…AND ADMITS TO USING 6,000 UNPAID INTERNS IN THE PAST FOUR YEARS
The BBC is feeling the heat today after the Telegraph reported that the corporation has employed 6,000 unpaid interns in the last four years – but still insisted that these workers had “no rights” to receive a salary. A spokeperson’s statement that there was “no budget” for paying these junior members of staff is unlikely to impress interns and unions – especially given the huge salaries awarded to senior executives and the broadcaster’s biggest stars.
And now, Graduate Fog has discovered another skeleton in the BBC’s closet – the corporation seems to be planning a new TV show which effectively turns young jobseekers into gameshow contestants. Here is the blurb:
Are you a graduate, school or college leaver?
Are you struggling to start your career?
Have you been unemployed, or working in a temporary job for some time?
If the answer to these questions is yes, we can help.
Love Productions are looking for young people, aged 18-24, who are keen to find work but don’t have the experience to get on the first rung of the ladder.
We’re going to take a small group of people and put them through a series of intensive work placements, with some of the biggest companies in the country.
Successful applicants will learn from the brightest people in the business world, from office juniors to chief executives and at the end of which, employers will be able to phone in and express an interest in hiring those who have completed our work placements – live on air!
Each work experience placement will be filmed as part of a documentary series for BBC Three. If you’re interested in being considered for this unique opportunity, please fill out the application form below and return it to us with a recent photo of yourself as soon as possible.
Please return by email to: upforhire@loveproductions.co.uk
or by post to:
Love Productions
Up For Hire Team
43 Eagle Street
London
WC1R 4AT
Is it just me, or does that sound like a pretty crass and humiliating way to treat young jobseekers? This paragraph makes me feel particularly queasy:
Successful applicants will learn from the brightest people in the business world, from office juniors to chief executives and at the end of which, employers will be able to phone in and express an interest in hiring those who have completed our work placements – live on air!
Bleurgh.
Just a few months ago, I contributed to a piece in the Guardian by Lucy Tobin about the growing trend for recruiters to ask young jobseekers to jump through hoops (making videos of themselves etc) to gain their ‘prize’ – a job. (Job hunting: forget a CV, you’ll need the X Factor.)
I complained that job-seeking graduates were being made to feel like gameshow contestants, which I feel is unnecessary and humiliating for young people who are already struggling to maintain their motivation and confidence during their arduous search for paid work. I never dreamed that we were only six months from an actual gameshow where the prize was a job.
Has this become an acceptable way to treat young jobseekers?
I heard about the programme when its makers – Love Productions – asked me to help find young people to take part. But because I’m careful about what I promote to the Graduate Fog community (curse my pesky integrity), I had to check first that the young people involved would be paid for their work. Love Productions wrote back:
Apologies, we cannot actually pay anyone in documentary as it becomes a conflict of interest as to why people would want to take part, if they really feel passionately then that’s the people we are looking for not the ones after a bit of cash and exposure, this is the same on any project I work on.
When I clarified that I was saying it should be the employers who pay for the applicants labour, Love Productions said:
The series is at a very early stage, I am just saying we cannot give them money due to BBC guidelines. I do however see your point of view and think you have a great way of communicating your thoughts which Is why I contacted your website.
I do see this as a very positive experience and the aim is to create more awareness, nationally, about youth unemployment, we also aim to create an online community that will hopefully lead to many people, not just the participants in our documentary, gaining real work opportunities.
Hmm. Getting a bad vibe from the whole thing now, I declined to promote this ‘opportunity’ to you lot.
But another surprise was to come. When I took another look at the application form, written in a square at the top was: “Please attach a recent photo of yourself (head and shoulder).”
As any jobseeker will tell you, the application form that requires a photograph of yourself should be treated with caution.
If this really was about helping talented young people to find work, why would the programme-makers need to see a picture of every applicant? When I asked why this was necessary, here’s what they said:
It is simply for our purposes of knowing who has applied. As you can imagine with the many applications we receive it is easier to remember a face rather than hundreds of names.
In all honesty, I’m not entirely satisfied with this answer. Does anyone else think it’s a bit odd?
At this point I would like to be clear that there is no suggestion that Love Productions is selecting candidates for this programme based on their looks. In fact, they admit in the small print that when selecting candidates the following will be taken into account: “skill, enthusiasm, drive, lively characters whoa re comfortable being filmed.” They also say “We will be looking for a mix of people to reflect the range in age, location, gender and diversity of youth unemployment in Britain.”
However, it is an open secret that the TV industry has been known to choose case studies in this way (likewise the magazine industry – I know this only too well).
Therefore, I would like to make the point that if candidates for this sort of programme were chosen by looks – even if it was just to make sure that there was enough ‘variety’ in the line-up’s mix – then I would have cause for concern. Why? Because it would mean that some strong candidates for real jobs would be de-selected purely based on the fact that they had the wrong ‘look’.
To be honest, I’m not sure that selecting candidates according to how they come across on camera is acceptable either – if the job itself doesn’t require this quality. Hey, here’s an idea, perhaps TV shows and recruitment just shouldn’t mix?
*Is this TV programme in bad taste?
Would you apply to be a contestant on “Up for Hire”. Do you think it is tasteless to turn job-hunting into a gameshow? Or are you desperate enough to find work that you would consider applying?
Judge for yourself!
Here is the Application Form:
up_for_hire_application_form
And the screen shots on the BBC’s own website:
Has anyone pointed out to the BBC that “no rights” has case law that proves quite the opposite? Interns/work placements/work experience (of this kind) are legally required to be paid the NMW, and all 6000 of those who weren’t might want to consider asking for that pay retrospectively; as they are probably legally entitled to it. In fact they are legally not entitled to forgo it despite what the BBC might say.
“lively characters who’re comfortable being filmed”
Is anyone at their ‘liveliest’ age 22, having been unemployed for six months? Er, I don’t think so…
@James Martin
When I read that the BBC were saying interns weren’t entitled to NMW, I thought perhaps they were arguing that this is because the BBC is a non-profit organisation. But I have not heard this stated explicitly – do you know if this is their argument?
@Maxine
I quite agree! I just think their ad is the coldest thing ever and shows a total lack of sensitivity and understanding about this issue : (
Also, I’ve now posted the Application form so you can see it with your own eyes. You’ll see in the Ts and Cs at the back that Point 3 is “You must be able to commit to all the filming days required which are currently expected to run periodically from July through to October.” So what happens if the ‘contestants’ are offered a job between now and then – or even during filming? Are they really expected not to take it, because the BBC requires them to ‘commit’ to work for them unpaid, for entertainment purposes?!
I’ve also posted screenshots of the page on the BBC’s “Be on a show” website, advertising for “contributors and contestants”. I missed it the first time but I’ve just spotted this little sidebar at the bottom left hand corner, which made me shout “HA!” at my screen:
I love the way they try to be so PC / Equal Opps in their small print – but then fail so spectacularly at something so basic and obvious like… the whole point of the entire show!
Tanya, they’re not a charity, so under NMW legislation they would have to qualify as a statutory body. I’m notexpert, but I don’t think they are one…. of course I’m happy to be corrected on this if I’m wrong.
Even if legally they are on safe ground, ethically they are on thin ice. Frankly the BBC has done more to erode the rights and pay of workers (particularly freelancers) than any other media organisation, and the intern/work experience scam is just one part of that.
No, they’re claiming that these interns do not have to be paid because they are “volunteers”, that they are under no obligation to do the work that is put in front of them. That is the exception they claim, nothing about what kind of body they are.
In practice this is nonsense, whatever the BBC might claim. People on work experience at the BBC do do real work, and any that refuse to do anything would find themselves travelling in the reverse direction career-wise so would obviously not do that.
The submission of a photo to gain a job opens any employer up to accusations of discrimination.
From a photo employers can illegally discriminate because age, sex, race, disability and religion – all of these are visible via a photo. It would seem the agency – in this case Love Productions – are willing to take this risk. And lets be clear, Love Productions are likely to be functioning as an employment agency here – engaged in the supply of unpaid workers.
If you are asked to supply your photo to get a job and you don’t get the job, I’d seriously think about launching a legal challenge ie. an employment tribunal, its difficult for any employer to justify using photos when they SIMPLY AREN’T REQUIRED.
If you think an employment agency is doing something illegal then you should report them to HMRC employment agencies standards.http://www.bis.gov.uk/policies/employment-matters/eas
Is it wrong I’d probably give it a go? (Yeah, I’m desperate! :D)
The thing is though in Europe and USA it is pretty standard to ask for a photo with a cv. I think it is only a matter of time until uk follows suit!
@Jamie
I’m really shocked! We all know that first impressions count at interview, and we secretly suspect that the beautiful people (!) are more likely to get the job all other things being equal, but that’s so brazen to ask for a picture at application stage… no? Does everyone just accept it? Why do they think they’re being asked for a picture?
“The thing is though in Europe and USA it is pretty standard to ask for a photo with a cv. I think it is only a matter of time until uk follows suit!”
@Jamie – as far as I know, it’s not standard practice to ask for a photo on your CV in the US – precisely because it falls foul of discrimination law.
This all makes me feel a bit queasy. Getting people desperate for work on air – presumably so they can be mocked and have their performance dissected in the same way that contestants on the Apprentice are.
Never trust the BBC. Admittedly, some of their shows are really good, I count documentaries such as Panorama among these, but to my mind the BBC in general are vain, narrow minded and operate according to particular agenda’s. This became quite evident to me when I was watching the Sunday morning show, ‘The Big Questions’ last week, on the topic of religion. Over the course of the show it was obvious that Nicky Campbell was only approaching people in the front rows of the audience alongside the four members of the panel for contributions to the debate, ignoring people in the middle and rear rows. It was clear to me that he knew exactly to approach for the answers he wanted. It was the same with John Sweeney’s investigation into World War 2 Reenactors who portray German soldiers in the documentary “Weekend Nazi’s” a couple of years ago, again, tailored to a particular agenda.
To my mind this latest shenanigan is a further development of that nauseating piece of ultra-capitalist bile, ‘The Apprentice’, the sub-script to which is something along the lines of “we’re all capitalists and entrepreneurs now and if you’re not, you’re somehow out of it”. The subscript to this latest internship focused programme is “graduates can be bought and sold for entertainment in the national media circus”.
Well sorry BBC, you can take a hike. This graduate isn’t playing that game, and neither should any graduate with any sense of self-respect.
What I would be interested to know is how many of those 6,000 unpaid interns either got offered a job with the BBC after their months labour or walked straight into another position? i.e. Did it help them hit the big time? For most I doubt it somehow…
It’s time more people spoke out about the racket that is “employability skills”. Because the more I look at the person who is “employable” to such employers, the more it looks like a privileged person with a high propensity for taking abuse. Since when did taking lots of abuse with a smile get re-branded as interpersonally skilled?
That is what an economy too focused on retail and finance gets you… all our personalities are expected to be made into those of salesmen and financiers. For ALL available jobs.
We should circulate a list of employers to be avoided… whether they use reality-show contests to select applicants, hire based on looks, or require anyone interested in advancement to participate in their personal self-help regimen.
We should NEVER have to choose between earning a living, and living our lives with dignity and autonomy.
why make a programme just for younger jobseekers. thats discriminating against us older jobseekers, who dont get any government help
Hey Lucy, I like that idea, sort of ‘an employers blacklist’. Anyone else up for this I wonder? Mind you I’m freelance so such a blacklist probably wouldn’t affect me, but I definitely think thats a good idea.
Also don’t forget, just like the Apprentice, if you make a serious screw-up every recruiter or employer will be thinking of that footage when interviewing you.