"Perhaps most disappointing, given that the code was drawn up as a response to recommendations of the Panel on Fair Access to the Professions, is its failure to even cursorily explore the negative impact of unpaid internships on social mobility.As I have said before, I reject the idea that people should have to work for no pay. When an employer hires someone for a position, they are necessarily taking a risk. Some candidates might be bigger risks than others, but it is the employer's responsibility to assess those risks in the application and interview process and make the best decision they can. But they should not be reaping the benefits of free labor while they make that determination. What incentive does a company have to hire someone for a full-time, or even part-time position in this economy when they are getting good work for free? I realize the premise is that an intern is there to learn and gain experience. But the reality is that many interns and post-graduates are doing the exact same work as regular employees but for no pay or a token stipend.
Skipping over the disadvantages faced by those without the resources to fund themselves while working for free, the code simply states blandly that recruitment should 'be conducted in an open and rigorous way so as to enable fair and equal access to available internships'."
I'm glad to see someone in the U.K. is getting it right. Now what about the U.S.?