3 ms·

I think the argument that interns are somehow compensated by "gaining invaluable experience" is somewhat of a strawman. Experience doesn't go away if an intern

I think the argument that interns are somehow compensated by "gaining invaluable experience" is somewhat of a strawman. Experience doesn't go away if an intern gets it. Money does and work gets done. I have seen too many people being lured into one "valuable" internship after the other. SOmeone wanted to get some work done and offered "valuable industry insights" as compensation. That is just laughable. If you need someone to do work, pay for it. Simple as that.

apotheon 17y ago
1. I'm not sure you're clear on the meaning of the term "strawman". 2. An internship actually can be valuable work experience, and that job may not exist at all if it can't be unpaid.
- voidpointer 17y ago
  Strawman in a sense were the party offering the unpaid internship distorts the value of the compensation through gaining experience. So the argument of the first party not being paid can be refuted by saying that compensation occurs through gaining experience. You are right though, it's quite a stretch of the term. What I wanted to say is that the party offering compensation through experience is, in my opinion, just trying to get free work and making it look like they are "paying" by "giving out" experience. A person on a full-time internship should get enough to cover basic living expenses. The employer should pay (in money) what the work done is worth to them.
  - apotheon 17y ago
    > Strawman in a sense were the party offering the unpaid internship distorts the value of the compensation through gaining experience. So the argument of the first party not being paid can be refuted by saying that compensation occurs through gaining experience. That wouldn't make it a strawman fallacy -- it would just make it refutable. > in my opinion I don't think that the fact some people have that opinion is justification for the law. > A person on a full-time internship should get enough to cover basic living expenses. I haven't heard of many full-time internships. People who take internships generally don't have the time for full-time without pay, and the organizations that offer those internships tend to know that.

apotheon 17y ago

1. I'm not sure you're clear on the meaning of the term "strawman". 2. An internship actually can be valuable work experience, and that job may not exist at all if it can't be unpaid.

voidpointer 17y ago
Strawman in a sense were the party offering the unpaid internship distorts the value of the compensation through gaining experience. So the argument of the first party not being paid can be refuted by saying that compensation occurs through gaining experience. You are right though, it's quite a stretch of the term. What I wanted to say is that the party offering compensation through experience is, in my opinion, just trying to get free work and making it look like they are "paying" by "giving out" experience. A person on a full-time internship should get enough to cover basic living expenses. The employer should pay (in money) what the work done is worth to them.
- apotheon 17y ago
  > Strawman in a sense were the party offering the unpaid internship distorts the value of the compensation through gaining experience. So the argument of the first party not being paid can be refuted by saying that compensation occurs through gaining experience. That wouldn't make it a strawman fallacy -- it would just make it refutable. > in my opinion I don't think that the fact some people have that opinion is justification for the law. > A person on a full-time internship should get enough to cover basic living expenses. I haven't heard of many full-time internships. People who take internships generally don't have the time for full-time without pay, and the organizations that offer those internships tend to know that.