can't be serious. $2000.00 wouldn't get anyone far in NYC, unless you're on public assistance of some kind, or you're sharing an apartment, that's been illegally converted into 4 or 5 bedrooms. I don't care what the rent is, $2000 is shit. I've had friends, that work in NYC, pay $1,200 for a closet, not essentially a closet, but a closet, albeit a large one. As for the computer, I would agree, I couldn't imagine that happening.
where are people paying $800-1200 rents? I need a new apartment.
no way can you find apartments for 800$ in NYC.
in 2005 i was paying $200 a month most the time, way way Upper Upper West side - also known as Washington Heights. We had sometimes 4 people in a 1 room. it can be done if you are willing to live like an illegal immigrant who might actually make more money an hour than you do as an architect..............basically in NYC there are a few hundred legit firms and then an ass load of "upstarts" (some have been around for years or decades). i say "upstarts" because if it was not for free or cheap labor, overly zealous young interns, and for the most part pyschotic stupid bosses who yell a lot the firms would have folded after a few months. the cheap bastards know there is an infinite pool of overachieving kids with dreams in the market - these firms (if you want to call them that) would never exist if it was not for all these kids coming to nyc with dreams of success. its the American Dream on crack with massive let down at the end of the tunnel................some advise - if the firm has more media recognition than built projects - they probably do not make money. if the partners have been teaching for decades and have a handful of built projects - they probably do not make money. if the firm is small but Archinect or some other website indicates half the country has worked there - they probably dont make money. why is making money important? its a sign you run a legit business, otherwise consider the firm a cult and you a sucker for trying to help them.......its not about money if you have money. any person who is not homeless in NYC and tells you its not about the money is already wealthy.
Is their any other profession whose education is more irrelevant and useless? I mean it would be pretty hard to not pay someone who actually was educated in any of the stuff on the ARE exams. People with philosophy majors have just as much hardship we have philosophy majors in buildings
No young person in architecture in New York is paying $3500 for rent. I have far too many friends paying $800-$1200 range. This keeps your example in the black. I have also never heard of a friend using their own computer at any big name NYC firm.
Ok, so instead of losing money, we're now just living in good old fashioned poverty. Are you saying that's good?
I have a small office here in France ( 4-5 persons)
We have 1-2 interns on regular basis, the deal beeing: lower pay, but fair hours, and real teaching / mentoring...They leave the office with an overall idea of the whole process of building projects, having encountered many projects, many situations and I try to be available for whatever questions and share the small knowledge I have....trying to be coherent at beeing an architect and a human.
I am just wondering why interns would want to join a big office with slavery reputation...working 70 hours a day at RCR, Zaha's, Foster's or other fancy studio will just write you a name on a CV, but what real knowledge will come out of that? How will one gain independance and enough know how if internship is spent drawing ceilings on massive scale hip building..
Boycott the big offices if you can, internship is about learning, not slavery.
good luck!
N
My takeaway... I am clearly paying my intern too much, that must be why I am not a successful famous Architect. In honesty, I am trying to approach it more as an apprenticeship than an internship.
But Seriously, I can sort of see an unpaid internship as a summer intern while still in school. But even then, I think they should make the minimum wage. However, Once you are out of school, a professional wage is appropriate. Most regional/local firms seem to pay decent wages, it seems only the big names are the ones who abuse the "intern" label. I kind of wish I kept up with some of my classmates who went to work for Libeskind, just to see what happened to them afterwards.
I don't mind long grueling hours weeks on end, but you have to pay the kids for that.
I didn't have the money to work for free out of college, so I went with a mid-sized regional firm in Jersey, they paid me well, and gave me the tools I needed to go on my own. I'm never going to have the connections to make a name for myself, and I really don't have the proper personality for that anyway (too introverted). But hey, occasionally I get to do some fun stuff.
Also, I think someone pointed to this elsewhere, but this is likely a large factor in why we have so little minority representation in Architecture, Unless you come from money or at least have some connections, Architecture is a lousy way to make it.
Olaf got it: why is making money important? its a sign you run a legit business, otherwise consider the firm a cult
The relevant problem with the education of architects isn't that it's impractical (the same is often said of law or medicine) but that it tends to inculcate a culture of hero-worship that glorifies individual practitioners. It's inadvertent - most such academic heroes are interesting thinkers and great intellects, worth studying in an academic way. But they can't / don't care to run a business, and may not to get too much into how things are built.
Unfortunately students aren't well informed about the distinction between academic praxis and professional praxis - there is an assumption that working in the office of someone with interesting ideas will make you a better architect. I think for the most part that's untrue. If it's to be done, it should be with a thoughtful focus and real intention to learn an applicable creative skill. But that's evidently rare: for every Jeannie Gang or B Ingels, how many other junior designers pass through OMA unaffected. For the most part, the hero-worship leads to an abundant supply of unskilled labor competing for limited job slots at prestigious firms.
Can you think of any other profession where working for the most-admired offices pays no more and maybe less? You certainly don't hear of top-5 law grads doing unpaid internships to get into big law, or accountants under reporting hours so they can get that charmed consultancy job...
excellent post Midlander, and to re-iterate
Can you think of any other profession where working for the most-admired offices pays no more and maybe less? You certainly don't hear of top-5 law grads doing unpaid internships to get into big law, or accountants under reporting hours so they can get that charmed consultancy job..
Here is a list that ENR comes out with every year, top Design Firms (based on revenue)
http://www.enr.com/newyork/toplists/2014_Top_Design_Firms
For the poster who stated that architecture is like the Marines, you don't know what you're talking about. I am a former Marine, and do know what I'm talking about. The USMC is about honor above all other things. Not paying interns is unethical, dishonorable, reprehensible, exploitative, and by extension, nothing like the Marines.
+++midlander.
Midlander nails it.
I listened to architect developer Johnthan Segal talk about how he felt he made it to the top, one of his main points: pay your people. Contractors,consultants,labor- pay your people. If you end up working for someone who doesn't understand how important this is for development. Don't work with them. When you can't get a client to pay for printing. He's more than likely not a client that we should have accepted in the first place. Pay your people. Why do you expect architects to do their work if we can't even PRINT the WORK...
Work on your contracts and work on your clients.
I had someone say in response to that idea- "well how do you think they got rich in the first place?" Ok- seriously in regard to developing hundreds of units for future lease- it's gotta get printed one way or another dude; successful projects don't cut corners and SAYING: I suggest budgeting in expenses for quality control and printing; explaining to clients that... Seriously. We're saving you money. You're saving 1,000 dollars now to make a 10,000 mistake (times 3) and the worse thing is; letting clients act like this just puts architects in further liability...
So start by educating the people who you work with. Who pay you. And who will become future relationships- because the domino effect is real. Project architects who say: hey, we can't design 10 buildings in a week- are successful. Break things down. Set expectations and manage things so that 120% effort isn't needed from staff every week - because come second time; employees, consultants are just going to say: look- NO. And your effort to stick that landing and hit the finish line early are totally wasted, along with the respect of the people working for you, as well as the client whom you've been making reduculous promises to. Act like a human, explain to clients that hey- we have kids to take care of on the weekends, we know you aren't sleeping because of the anxiety of getting this done, but it's important to us that we provide a great product and quality service to you. Cutting corners only leads to more work later, so let's shoot for 3 weeks... Thanks.
pay your people,educate the people paying you- and you'll come out slightly less crazy.
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.