Unpaid internships: Support beams for the glass floor | Brookings Institution

Bank of America Merrill Lynch

Bank of America Merrill Lynch (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

This is must-read article by the Brookings Institution. Check it out!

via Unpaid internships: Support beams for the glass floor | Brookings Institution.

Reading the Brookings article made me re-read one of my most popular blogs, entitled Bank of America Merrill Lynch intern Moritz Erhardt found dead after working long hours | Mail Online. My views on interns have not changed.

Basically, children of the wealthy and socially connected take the cream of the internships, both because of whom they are and secondly because their parents can avoid for them to work for free.

Personally, I struggle with the US Appeals Court that “unpaid interns must derive more benefit than the employer”. Surely this is totally subjective and unenforceable?

There’s a need to test unpaid internships in the highest courts, both in North America and Europe.

Apart from the issue of pay, there’s the reality that prestigious internships are beyond the grasp of youngsters from ordinary backgrounds, irrespective of their education or personal qualities.


Opinion – Sir James Dyson: Theresa May risks ‘long-term economic decline’ over foreign students – Telegraph – John Gelmini

Quite apart from the fact that most of our UK universities would not be viable without foreign students paying many times the amount that British students pay, Sir James makes a valid point.

In addition, many of our universities have set up shop in China and Singapore, so if Theresa May has her way, the students that come from abroad to this country will simply go there, taking their money with them.

As Dr Alf knows, the problem around immigration to the UK has multiple causes:

1) EU rules on the free movement of people

2) A lazy and unproductive indigenous workforce, which UK employers wish to replace with more productive and hardworking foreign workers

3) A disfunctional Home Office, led by a disfunctional and self-centered woman (Theresa May), who allows 250,000 illegal immigrants into the country each year; she does not know how many people are in the country; and she takes measures designed to discourage Chinese tourism rather than increase it.

In any company that was properly run, this vain and vexatious woman would be dismissed without compensation but is amazingly she is seriously being considered as Prime Ministerial material.

Already we have Cameron, a man Sir Bernard Ingham describes as “Promising too much and delivering too little”.

In Theresa May, we have someone who is incapable of controlling illegal immigration, incapable of compelling our inefficient and useless Chief Constables to agree to force mergers or do their jobs and incapable of understanding that until the issue of productivity is faced up to, we either have to have immigration or use robots to do the work that the indigenous population is unwilling or incapable of doing.

John Gelmini