HOW ONE TINY TWEAK WILL HAVE A BIG IMPACT FOR YOUNG WORKERS
Good news for interns at last! Yesterday, Labour announced it is backing an important proposal which will help to ensure that all internships lasting more than four weeks are automatically paid, if the party wins the general election in May.
The so-called ‘four-week limit’ has been proposed by Graduate Fog’s friends at Intern Aware, who are working hard to persuade all the main political parties to pledge publicly their support for the idea. But what does the four-week limit mean for interns – and why is it so important? Chris Hares, Campaigns Manager at Intern Aware, explains…
Graduate Fog: What is the four-week limit?
Chris Hares, Intern Aware: The four week limit is a change to the current law, which will better protect interns from exploitation and make the system fairer for all workers, regardless of their financial circumstances. Currently, if an intern is doing real work with set tasks, they must be paid as a worker in the law. However, HMRC and the Government haven’t been enforcing this properly, businesses and interns find the distinction confusing – and unpaid internships continue to be found across many industries. The four-week limit will cap that situation at four weeks, meaning that after that point all interns would automatically be classified as a worker. Interns would still qualify to be paid for the work they do in that first four weeks but after that point pay (at the minimum wage or above) would be unequivocal. It will be the employer’s responsibility to prove that their intern is not a worker, rather than the intern’s responsibility to prove that they are.
GF: We’re confused. Isn’t it already illegal to work for free, even for less than four weeks?
CH: Yes. If you have set hours and set tasks, you should currently qualify as a worker even if you only work for a single day. The National Minimum Wage law says work should legally be paid, and it is what makes most unpaid internships currently out there illegal. The four-week limit won’t affect that – interns will still be entitled to be paid if they are working less than four weeks. But the four-week limit will eliminate the problems with the existing complaints and prosecution procedure. It will also clarify the situation for businesses, so they are clear on their responsibilities whilst protecting genuine, short-term work experience or shadowing. This cap will be a step change in clearing up the ‘wild west’ of unpaid internships. Above all, it provides extra protection to stop interns being exploited.
GF: What difference will it make in practice?
CH: The practical changes are clear. Businesses will know exactly what they should be doing when it comes to interns — paying them. Interns should also be empowered to talk about pay, whereas many currently feel afraid of the question as their unpaid internship seems to stretch on indefinitely.
GF: What about charity internships? Will they be affected?
CH: Exemptions in the current law, including charities, will remain as this change only amends the status of ‘workers’ in the National Minimum Wage Act. However, we hope that the new practice for businesses will help to bring charity internships along with them soon, whilst letting charities continue to take genuine volunteers. Getting this change made won’t stop us campaigning heavily to see an end to unpaid internships in the charity sector.
GF: Who is supporting the four-week limit so far?
CH: There is strong cross-party support for the limit. We have also been happy to discover that there is very strong support for the proposal among businesses. A YouGov poll this year found that 65% of businesses want to see the law clarified with a four-week limit. This including support from influential industry groups like the Institute of Directors, and businesses such as AXA and Pimlico Plumbers. A number of reports recently have made the suggestion, including the Sutton Trust, the Social Mobility and Child Poverty Commission and the London Assembly. It also has the support of MPs — 181 of them voted for the policy in Parliament back in May, compared to just 19 who voted against.
GF: And who isn’t supporting it?
CH: There really aren’t a huge number of people objecting to this proposal. We do know a small minority of businesses (12%) and the public (2%) don’t want to see a change, with interns continuing unpaid.
GF: If it does become law, how will the four-week limit be enforced?
CH: At the moment, there are very few unpaid internships being followed up by HMRC for prosecution. Our hope is that the new law will make things very clear, so cut down on the enforcement needed as businesses come into line with the changes. It should also make many unpaid internship complaints straightforward in naming interns as ‘workers’ so there is no ambiguity or room for interpretation. Those unpaid internships less than four weeks will still need the current level of investigation by the Government, but this should be a much, much smaller pool. We will also continue to push the Government and HMRC for better enforcement and protection of interns in their current practices.
GF: When will the four-week limit be implemented?
CH: That is the big question. In theory, the Government could announce it tomorrow to make it into law — they don’t need Parliament to approve it. This proposal has been drafted up by top employment barristers, so will fit straight into the current National Minimum Wage Act.
As a legal scholar, I don’t like this change. I think it will make it harder to secure protections.
@CostaDel Can you explain why? And if you don’t think this is the answer, what do you think might be?
We have been fighting this battle for a few years now and although we have had some big successes with a number of important cases where brave interns have come forward to challenge their employers, it seems that that the flaws in the current complaints procedure are still too great for it to be a viable solution to gain justice for those who are exploited, or create a fairer system for those who can’t afford to work for free, or to serve as a deterrent to ‘bad’ employers. Personally, I’m not sure that any change is guaranteed to be a perfect solution, but surely any change must be better than none?
If a candidate applies for a job, are invited to attend an interview, and afterwards are not offered a job but an expectation that they work for an employer for nothing, they are their own worst enemy.
The Four Week Limit will make no difference at all…if it ever reaches Statute. Additionally, employers could simply coerce candidates to volunteer.
Some may view the limit as being a small, positive step….however, unless and until candidates assert their rights, and start to treat such offers and the employer with the contempt deserving, employers will continue to play the game.
It’s about time really!
My main worry about this is where it leaves the people who are expected to work for short periods of time without pay. People in the fashion industry, or the media where the expectation is for someone to come along and work for the odd day or week, under the four week limit.
While it is easy to say that they can still claim if they are being treated as a worker, employers can take some comfort in the fact that the state will have decreed that over four weeks is illegal and (therefore) under four weeks is OK. Whether that is true in law or not, that is going to be the perception.
It might – might – be better than no change in the law at all, but it means that the war will have been lost in order to win a small battle.
Not sure.
Surely people mandated to work unpaid by the Jobcentre or Work Programme ‘providers’ such as A4e can challenge it? In many cases, they are being expected to do exactly the same tasks as paid members of staff.
Ok. Let’s say this goes through. It will be good quite possibly.
HOWEVER does it not throw up another possibility. In which employers offer 4 week internships taking advantage of the situation?
Lots of suspect employers up and down the country if my hometowm of Bristol is representative.
One even docks 5 pct of bonus for lateness 10 pct for a sick day so it’s not beyond the wit of employers. Another hires exclusively via agency.
And those are just two I know of.