NO WAGES, NO OFFICE AND NO PROFIT – ARE YOU SURE YOU’RE RUNNING A BUSINESS, GUYS?
At Graduate Fog, we see a lot of adverts for unpaid internships. They all make our blood boil – that’s why we’ve named and shamed dozens of employers in the last few years and our stories are regularly picked up in the national press.
Oddly, when we saw this advert for an unpaid “copywriter role” at BrokeinLondon.com – a website whose ‘mission’ is to help young people struggling to survive on low incomes – our blood didn’t boil. Because we assumed it was a spoof. No-one could possibly run a website for skint city-dwellers and then post an irony-free advert for multiple four-month unpaid internships based in London, could they? Oh yes, they could. Here it is:
Just when we thought it couldn’t get any worse, founder Manolis Zografakis responded. He claimed the online backlash against BrokeinLondon (including tweets from calls-a-spade-a-spade author and blogger Zoe Margolis) had been “unfounded” and insisted his website is “just trying to do good”. We’re not convinced. Manolis, here’s what we were thinking when we read your statement…
Hi everyone,
> Greetings, cheapskate ‘entrepreneur’
As founder of Broke in London, I would like to quickly clarify all the concerns raised as a consequence of a twitter post by @girlonetrack (Zoe Margolis) regarding our unpaid internship vacancy. I totally agree with the points of Zoe Margolis regarding the exploitation of interns among several companies and start-ups (and not only) and she did really well to point it out. However, the concept of exploitation of any type of worker does not apply to our case, since so far no one who contributed to this project (me included) earned any form of salary or income. So, I’d like to spend a few words on that.
> Uh-oh… This Manolis dude is So Not Getting It.
Broke in London’s goal has always been to help all Londoners surviving in the capital. When I got the idea and started developing the website in October 2012 I used to work in other 3 jobs at the same time for almost a year in order to have the money to survive as well as to develop Broke in London from scratch (you can have a look at my story through our ‘About Us‘ section).
> That’s impressive – no-one has ever started a website from scratch before. Random strangers should definitely work for you for free now.
My dream was to create an online platform that would help all people facing the same difficulties that I did. So far, our project has been based on volunteering efforts of a team of contributors, including myself, who have been doing their best to provide a service and advice to all the students, expats and Londoners on a budget. We want to provide all the information for free and to help as many people as we can and until now we are happy to know that we have helped a lot of broke Londoners out there. I want to clarify here that all the efforts put on the website have not made any profit until now. Friends and volunteers participated in this project with passion and commitment, providing their input and gathering at the same time valuable technical skills.
Myself as well as all the team contributors have being unpaid interns several times in our lives and we know exactly the meaning of contributing without a monetary compensation especially for companies which make actual profit.
> So because you worked for free in the past, you’ll now pass the misery down to a whole new generation? Cheers for that.
If anyone looks a bit closer to Broke in London’s website will realise that we are just trying to do good here.
> Forgive us! A terrible error has been made. It is we who should apologise to you, BrokeinLondon! How you give and give and give and give… (experience, that is. Not actual money that your staff can use to pay their rent and bills and use in shops to buy boring things like food)
Most of our bloggers contribute their articles for a long time now because they like the idea behind the website and due to the freedom of our collaboration.
> You use “collaboration” in the 2014 sense here of course – to mean: “The act of persuading younger or more desperate people to work for you for free, using vague allusions about unspecified benefits at some point in the distant future.”
I am really glad and proud to be part and manage this team and at the same time I am really sad to see all this anger against a project that is trying to help and not exploit people.
> Is this still real life?
Regarding the job vacancy, here are some points to consider:
1) We never set working hours. The schedule of all our team members is super flexible: They contribute whenever they want and as much as they want.
> Wow, that’s sweet of you to be ‘super-flexible’ about how and when people work for you for nothing.
2) Being part of Broke in London involves collaborating closely in a really professional way and choosing between a large range of task in order to develop specific skills according to each candidate profile. We do need to have a selection screening of candidates, as we aim to maintain a high level of professionalism.
> Sorry, we drifted off there. Tell us again why it’s ‘professional’ not to pay your staff a wage for their work?
There is no actual working space because there is no money to have one and that is why the candidate would have to contribute from home.
> Hang on. You’re advertising a vacancy, but you can’t afford wages or an office? This has all gone very meta.
I personally (as I am the one who wrote the vacancy) would like to apologise if our advertised intern vacancy has caused any inconvenience.
> An apology! Just a shame it’s for the wrong thing. To clarify, no “inconvenience” has been caused. You misunderstand the very nature of those you have annoyed. Job-seekers have all kinds of time to slate you on on Twitter – and those who don’t will make time. Of course, you are not the only cretinous, tightwad employer out there. Unfortunately for you, your advert neatly sums up everything that’s wrong with a supposed intern ‘system’ which both exploits and excludes young people (depending on their parents’ financial situation). Combined with the irony of your website claiming to help the skint, you have the ingredients for a Twitter backlash, which is what’s happened. Bad luck.
We are not in favour of unpaid work and we believe that in an ideal world this wouldn’t exist…
> But surely this ‘ideal world’ could exist – if employers like you didn’t take advantage of people desperate enough to work for free. No?
…and that we should fight to make this happen in the “real” world.
> This is the real world. And we are fighting for a fairer deal for interns. We’ve been doing it since 2010 – fighting people like you. It’s turned out to be really, really hard, when all the people who should be helping us seem to be busy with other stuff (Has one politician mentioned internships during party conference season? And what is the NUS doing on internships? Anyone?). You would know this if you were part of the fight.
Broke in London’s team including my self has always been contributing without any profit.
> Totally irrelevant. Just because you don’t make a profit, that doesn’t make you a charity. Graduate Fog doesn’t make a profit either (yet). We also don’t have unpaid interns. Ever.
However, all the team of contributors enjoys collaborating together for a meaningful project like Broke in London that helps people’s lives even if until now we don’t receive a financial compensation. We nevertheless managed to create a strong and passionate team and to reach out a large audience.
> When your ‘team of contributors’ says they ‘enjoy’ working for free, they’re either fibbing, or desperately hoping you might one day give them a paid position (or someone else might, with the experience they’ve gained). They’re not doing it for fun. As the founder, you can work day and night on your website for free if you want to – because it’s you who will benefit in the long-term, if the site becomes successful. Your unpaid staff will gain no such reward. See the difference?
Unfortunately, this type of negative social media attention, which builds up on unfounded opinions rather than rigorous information, does not help us at all to reach out possible funding opportunities that will help us being sustainable in the future.
> Yeah, karma’s a bitch like that. Maybe next time don’t behave like an arse? Then the internet will have no reason to hate on you with its ‘unfounded opinions’.
For any further clarification, I make myself available at manolis@brokeinlondon.com.
> A kind offer, but we don’t want you to make yourself available. We want you to make some money available, so you can pay your staff a fair wage for their work. Thank you.
*GOT SOMETHING TO ADD?
What do you think of BrokeinLondon’s advert – and their response to the online outcry about it? Have your say below…
Hi Graduate Frog,
I have just read your angry response on this matter. I must confess I found your response on this important matter immature, aggressive and generally unhelpful.
I am of the opinion that your efforts would be better spent working with such companies/people to develop solutions that would foremost help graduates get experience in non-profitable start ups.
Your business model of not having unpaid interns seems to be very successful. Why not share how you have achieved this. So you can set a precedent for others.
Gavin
@Gavin
I assume, like myself who’s business is also a start-up not currently making a profit, that Tanya does everything herself and not advertise for jobs asking people to give up their time for nothing! As Tanya states in this, it is ok for the founder(s) to- because they will reap the rewards of their efforts if it does become profitable. You can’t afford to pay someone else at least the minimum wage, you don’t attempt to hire.
@JC That’s exactly right, thank you 🙂
@Gavin It’s fair for you to ask questions about how I run Graduate Fog (not Frog) – that’s something I have always been transparent about. You can find out more on the pages About Tanya de Grunwald and About Graduate Fog.
What I don’t get is your suggestion I should spend my time (unpaid, presumably?) “working with” companies like BrokeinLondon to “develop solutions” to the problem they have, which is that they don’t have a business model. It’s very simple: they can’t have what they can’t afford. End of story. We also have the minimum wage law, which says that if someone is doing real work, they must be paid at least the minimum wage. Employers must pay this, and interns can’t waive their right to pay, even if they claim they’re happy to work for free.
Of course it’s difficult for start-ups to increase their profitability while keeping staff costs down. You either do it all yourself (as I do) or get an investor / get a sponsor / bank loan so that you can pay the staff you need to take your business forward into profitability. Or you do a mixture of both, while you gradually expand your team by using (paid) freelancers etc.
While it’s true that many graduates may gain useful experience working at start-ups, it is not fair or reasonable to expect them to work for free. I believe that unpaid internships exploit those who do them and exclude those who can’t afford to do them. I am puzzled by how anybody could not see this, when it is so obviously true. If I had unpaid staff working at Graduate Fog, I wouldn’t be able to sleep at night. If someone is bringing value to your website / project / business (whatever you call it), you pay them.
Do you run a start-up yourself? How do you manage your staffing budget?
TAKE HIS HEAD OFF!! Come on…what’s this!?! This looks like a witch hunt to me. If you really want to fight for the rights of graduate students, why don’t you go after big fishes instead of wasting time with this? Or are you just looking for some easy traffic in your website?
@Amy I do go after the big fish – including Simon Cowell, Philip Green, Tony Blair, Harrods, the Ritz, etc.
And I do it all unpaid. Without the help of unpaid interns. You’re welcome 🙂
I’m working hard to secure a funding model to allow me to grow this website – but hiring unpaid staff in the meantime is not an option. Maybe that’s why people like this guy bug me so much!
PS There is no such thing as “easy traffic”. Trust me!
Hi Tanya I am fully behind what you are doing here, advertising for an unpaid role is wrong, and what BrokeInLondon are doing is appalling.
If they really want copywriters why don’t they advertise for anyone who is interested merely to contribute in their own time, so say for example if they advertised: contributors wanted! If you have any advice about living on London etc etc. That would mean that people in their free time can write an article or two, and can put on their CV that they have contributed towards a website, without wasting valuable hours in which they could have got a job. One or two hours a week shouldn’t be too bad.
big or medium fish is still abuse , so shame on you
Hi Tanya, I normally like what you do and the idea behind Graduate Fog, but I think you should evaluate more carefully who you target in the future. For example, this case seems a bit unfair to me, considering that the guy actually does not earn a penny. There is no comparison at all with Tony Blair, Harrods and so on…Thus, perhaps you should weigh your words differently according to the specific person/business. I also think that in order to create new business models you need to be flexible and open to dialogue. Strictness and stubbornness are not always good principle to follow.
@All – Interesting to see a range of opinions here! That’s always a sign we’re asking the right questions 🙂 There is a similar range on Twitter. Some think that unprofitable websites shouldn’t have to pay their contributors / staff, others say they should do what every other business does which is get a loan / investor etc and a proper business plan. They can’t have staff they can’t afford.
@Gerard – thanks for the support. The idea of contributors writing in their spare time simply out of the sheer love of it is hard to find fault with. However, who decides where the ‘line’ is here between “hobby contributor” and “exploited freelancer”? You say 1 or 2 hours… but why not 3 or 4? Sorry, not being deliberately difficult – and I don’t have the answer – just think it’s an interesting question!
@Amy Sorry you don’t like this post as much as some of the other work I’ve done targeting bigger fish. I agree that some cases are more clear cut than others, but think it’s important to discuss all of them. You could argue that the work I’ve done on charities is similarly blurry, but I still think it’s important to ask challenging questions, even if it turns out that GF followers have slightly different opinions about the answers.
I’m genuinely interested in exploring your logic and ethics here, which says it’s not so bad for BrokeinLondon to do what they’re doing. You could argue that it is actually WORSE than X Factor, Harrods etc not paying. At least with those employers interns get a decent name on their CV. So you could argue that they gain greater ‘value’ from it, and therefore there is less need, not more, to pay them. But you seem to be saying that there is a link between the strength of the argument that someone should pay and the financial resources available to them, yes?
Also, at the moment I don’t earn a penny from Graduate Fog. Do you think it would be okay for me to recruit for unpaid writers to contribute to the website? I don’t – but I’m genuinely interested to hear your views. I know the Huffington Post did it, but that has turned out to be quite a controversial policy, as the site has grown in value over time.
Hi Amy,
Today I had the chance to had a look at your activity on twitter and to be honest I realized I don’t share any thought and/or critical method with you/GF. You seem to imply that if a company/start-up doesn’t have any budget, it shouldn’t even try to develop itself by finding new ideas or forms of collaborations (“They can’t have staff they can’t afford”). I also had a look at broke in London, and it actually has nice mission and seems a very useful website for 20 something like me. I think it is too easy to sentence without knowing nothing about the unpaid internship and its conditions (the vacancy is not specific enough, we don’t know anything about how many interns work there). However, I am not going to discuss further my ethics an ideas here in this forum, ’cause I feel they are quite different from yours.
@Amy Really sorry you don’t want to discuss this further – I am honestly interested in exploring the reasons behind people’s differing opinions on this subject. And I’d really like to know if you think it would be okay for me to start hiring unpaid interns to work for me on content for Graduate Fog. I’m not going to, but I’d really like to hear your views on whether in theory that would be acceptable.
Hi Tanya,
Thanks for posting your response. I couldn’t fit all into a comment, so just created a blog and here’s a link to it. The good thing is, if you hadn’t written about it… we all wouldn’t even get a chance to comment on it. So thanks for atleast writing your views and letting us comment.
http://www.careergeekblog.com/2014/10/08/disagree-with-graduate-fog/
“Go easy on start ups”
I’m afraid this argument doesn’t wahs. The bottom line is you want one rule for the big guys and another for the small. The law doesn’t work like that.
Furthermore you are providing NO INCENTIVE for the start up to pay staff. That’s partly the reason why there are so many unpaid jobs, there is no incentive to pay people, thus it has become ‘morally acceptable’ not to pay people and we see people justifying that practice on these very pages.
The law is clear about what is work, what is a favour, what is volunteering. The people who aren’t clear are the employers.
@CareerGeek Thanks for taking the trouble to post such a thoughtful response (to my response to Broke in London’s response!) I’ve posted my response (!) on your site, but for those wanting the shortened version, my thoughts are this:
1) You seem to be saying that unpaid internships are bad because they are unfair. That’s true, but they are also exploitative (a person donates something of value, for nothing – and excluding( those who can’t afford to do it can’t gain this experience). For me, BiL falls down on both points. Whether it’s making money YET is irrelevent. While name and shame stories work best when it’s someone with deep pockets (Cowell, Blair, Green), the ethics remain unchanged regardless of the employer’s financial situation.
2) On the style of my approach for this story… To be honest, I was just trying a slightly different approach with the editorial, as I feel straight name-and-shames become repetitive. I felt the tone of my post matched much of the criticism already on Twitter, so I didn’t think much of it. Maybe I’d do it again like that, maybe I wouldn’t. Not sure.
3) You say “Essentially CG and GF would not hire unpaid interns to grow and all that sort of stuff. But BIL isn’t one of us. It is a new site trying to build itself… maybe we should give it some leeway.” I just don’t get this. BiL is extremely similar to GF, perhaps why it makes me so mad. I’m not saying this guy isn’t trying to do a good thing with his site, I think he is. But he’s lost sight of what’s okay in terms of the ethics of having staff. From his response, he even admits that he’s worried that the social media backlash could harm his chances of getting investment. I think he is trying to run this as a business, and sees himself as an entrepreneur. Which is fine – but he needs to be have like one, and that includes having serious ideas about plugging his current funding gap. I’m not saying it’s easy, but that’s the deal when you’re setting up on your own. I have a plan (which I’ve worked hard on). I’m not going to tell you what it is – but I can tell you that it does NOT involve taking advantage of unpaid interns!
@Derrick – Thanks for your comment. You make a really interesting point that I don’t think has come up yet: that if you allow unprofitable start-ups to use unlimited unpaid interns indefinitely, they will get used to it. Also, I think having lots of unpaid staff allows wannabe entrepreneurs to pretend to the rest of the world (and to themselves?) that they are running a successful business, when of course they are not.
Does anyone remember ModusPR, the fashion PR company that admitted on a BBC documentary that out of its staff of 70, 20 were unpaid?! I think the company was profitable but it would have been far less profitable if they’d been paying all the staff they were using! What’s the point in giving everyone a false sense of how successful one entrepreneur really is? If it’s smoke and mirrors and there is really no business there at all, the business should find a new funding model, or it should close.
Link to the Modus Publicity story
This sounds familiar. I’m not going to name names but there was one place in East London (e1 ish) that was based in a basement in unimpressive condition almost completely hidden between two shops in which everyone was student age and was using their laptops as only 1 pc. I don’t have a suitable laptop. I would be unpaid.
Bang on the money again, Derrick.
In addition, it should also be pointed out that company directors aren’t entitled to the National Minimum Wage at all. However, workers are entitled to the national miminimum wage.
Therefore, our law makes it very clear that workers come before company owners and directors.
Hi Tanya. Seeing as you have responded so eloquently and without vitriol, and at length, I’ll keep it relatively short. Internships fucking suck. Did it in the 90’s when I left uni (mtv). It’s souless and pretty much without merit. The law has been changed, but still being ignored. More apprenticeships from established businesses that can teach and pay some please. If you can’t pay somebody for their creativity, time, hard work and aspirations then don’t ask. Oh, and he obviously does need a copywriter as that letter was awful. As a freelance copywriter it’s hard enough to find work without that brick wall rushing towards you at every search. If he and others can’t even offer a mates rate for interns, then they will all be on their own and consigned to the new app bin before long. Hmmm. Not so short. You have a new (long in the tooth graduate) follower. Meta post-modern ironically, I’d write/help you for free as it’s a very relevant and dangerous situation. Disenfranchised doesn’t even cover it.