CHARITY’S ASTOUNDING ARROGANCE STUNS GRADUATE FOG
In the last few months, Graduate Fog has seen some shocking displays of arrogance among those organisations which continue to expect young people to work for nothing, in the form of unpaid internships.
But folks, this one takes the biscuit.
The National Trust has advertised for an unpaid intern to be their ‘Internship Programme Coordinator’. In other words, this unpaid worker is there solely to help set up the organisation’s new internship programme, which will encourage more interns to come and work for them unpaid.
I quote: “As an intern yourself, you’ll be able to advise colleagues on how best to recruit and support fellow interns.”
Translation: “You’ll be working for nothing, and we’ll waste your time by asking you what it’s like working for us nothing, so that it becomes even easier for us to encourage more young people to work us for nothing. See? Aren’t we geniuses?!”
As the National Trust rolls out an expensive-looking new advertising campaign across London Underground (slogan: ‘Time well spent’) its audacious request raises the question: “Time well spent, for WHOM?”
What real value does the intern get from this experience? Or is it really only the National Trust that gains anything from this internship? And when they descend to levels like this, for how much longer can charities hope to keep passing off their ‘internships’ as true ‘volunteer’ roles?
Here is an excerpt from the astonishing advertisement, which appears on the National Trust’s own website:
We’ll be launching a brand new internship progamme this summer and we’d like you to help make it happen. Based at our award-winning central office, you’ll be involved in all aspects of this exciting programme, from its development and launch through to its successful implementation. As an intern yourself, you’ll be able to advise colleagues on how best to recruit and support fellow interns. On other words, you’ll give us an invaluable insight into what interns want from a programme — and how we can make sure that our programme stands out.
We’d like you to have some experience of planning and delivering progescts — and to tight deadlines too. Full of ideas and initiative, quick and keen to learn, you’ll enjoy working in a team but can also get your head down on your own when needed. Just as important, you’ll be a clear communicator, with the confidence to work with colleagues across the organisation. You’ll also need IT skills, MS Word, Excel and PowerPoint especially.
This ‘Internships Programme Coordinator’ role was one of four positions advertised recently by the National Trust. It stated that the internship would last for six months, during which interns can expect to work up to 30 hours a week. No expenses were offered.
Here is what happened when I emailed the National Trust:
From: Graduate Fog
To: National Trust press officeHi,
My name is Tanya de Grunwald and I run a graduate careers advice website called Graduate Fog.
I am surprised to see that you are openly advertising for unpaid interns to help you at the National Trust, for up to 30 hours a week for up to nine months, paying expenses only. The four roles currently advertised are:
– Volunteering communications coordinator (6 months)
– Internship Programme Coordinator (6 months)
– Volunteering & community involvement strategy coordinator (6-9 months)
– Change programme liaison assistant (contract length not stated)As we all know, unpaid internships have become commonplace. However, it is my belief that they are ethically dubious – and their legal status is unclear. My understanding is that there is currently a loophole in the law designed to protect genuine volunteering for organisations with charitable status – which I understand the National Trust has – but it is my belief that this is being exploited by many large organisations simply looking to cut their costs at the expense of their most junior members of staff.
For all of these role descriptions, the National Trust goes into great detail about the nature of the work involved in each internship. In my opinion, the roles that you describe in your advertisements are not those of a true charitable volunteer. To me, all four ‘internships’ sound to me like jobs that should be paid.
In the ‘About our Internships’ paragraph, you say:
“You’ll be involved in, even manage, key projects. Real projects too, with real responsibility…”
Then, for the volunteering communications coordinator role, you say:
“As well as managing communications and writing new web content, you’ll look at we use social media and online communities to talk to current and potential volunteers. You’ll also help us to create a brand new ‘volunteers area’ on our website…”
For the internship programme coordinator role you say:
“We’ll be launching a brand new Internship Programme this summer and we’d like you to help make it happen… you’ll be involved in all aspects of this exciting programme, from its development and launch through to its successful implementation. As an intern yourself, you’ll be able to advise colleagues on how best to recruit and support fellow interns…”
For the volunteering & community involvement strategy coordinator, you say:
“Through interviews, workshops and focus groups, you’ll talk to key stakeholders to make sure that we’re effectively delivering our strategy. As well as identifying key milestones, knowing what needs to be achieved when, you’ll help to ensure that everyone in the Trust knows about our plans for volunteer and community involvement…”
For the change programme liaison assistant role you say:
“You’ll identify how we’ll we’re progressing against our key milestones. You’ll find out where obstacles are and how best we can overcome them. In everything you do, you’ll be a real champion for the ‘Performing at our best’ priority, communicating this vital value with clarity and enthusiasm…”
Even if we set your legal obligations aside for a moment, does the National Trust not accept that that these unpaid internships take advantage of those who do them – and exclude those who can’t afford to do them? Frankly, considering the National Trust’s excellent reputation, I would expect your organisation to be more careful about being seen to take advantage of young workers like this. Do you not agree that you are effectively only offering these placements to those who can afford to work for free, thereby excluding those who can’t afford this ‘luxury’?
Having had recent dealings with Comic Relief on a similar case, I understand that volunteering is a crucial aspect of charitable organisations’ work. However, I – and my users – feel it is important not to confuse genuine volunteering (which people do in their spare time, out of the goodness of their heart) with unpaid interning (which people do full-time, because they are desperate for experience and feel they have no alternative).
I will be blogging about next week and would be very grateful if somebody from the National Trust would care to comment (in writing, via email) on this at your earliest convenience. Are you willing to reconsider your position and turn these roles into paid opportunities?
With many thanks
Tanya
The National Trust replied:
From: National Trust press office
To: Graduate FogHello,
Please see below for some words responding to your query about our internships.
Feel free to give me a call if you’d like to discuss further.
Best wishes,
Mike Collins
Senior Press Officer (natural environment)National Trust internships
As a charity and organisation that works with tens of thousands of volunteers these voluntary internships are just one way in which people can support the organisation whilst looking to develop their own skills and experience.
We are committed to ensuring that opportunities created through the National Trust Internship Programme are accessible to as wide a range of applicants as possible, whether recent graduates or people seeking a career change. There are also a range of long term voluntary roles which help people get a foothold in to a career path of their choice.
Our internships are designed to offer people of all ages, and backgrounds the chance to gain some solid work experience in an area of their choice.
All our internships are purely voluntary and arrangements are not legally binding. As with all volunteering opportunities with the National Trust, out-of-pocket travel costs between home and the volunteering place will be paid, and other reasonable expenses agreed in advance.
We’ve designed this programme so that all of our opportunities are part time and we ensure that they are as flexible as possible to allow time for paid work, job seeking or alternative training. This ensures that our Interns are still able to undertake paid work or claim Jobseekers Allowance whilst volunteering with us.
Internships are just one opportunity to develop a career with the Trust. We also run a range of apprenticeships and traineeships, both paid and unpaid.
We are currently recruiting some volunteer internship roles which will ensure that volunteers have an opportunity to lead the development of our volunteering offer. The recruitment process will be testing and thorough and we will help interns as much as possible so that they can move into full-time work.
Annoyed? So was I – so I wrote back:
From: Graduate Fog
To: National Trust Press OfficeThanks for this Mike. You have clearly taken great care over this response, but I am disappointed that it fails to answer the majority of my questions. I anticipate that most of my users will feel similarly frustrated.
To clarify, does the National Trust not feel any sense that these internships are ethically dubious?
I am also interested in the point you make about your internships being taken up by people of all ages. Whilst I believe that your volunteers are of all ages, I find it very hard to believe that these internships are taken up by people of all ages, given the nature of the work, which is clearly designed to appeal to those in the early stages of their careers and eager to gain work experience. In order to support your point, would you be able to find out the average age of your interns at the National Trust?
Also, should we take it that you are unwilling to consider turning these internships into paid opportunities?
With thanks again,
Tanya
PS. I would prefer not to speak on the phone as it is best to have this in writing so that you cannot claim that I have misquoted you.
PPS. Do you get paid to do your job?
At this point, it all went quiet. So about a week later I wrote:
From: Graduate Fog
To: National Trust press officeHi Mike
Are you planning to respond to my email? Or have you said everything you wish to say?
Thanks again,
Tanya
A few days later, the National Trust replied:
From: National Trust press office
To: Graduate FogHi Tanya,
I’m sorry that I didn’t respond. I think that we’ll keep to that statement.
Thanks,
Mike
This is the debate that won’t die. Nick Clegg used it last week when justifying unpaid internships within the Lib Dems – and charities of all sizes are doing the same thing. I know we’re not supposed to pick on (supposedly) lovely charities, which are run by (supposedly) lovely people – but what I’m seeing is decidedly un-lovely. And I’m not about to let this one go.
I’m dismayed to see charities like Comic Relief and the National Trust dragging their excellent reputations into the gutter by using unpaid interns – and trying desperately to convince us all that these are ‘volunteer’ roles.
People who genuinely volunteer do so out of the goodness of their hearts.
These are not volunteer roles. In my opinion they are cynically targeted at young people (usually graduates) who are so desperate for experience that they will work for free if they can afford it. As a result, those who can’t afford it are effectively locked out of working in the charity sector, where long stretches of unpaid experience are a necessity before even being considered for paid roles, however junior.
I know times are tough in the charity sector right now. But looking to unpaid workers to fill the gaps in your balance sheet isn’t fair or right. You know it and we know it. Find another way to balance your books. Do more fundraising, spend less on advertising and PR, ditch a few expensive executives – frankly, we don’t care. But STOP taking advantage of young workers.
*What do you think of the National Trust’s “Internship Programme Coordinator” role?
Is the National Trust taking advantage of its brand name to trick a young person into working for them for free? Is there any way this could be viewed as a true volunteer role?
Think yourself luckey that you have youth on your side. I have worked for three NT sites and my wife was a catering manager for over 10 years for the NT. Current policy appears to be if you are over 40 and have long service – then you are to be hounded out of your job OR under “restructuring” apply for a post you have held for years and THEN this post lasts for a two year contract. – NASTY!
NOT VERY CHARITABLE.
We thourght that this was just a policy in our region, but have contacted other regions and have found the same cull is in progress throughout the organisation! NT – AVOID!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
@Macy. That’s awful. I’ve known several charities behave appallingly to staff which I wouldn’t have expected in that sort of organisation. Sadly it seems having moral aims and treating your staff morally are not the same. I don’t agree youth is always an advantage though-as we’ve seen from all these companies not paying trainees as a policy.
Hi there…….
This is so true- especially the point that essential work experience is a luxury; it’s good to read that somebody is vocalising what we are all thinking. If it’s not working for free then we have to pay for it. As the National Trust has proven the larger companies remain completely unchallenged. The last I heard of Britain’s latest social experiment was that more emphasis was going to be put on apprenticeships; if training at degree level now seems less of a viable option financially, what other routes are any more attractive? It has already been noted that apprenticeship aren’t as fulfilling as they could be- ie the level one is trained up to compared to say a degree. Has the buck not been passed over to the big society – and what is the fundamental benefit of this social experiment to our country in the long run?
Disgruntled, of Torquay
I have just read your article, the national trust are becoming an organisation that is just interested in the money and not the conservation of our national heritage.
There internal policies on income will soon see all national trust car parks and other areas been made in to pay areas..it might take time but its coming.
I for one no longer TRUST the trust.
shame really
completely agree with this, youngsters just don’t have a chance to get into paid charity work. the national trust has been a business rather than a charity for years now. Disgusting.
“I know times are tough in the charity sector right now. But looking to unpaid workers to fill the gaps in your balance sheet isn’t fair or right. You know it and we know it. Find another way to balance your books. Do more fundraising, spend less on advertising and PR, ditch a few expensive executives”
I’d like to point out a few things regarding this. I work for the Trust. You say times are hard for charity worker sector at the mo, do you think cutting down on advertising and PR will make them money?
NO..The Trust makes money out of the public, and without publicity and Advertising alot of properties struggle to survive.
people outside the Trust don’t realise how hard it is for some properties to make money and how much red tape there is. Costs of repairs for historic buildings is phenomenal, and alot of properties are off the beaten track so have to rely on advertising and PR to survive.
To me this internship scheme is optional. If you don’t want to do it, then don’t. People should judge their own circumstances as to whether it’s a good idea. If you want to earn money AND learn a skill in the heritage sector, do volunteer work and work part time. This internship scheme isn’t there to create barriers or discriminate against groups. No-one forces people to do it, it’s just another option to gain a skill if you can. But it’s probably a more in depth training than volunteering.
I’m in a decent position in the trust and I got here through Volunteering.
The Trust has made redundancies high up the chain so they are cutting down on
The Trust has had a re-organisation and made redundancies high up the chain so they are cutting down on more higher positions.
You ever pay rent on part time wages? Good luck with that.
jacob…
I presume you pay work fulltime to pay rent right? Lets say the National Trust did pay you to do an internship and you decide to do one.You’ve left your old job to do it, what you going to do when it finishes? The heritage sector is exrtemely competetive, and theres no saying you’re going to get work straight away when it finshes. So you’re jobless, how you gonna pay the rent then? It’s not the answer to all your dreams even if they did pay.
If you want it that bad you have to make sacrifices. I moved back in with my parents for a little while whilst I did volunteer work. I paid them rent with a part time job. A few years I’m full time for trust, but I gave up my own space to do it.
Two friends of mine that live together now want a hertiage career. Ones gonna stay fulltime and volunteer at the weekends, the other is gonna go part time to help with the rent andand do volunteer work with the rest of his time.
National Trust can’t just hand you everything on a plate, you have to judge yourself what you wanna do and how if you can do it. Thats what I did. This intern scheme is there for people who can and want to d it. It’s not like you’re being forced to do it by the job center.
And there’s the problem – this unpaid work is there for those who CAN AND WANT to do it. Not everyone can, given that you have to work unpaid for six months!
Great for you that you you could afford to subsidise the National Trust in order to get experience, not everyone is in such a foirtunate position – and why should they have to be just to carve out a career?
J C, that’s not an argument for them not paying though. Quite apart from anything else, a role that performs the function of a ‘worker’ must by law be remunerated at at least the national minimum wage.
Personally I don’t really give a shit about the heritage sector or media or any of those where internships are particularly rife, but their logic has now crept through to a lot of other sectors whereby you have to actively pay to start your career and thus basically by default shut out anyone who doesn’t have a conveniently located relative or sacks of cash. Given that, I’d rather have internships as a whole nipped in the bud since they are shakily legal at best anyway and stop this zero sum game where people have to go into debt before they even start in life/pay out huge sums rather than earn a very little and slowly (or quickly if you’re good) build up.
You know what the most shocking thing I recently found out about the national trust?
Of their 72,200 staff, only 5200 are paid employees. The rest are unpaid. I repeat – Only 7.2% of their staff are paid. A whopping 67,000 work for them for free.
CostaDel
Yes, thats called volunteers, it’s nothing new or shocking. Alot of organisations have them ranging from Oxfam to RSPCA to the Police. They don’t work full time, most come in for half a day once or twice a week sometimes even just once a month, most are over 60 years old so it’s not like they’re doing it for a career or need for money.
Alot of our volunteers do it because the property or site they work for are of local interest to them and actually want to keep their local history surviving. Many use it as a form of socialising too. But it’s not like they don’t get rewarded. They get discounts in other NT shops, and they get free staff meals and days out. But at the end of the day, they choose to do it, and don’t consider it as work.
I started volunteering for the trust, I didn’t give a crap about whether I was paid. I made a new circle of friends,I saw it as an extention to my hobby and interests, and for me, it was a foot in the door for a new career.
But you will also find, alot of those unpaid members of staff do job where a skilled member of staff isn’t needed and don’t actually want to do anything with more than the minimum responsibility, so it’s not like they’re being forced to be property managers or anything.
I don’t see what the upset is here?
It’s National Trust not National Service. By the way people are carrying on it sounds like the Trust has just invented a new compulsary slavery regime
Unless you’ve been a member of staff in the Trust and know how much it costs to run a site, and see the figures, and know how hard it is for each site to make money, then you can’t critcise.
This internship scheme is just an option for people who can do it. If you can’t do it, try other avenues if you’re that desperate to make anew career.
But to come out with things like cut down on PR and Advertising is obsurd and shows a complete lack of understanding as to how hard it is to make money for alot of sites.
If like Jacob you don’t shit about the heritage sector then why are you arguing about it or even on here?. If people are happy to do the Internship, and NT are happy to accept them, then why should it affect you?
I tell you what, why doesn’t the trust take on and pay everyone aho wants to be an Intern. And pay them all a wage that they can live on and afford rent no matter where you live etc, and then lets see how long it takes for the Trust to run out of money. The public will be the first people to start compalining when our National Monuments and historic sites start perishing and then we’ll get the argument that the Trust needs to stop employing people to spend momey on our heritage , which is-what our job is to do !!
My upset, in one single phrase: No young person should ever have to work for free to be considered for a career in any sector.
Not fashion, not PR, not journalism, not heritage, not anything!
The distinction is all too blurred between volunteering, internships, and those looking for a job. If Dorris wants to volunteer her retirement away, then so be it. But job hunters shouldn’t be put in the horrible position that the only entry point to a particular industry is unpaid internships.
I read recently – though I am loathe to forget where I read it – that simply calling something an “internship” rather than calling it what it properly is “Volunteering” increases applications from candidates by a massive amount. This is because – simply – internship has a much better ring to it on the CV. The NT, and indeed any organization that can get away with it, will label any old shoe an internship simply to increase engagement. Who the hell wouldn’t that can get away with it?
I quite frankly don’t care if you want to volunteer. Volunteer yourself to death chasing a sector that’s closed for paid work for all but the lucky. But if you call it an internship, it should be paid. I’m not saying do away with volunteering, but the term “internship” needs a legal status that means it must be paid.
That way, volunteering with the NT can be called what it properly should be – volunteering. Fool yourself to believe otherwise, but you’re still a fool.
If internships are a vital entry into graduate careers, then they should all be paid. Plain and simple. Social mobility, to me, outweighs ANY charitable cause.
But reading this…
“You know what the most shocking thing I recently found out about the national trust?
Of their 72,200 staff, only 5200 are paid employees. The rest are unpaid. I repeat — Only 7.2% of their staff are paid. A whopping 67,000 work for them for free.”
You don’t seem to know the difference either. What you wrote here makes it sound like we have some paid staff,and 67,000 members of unpaid staff.
Volunteers are classed as staff, so those 67,000 members of unpaid staff are mostly those people that want to volunteer there retirement away. …to which, you said you don’t have a problem with.
“My upset, in one single phrase: No young person should ever have to work for free to be considered for a career in any sector. ”
Indeed, and I agree, IF that organisation is making millions of pounds worth of profit or is government funded. The National galleries for example offer paid internships, but they’re government funded.
National Trust is a non profit organisation, and doesn’t have millions of pounds knocking around to employ loads of interns. NT have made a loss this year.
Really,the responsibilty should be put on government and their bodies such as the DWP, Jobcenter etc to help people with career funding. They should be helping to fund people with a career after all thats their job. The National Trust isn’t their to sort out the countries un-employment and career issues. People come to us because they WANT to. We’re not the only option. Their is the government and council owned museums, theres English Heritage, Private houses, countryside trusts, historic house association, etc or, you could just back to Uni and claim off the govenment.
National Trust are totaly on their own, and has relied on unpaid staff for decades. We get no outside funding. Even something simple like working with the local councils to get a few sign posts is an extremely timely, expensive process.
In fact over the years NT have made it easier for people to get a foot in the door. It used to be stuffy work environemnt for Uni grads and experts in heritage. Now you get work with them through just having some experience in a museum environment which can be gained through volunteering for the Trust, English heritage or your local museum, and no degrees required. Some roles require degrees and experience but the National Trust will take on people with just experience.
It’s totally irrelevant whether that organisation is making a profit or not. It’s still utterly exploitative for the National Trust to expect people to work for it unpaid and then use those very same people when they want to recruit people with experience to work for them.
Anyone who wants to work in that sector has no choice – you work unpaid for us or don’t ever think of getting paid work. And there is no question but that that is contrary to any consideration of social equality and equality of opportunity. If you practise an employment policy such as this, you are bound to limit the kind of people who work for the National Trust to be from the wealthier sections of society.
That isn’t something that any government funded body should do, it’s nothing to do with profit making, it is simple straightfoward decency.
They’ve made a loss you say? Damn, must be all the expenses they’re paying…
In any instance, the statistics was posted because I was so shocked at the disparity between the number of unpaid staff to paid staff. Only 1 in 12 people being paid in an organisation – regardless of their profit making status – is quite a shocking statistic. It doesn’t bode well for any person who actually wants a career in that sector…
Also, I’m all too well aware of the current statutory framework in this areas – with section 44 of the National Minimum Wage Act making it quite clear that for registered charities a person can be considered a worker, but without the requirement to be paid (“Voluntary Workers”). However, if people who operate under s.44 are counted under staff rather than volunteers, then that makes the situation even more bleak if you ask me.
Either way, the division for me is not whether an organisation is “Not for Profit” or “For Profit”. The division for me is the name of the arrangement.
Here’s how I believe it should be: Internship is a very lucrative marketing term. As such, if the arrangement is described as an “internship” – Whether for an NFP or not – it must be paid. Simple. No exceptions. If the arrangement is unpaid and for a registered charity, then it must be described as voluntary work. If the arrangement is unpaid and for a private profit-making company, then I’m sorry but there’s a cost to doing business in this country and part of that is labour – and that’s non-negotiable.
I do think that limits need to be placed on the NFP/charitable sector through other technical legal mechanisms. For one, the Equalities Act needs to start applying to voluntary positions. To date, legal developments have meant it doesn’t apply. Do you know what that means? If the HR manager doesn’t like you because you’re black, or you’re a Muslim, or you’re gay, then they can choose to discriminate on that basis and there is no way to challenge it. That must be amended.
Some interesting figures – The National Trust should be congratulated for supporting 67,000 volunteers, very impressive indeed and commendable to provide opportunities for young people needing to gain experience. Well done.
Yes, something like that…
I have a problem with it. Your argument is that, if you don’t like it then ignore it. Well that doesn’t address the problem, its like sticking your head in the sand. It lets the problem grow and fester until it gets to such proportions that it becomes normalised and encroaches on other jobs – so it does affect us all.
Ignoring the problem solves nothing.
I am currently doing an internship for NT and find this very poignant at present.
JC, you state that the Trust reimburses out of pocket expenses, but that is only if you live less than 20 miles away. Any further and we have to foot the bill ourselves. I have even heard of volunteers being discouraged from applying for these reimbursement despite the fact that without the 67000 volunteers that the Trust has it would not be able to open ANY of its sites. NEVER underestimate what WE do you for.
JC, you seem to have been in the Trust for some time and as such have no idea how hard it is to get a job, let alone one of the sector you want. You had the luxury of being able to move home, a lot of people don’t.
You also state that a lot of properties are in remote areas, have you ever tried to find part time work in a tiny little village? Its next to impossible.
Internships for charities that are unpaid should have time limits implemented. I am currently on 3 months and I feel it is the perfect length of time. I have supported myself with no help from anyone but have eaten into my savings a lot. I have got some valuable experience out of it, BUT not enough to contemplate doing a 6 month unpaid stint with the Trust.
If the Trust wants their internships to have a better reputation then they need to make them a damn site better. Recently I saw an advert for a Visitor Services Assistant Manager Intern! This is appalling! This is damn right abuse.
Internships need to have a structured, organised level of learning. Where both parties benefit equally. It needs time and planning to ensure than the interns are not exploited.
Until this happens, the Trust I’m afraid is in no position to argue their greatness.
It is every company in the UK’s responsibility to contribute to our economy. The Trust, charity or not, has as big a part to play in this as Tesco. So buck up and play your part.
“You also state that a lot of properties are in remote areas, have you ever tried to find part time work in a tiny little village?”
Yes, you don’t have to live in the same village as the property to volunteer there you know. I lived in a town and commuted to my local property which was 35 minutes away in an isolated hamlet.
And tell me I had the ‘luxury’ because you don’t know my circumstances.
I haven’t worked fulltime for the trust for long fulltime. I started as a volunteer, then part time 2 days a week and then seasonal 3-4 days a week and then finally fulltime. When I did part time and seasonal work I had to find other part time roles so yes, I know exactly how hard it is to find work.
As for volunteer expenses, that purely down to the discretion of the site. The ones I’ve worked at, distance has never been a probelm. But then most came from less than 20 miles away anyway.
“NEVER underestimate what WE do you for.”
You don’t have to tell me that. I have been both volunteer, and needed volunteers.
“It is every company in the UK’s responsibility to contribute to our economy. The Trust, charity or not, has as big a part to play”
I don’t think Tesco and the National Trust are really on the same level. Tesco cover almost every square mile of britain and dabble in every aspect of life from groceries, electrical items, travel, insurance, petrol, phones and phone contracts and employ millions more than the NT. National trust just looks after historic monuments and areas of natural interest etc and creates abit of tourism.
To say the nt gets no funding us a lie. They claimed £24 mil last year in gift aid alone. Charities DO get money from the government from taxes
But the gift aid is money the Trust has made off it’s visitors.If we don’t promote the site, we get no visitors, we get no gift aid, so it’s down to OUR work we get it. We have to rely on visitors generousity to get the Gift aid declarations to begin with. It doesn’t come automatic as a good will gesture from the government.
But then that money goes straight back to the property to help it survive.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/350-national-trust-staff-balloted-on-strike-action-over-pay.1366989875
“We now have no staff whatsoever either on or earning less than the national minimum wage”.
Actually, the vast majority of the NT who are needed to make that operation run earn less than the NMW… Interns and volunteers, treated like staff when it matters, not considered staff when it comes to PR.
I read this a couple of weeks ago, and originally I thought the article raised some interesting points of view that I had never considered before. However since then I have started volunteering for the NT. Not only do they cover my travel expenses, but I get free tea, coffee and cake, as well as free entry in to other NT properties and a generous discount in their cafes and shops. I’ve also spoken to some people doing internships with the NT, and in all cases they had been provided with lodgings either on the site or nearby. I believe this to be a fair trade for the skills and experience they are offering, especially in such a competitive job market, and your exclusion of this information makes your article seem like nothing more than poorly researched, hate-mongering bullcrap.
“Not only do they cover my travel expenses, but I get free tea, coffee and cake, as well as free entry in to other NT properties and a generous discount in their cafes and shops.”
Pretty sure those are benefits in kind – the discount especially is… That would entitle any volunteer to legally be paid the national minimum wage according to s.44 of the National Minimum Wage Act…
Marie, unfortunately inot all sites follow those guidelines. For instance when i volkenteered only 10 miles were covered and the volunteers didnt get cake. They were often put down by staff and the interns were not appreicated often being moaned at for not being able to work 7 days amongst other issues. Internships can be a great idea as long as they are only a couple months and do not replace orvdo the work of paid staff.
Agree that discount amounts to a benefit in kind which would render the NMW to be due under the terms of the NMW Act 1998.
“Pretty sure those are benefits in kind — the discount especially is… That would entitle any volunteer to legally be paid the national minimum wage according to s.44 of the National Minimum Wage Act…”
Petty sure that’s an ignorant and idiotic assumption. Too many of the comments above are reflective of the ‘moon on a stick’/’I’m entitled to whatever I want with minimum effort’ attitude that is far too prevalent today.
@J Handin: Ignorant and idiotic assumption?
I sure hope that you’re some kind of expert on s.44, because I think you’ll find there is nothing “ignorant or idiotic” about my statement. I’m willing to bet you haven’t even read the text of s.44.
Voluntary workers under s.44 are NOT entitled to anything except expenses actually incurred, or reasonably estimated to be incurred, accommodation necessary to undertake the volunteering, or training necessary to perform volunteering tasks.
With regards specifically to benefits in kind, for national minimum wage purposes, a benefit in kind is a non-cash benefit or facility of any kind. Typically, a benefit in kind would have some monetary value and the provision of it would incur some cost on the provider.
A discounted or free entry to premises would be considered by definition a benefit in kind. As they are being provided with this benefit beyond the allowances in s.44, they are workers rather than voluntary workers entitled to national minimum wage.
If you’re going to call someone “ignorant and idiotic”, then I would recommend in future that you’re actually correct with what you say. Unfortunately, you are wrong and that makes you both ignorant to the proper application of employment law and idiotic for challenging someone who is.
I’d recommend that you look up the definition for ‘entitled’.
Ironic really given the overall point I’d made!
Your ignorance is the cause of your misunderstanding of the point of minimum wage vs volunteering.
So who feels the idiot now?
“Who feels like an idiot now”.
Not me. I have made a technical point on the correct interpretation of minimum wage legislation. You on the other hand are making a point about absolutely nothing. Your OPINION is that the people on here have a false sense of “entitled” given that the arrangement is volunteering (that is called opinion. It’s not fact.)
My point is that, technically, based on the letter of the law, offering a discount to voluntary workers under the wording of s.44 makes people LEGALLY entitled to be paid the national minimum wage. This occurs REGARDLESS of the position being volunteering, due to the strict requirements of voluntary workers under s.44.
I would recommend YOU look up the definition of entitled. Let me elaborate for you:
1) Give (someone) a legal right or a just claim to receive or do something.
2) Give (something, esp. a text or work of art) a particular title.
Under the terms of s.44, providing voluntary workers with free or reduced entry to premises would give them a legal right or a just claim to receive national minimum wage (entitle, definition 1).
There’s nothing ironic about my view that s.44’s strict requirements are often waived because I’ll let you in on a secret – I have a graduate job. I don’t feel entitled to anything except my wage at the end of the month after doing a damn good job. I don’t need to argue on behalf of graduates who are in sh*t working conditions and unpaid internships. But I do, because it’s important to me and to others. I want people to receive the wage that they are legally entitled to. Laws serve to protect and they must be adhered to (let’s not get into an argument of positivism vs. natural law for now). It’s that simple.
You on the other hand sound like a Daily Mail reading 50-something who believes that not a single young person (The “entitled” generation) anywhere actually does any work. You sound like the kind of person whose dreams were shattered by having to work hard with no prospect of social mobility (One of the baby boomers who doesn’t hold disproportionate wealth and power, yeouch, the rest are doing AMAZINGLY!). If any of that is correct, to put it simply: you need to grow up.
And if it’s not correct, it appears that your attitude has grown up faster than you. Succinctly: You need to grow up.
You haven’t actually provided any counter argument to the legal interpretation, except some ad hominem opinionated drivel about “entitlement” culture, so I’ll assume you’re either a troll and / or an idiot and ignore you as appropriate.
I wonder if your response had been even longer how many more prejudices would be revealed? None of your assumptions are correct.
Unless the ‘benefits’ are a requirement of the volunteering agreement your claims are incorrect.
Read through what I have said (and try to understand it rather than spitting with indignation) and you may learn the irony of your responses.
There’s a further irony that having copies and pasted the google definition of a term you still failed to understand it in relation to the context of your argument.
Hmmm, this is a polite and friendly group I’ve stumbled across isn’t it!
Thinking logically about this I’d hazard a guess that the National Trust is big enough to have taken legal advice on it’s involvement of interns, benefits like offering a discount etc. Having done that I’d then assume they’d follow that advice and wouldn’t be doing anything legally dodgy. I know you should never assume (it makes an ass of u and me afterall)but just thought I’d share the thought on a wet and soggy Friday afternoon.
@ Andrea T
thinking experientially you’d be wrong.
Large companies like Harrods, Arcadia and others have fallen foul of NMW law. https://graduatefog.co.uk/2012/2350/harrods-internship-writes-cheque-1800-unpaid-intern/
They don’t take legal advice, they simply rely on what others are doing or their HR dept and then find out its too late.
An interesting discussion, couple of thoughts
1. The adverts for these positions read an awful lot like paid role descriptions. I haven’t read much about their internships, but do they offer for example, much training or the chance to obtain qualifications for free – which can sometimes cost quite a bit of money. Do they offer employment support of any sort? Help with CVs/interviews and other things? Can they apply for internal jobs at the end? In short – what do they get that a normal volunteer wouldn’t get, if it is not paid? I really don’t see why the minimum wage can’t be applied. There are various funding schemes around for this these days that the Trust could apply for to keep it ethical. I have noticed a lot more minimum wage interships/traineeships in the conservation sector nowadays funded by such schemes. E.g. Heritage Lottery Fund Skills For the Future programme.
2. I started out as a trainee for a wildlife trust and was overall very pleased with this. Whilst I wasn’t paid, but I received free accommdation and bills, all expenses, PPE etc and had one day off a week to earn some money to feed myself, so it was doable. I also was able to apply for internal jobs. Only drawbacks were being allowed to do training, but then not being allowed to do assessments for certain qualifications, and being shown a long list of trainig at the beginning whuch did not materialise.
2.. Having worked in volunteer management for some years, these internships throw up a particular issue for me – that they are all about volunteer development. I feel it is a sign that volunnteering management in general can often be seen as an area that is not that important, even by organisations who claim to value volunteers, and they try to get volunteer managers on the cheap/for free. This is much less true for the health sector, but still a problem in nature conservation/heritage.
What a load of rubbish!
The National Trust aren’t dragging their name through the gutter. You are doing that for them!
I imagine the majority of your questions weren’t answered because they were asked in an argumentative way – or at least that’s how they read.
You made no mention of your experiences of volunteering or knowledge within the sector so let you give me mine: The National Trust helps thousands of people every day with volunteering, myself included. It doesn’t discriminate against age, gender, ethnicity and accepts people with all sorts of personal difficulties.
Volunteer positions AREN’T for monetary gain. They are made to support the greater good of which the charity does – to conserve. I wanted a career change and I was able to get it by gaining experience whilst volunteering. I am now in a well paid, full-time, permenant position. I would have had a much harder time changing careers had it not been for the National Trust.
I could ramble on about how brilliant they have been and continue to be but it would appear that you’re of the opinion that we (humans) work only for money and for nothing else. It’s sad that that’s the perspective you choose but it’s not my job to change it.
This was shoddy journalism. Pitchforks at the ready. You mention your users quite regularly. I can only assume this is a badge of honour for you? I understand this article is old but I really hope your journalism has improved – it’s a big responsibility, being able to influence so many people and you seem to have taken it lightly.
Nonsense. These are all fair questions of an organisation which should be paying people who they expect to do real work for them.
Numerous people want to work in this sector, they aren’t “volunteering” to “support the greater good” of a charity, they are trying to build a career. Why should young (mostly debt ladened) people in this sector be forced to work unpaid to do that (and yes, they are “forced” because it is the only way to make it in this field).
It is not that people work for money and nothing else – it is that people do need to have a bit of it to put bread on the table!
Keep going Tanya!
The ‘intern-ification’ of jobs needs to stop. That’s not to say that there aren’t genuine opportunities too, but what we see these days is employers exploiting the lack of opportunities available by transforming often low-paid into no-pay jobs and selling them as ‘fantastic learning opportunities’. You often end up doing the same thing as someone who would formerly have been paid.
Hi all, I’m on the hunt for a former National Trust intern who will speak to a journalist about their experience, plus their views on why they think NT internships should be paid. If you can help, please email me via the form on our Contact Us page (link below). Thanks so much!
https://graduatefog.co.uk/about/contact-graduate-fog/
PS. His deadline is 5pm so please be quick!