Labor: Try mediation for unpaid intern lawsuits
Its summer vacation for college students. That used to be their time to go to the beach, see friends and make a few bucks.
July 22, 2013 at 05:15 AM
6 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
It's summer vacation for college students. That used to be their time to go to the beach, see friends and make a few bucks. Not anymore. The beach and friends part may still be happening, but the availability of summer jobs is not what it used to be. At least jobs that pay. Instead, college students and even graduates are pursuing the new-normal job: an internship that pays in experience, possible connections and resume building, but not in dollars.
Employers beware. Interns are beginning to demand compensation for performing the same work as paid employees, many of whom they displace for free. Many have filed lawsuits. And they are winning. Two interns who worked on Fox Searchlight's film “Black Swan” claimed the company's unpaid internship program violated federal minimum wage and overtime laws. They brought a class action lawsuit against Fox Entertainment Group. In June, a federal judge in New York ruled that Fox should have paid the interns because they essentially were regular employees. The judge also allowed the case to proceed as a class. Other intern lawsuits are now pending around the country against Warner Music Group, Hearst Magazines, Conde Nast, Elite Model Management and others.
These lawsuits pose significant risks and costs not only for the employers, who face potentially enormous liability, but also for the interns. How many 20-somethings want to mark themselves as trouble-makers just as they seek to enter the job market? Likewise, companies concerned about their reputation surely do not want to be seen as taking advantage of talented individuals with little or no bargaining power. These disputes lend themselves perfectly to an alternative approach—mediation, and in particular, pre-filing litigation.
Mediation offers many advantages. First, it is confidential. Mediation sessions are conducted in private, behind closed doors. No one besides the participants needs to even know that mediation is occurring. Further, all communications in mediation are statutorily privileged in most jurisdictions in the U.S.
Experienced mediators make a difference. They understand each side's needs and interests and suggest creative ways to satisfy them. The parties can select a mediator with experience in their industry.
Mediation is flexible. The times and location for mediation sessions can accommodate the parties' schedules. Additional sessions can be scheduled easily.
Importantly, unlike litigation, mediation is not a winner-take-all process. Settlements are typically crafted that do more than compromise each side's position. Rather, mediated settlements serve the parties' long-term interests. Business relationships can be preserved.
Finally, mediation allows individuals and companies to avoid devastating results. This benefit should be especially important to interns and the companies that retain them. Defendant companies face potentially enormous financial liability from an adverse court judgment in an intern class action lawsuit. Plaintiff interns are saved from giving themselves a damaging black mark that could block their path to gainful employment.
Ultimate resolution of intern-employer conflicts likely will not occur without a legislative solution. In the meantime, interns and the companies that hire them would be wise to turn to mediation before going to court.
It's summer vacation for college students. That used to be their time to go to the beach, see friends and make a few bucks. Not anymore. The beach and friends part may still be happening, but the availability of summer jobs is not what it used to be. At least jobs that pay. Instead, college students and even graduates are pursuing the new-normal job: an internship that pays in experience, possible connections and resume building, but not in dollars.
Employers beware. Interns are beginning to demand compensation for performing the same work as paid employees, many of whom they displace for free. Many have filed lawsuits. And they are winning. Two interns who worked on Fox Searchlight's film “Black Swan” claimed the company's unpaid internship program violated federal minimum wage and overtime laws. They brought a class action lawsuit against
These lawsuits pose significant risks and costs not only for the employers, who face potentially enormous liability, but also for the interns. How many 20-somethings want to mark themselves as trouble-makers just as they seek to enter the job market? Likewise, companies concerned about their reputation surely do not want to be seen as taking advantage of talented individuals with little or no bargaining power. These disputes lend themselves perfectly to an alternative approach—mediation, and in particular, pre-filing litigation.
Mediation offers many advantages. First, it is confidential. Mediation sessions are conducted in private, behind closed doors. No one besides the participants needs to even know that mediation is occurring. Further, all communications in mediation are statutorily privileged in most jurisdictions in the U.S.
Experienced mediators make a difference. They understand each side's needs and interests and suggest creative ways to satisfy them. The parties can select a mediator with experience in their industry.
Mediation is flexible. The times and location for mediation sessions can accommodate the parties' schedules. Additional sessions can be scheduled easily.
Importantly, unlike litigation, mediation is not a winner-take-all process. Settlements are typically crafted that do more than compromise each side's position. Rather, mediated settlements serve the parties' long-term interests. Business relationships can be preserved.
Finally, mediation allows individuals and companies to avoid devastating results. This benefit should be especially important to interns and the companies that retain them. Defendant companies face potentially enormous financial liability from an adverse court judgment in an intern class action lawsuit. Plaintiff interns are saved from giving themselves a damaging black mark that could block their path to gainful employment.
Ultimate resolution of intern-employer conflicts likely will not occur without a legislative solution. In the meantime, interns and the companies that hire them would be wise to turn to mediation before going to court.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All2024 in Review: Judges Met Out Punishments for Ex-Apple, FDIC, Moody's Legal Leaders
Financial Watchdog Alleges Walmart Forced Army of Gig-Worker Drivers to Receive Pay Through High-Fee Accounts
GC Pleads Guilty to Embezzling $7.4 Million From 3 Banks
Trending Stories
- 1The State Privacy Laws Going into Effect in 2025
- 2People in the News—Dec. 26, 2024—Laffey Bucci, Eckert Seamans
- 3Drink Up: 2024's Biggest Drink-Related Suits
- 4A Year of Controversy: NJ Judges Face Disciplinary and Legal Issues With Mixed Results in 2024
- 5The Biggest Gen AI E-discovery Developments in 2024
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250