Labor: When unpaid interns become unpaid employees
Many students at every education level from high school through graduate schooland even some graduatesview unpaid internships as an opportunity to gain valuable work experience and, ideally, as a stepping stone to gainful employment.
April 30, 2012 at 08:20 AM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Many students at every education level from high school through graduate school—and even some graduates—view unpaid internships as an opportunity to gain valuable work experience and, ideally, as a stepping stone to gainful employment. When the companies for which they intern benefit from the extra help at little to no cost, the relationship appears to constitute a win-win. In many circumstances, however, the Department of Labor (DOL) disagrees.
The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) generally requires employers to pay their employees at least minimum wage for all hours worked, as well as overtime for all hours worked over 40 in a week. Internships and training programs are excluded from this requirement only in limited circumstances. Because the FLSA prohibits employees from waiving their rights under the law even if they want to, it is only under those limited circumstances that interns may work without compensation.
The DOL created a six-part test that must be applied when determining whether an internship or training program meets the FLSA exclusion. Under the test, each of the following criteria must be met:
- The internship, even though it includes actual operation of the facilities of the employer, is similar to training which would be given in an educational environment
- The internship experience is for the benefit of the intern
- The intern does not displace regular employees, but works under close supervision of existing staff
- The employer that provides the training derives no immediate advantage from the activities of the intern and on occasion its operations may actually be impeded
- The intern is not necessarily entitled to a job at the conclusion of the internship
- The employer and the intern understand that the intern is not entitled to wages for the time spent in the internship
When—and only when—all of the above criteria are met, an employment relationship does not exist under the FLSA and the internship may be unpaid. Note that even if a student receives academic credit for his or her participation in the internship, as long as the internship is unpaid, the above six factors still need to be met.
In addition to the six-part test, the DOL has provided guidance that employers can use to structure unpaid internship programs. The guidance includes the following:
- The more an internship program is structured around a classroom or academic experience as opposed to the employer's actual operations, the more likely the internship will be viewed as an extension of the individual's educational experience
- The more the internship provides the individual with skills that can be used in multiple employment settings, as opposed to skills particular to one employer's operation, the more likely the intern would be viewed as receiving training
- If an employer uses interns as substitutes for regular workers or to augment its existing workforce during specific time periods, these interns will be viewed as employees under the FLSA
- If the employer would have hired additional employees or required existing staff to work additional hours had the interns not performed the work, then the interns will be viewed as employees under the FLSA
- The internship should be of fixed duration, established prior to the outset of the internship
- Unpaid internships should generally not be used by the employer as a trial period for individuals seeking employment at the conclusion of the internship period
Several high-profile companies recently have been sued by former unpaid interns who claim they should have received compensation for their work. These lawsuits signal an awareness of FLSA rights on the part of interns and highlight the need for employer diligence and attention regarding this issue.
Employers are encouraged to review their hiring and employment practices as they pertain to unpaid internships, familiarize themselves with the DOL's six-part test, and train managerial staff appropriately. More information regarding internships and the FLSA can be found here.
For more InsideCounsel coverage on the unpaid intern crisis, read:
Labor: The perils of using unpaid interns
Unpaid intern sues talk show host Charlie Rose
Slate looks at the social problems surrounding unpaid internships
Former unpaid intern sues Hearst Corp., seeks class action
“Black Swan” unpaid interns file class action wage and hour lawsuit
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
© 2025 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 AllKeys to Maximizing Efficiency (and Vibes) When Navigating International Trade Compliance Crosschecks
6 minute readLSU General Counsel Quits Amid Fracas Over First Amendment Rights of Law Professor
7 minute readExits Leave American Airlines, SiriusXM, Spotify Searching for New Legal Chiefs
2 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Apply Now: Superior Court Judge Sought for Mountain Judicial Circuit Bench
- 2Harrisburg Jury Hands Up $1.5M Verdict to Teen Struck by Underinsured Driver
- 3Former Director's Retaliation Suit Cleared to Move Forward Against Hospice Provider
- 4New York Judge Steps Down After Conviction for Intoxicated Driving
- 5Keys to Maximizing Efficiency (and Vibes) When Navigating International Trade Compliance Crosschecks
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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