Dastardly Internships

P

oor old Nick Clegg. He probably had hoped that if he was ever at the heart of the machinations of government that he would have been the person associated with and credited for spearheading some weighty initiatives. A root and branch reform of the welfare system perhaps? Overthrowing a political despot maybe? What about standing up against a rise in university tuition fees (too difficult)?

Instead, the Deputy PM during his 19 months in office has been the principle advocate of what can hardly be described as two of the most pressing issues of our time: the Alternative Vote and the unfairness of many internships today. This is admittedly a bit unfair as Clegg has been a key man in the government's laudable commitment to raise the income tax personal allowance threshold to £10,000 by the end of the Coalition's term in Parliament: an integral part of making work pay.

Actually, I have some sympathy with Clegg's stance on the unfairness of the work experience industry and the importance it has taken for young people to gain employment. Indeed, as every young person is acutely aware acquiring work experience in a sector related to the industry that you wish to join has virtually become a pre-requisite before an employer will look you in the eye, pat you on the back and say 'welcome on board'. Quite simply if you don't have the work experience you won't get the job (or even an interview and psychometric test).

This state of affairs puts young people who neither have parents with weighty contact lists nor parents who are willing to subsidise them at a sizeable disadvantage in the job hunt in certain sectors (most notably in the arts, the media and politics) to those young people that do. For example, a young person wanting to embark in a career in journalism without wealthy or influential parents is going to find it tough regardless of their ability. Breaking through would require months and months of unpaid work which, with inconvenient things in life like the need to stay alive, would demand having a paid job to put food on the table resulting in less time for writing. Any writing undertaken would have probably been done in a fairly weary state in the evening or possibly in the early hours of the morning. Good writing, or good performance in any job for that matter, is manifestly not usually achieved when 'cream crackered'. Guy and Daisy on the other hand could wake up, scratch themselves for a bit, have a cuppa and watch a bit of 'Homes under the Hammer'* before serenely sculpting 800 words. Not fair is it?

Funnily enough the baddies: investment banks and 'magic circle' law firms are actually pretty egalitarian in this respect offering both well remunerated work experience programmes and selecting the brightest and best not 'Tim Nice But Dim' whose Father is an equity partner. (They are also egalitarian in treating all employees like shit). Nepotism of this sort is quite hard to get away with in large organisations with HR departments the size of Tonga.

Unfortunately, for all concerned Clegg isn't really trying to solve the problem of dastardly internships and is merely doing a bit of political window dressing to pacify the left of his party. If he was then Nick, being a pretty bright chap, would know that asking employers to sign up to a voluntarily list whereby they promise not to exploit those on work experience will not change the status quo one iota. The only employers who would sign up to this initiative would be those large organisations with financial muscle who are already paying interns anyway. Forcing extra costs on smaller employers in straightened times hardly seems sensible.

If Clegg really cared about this issue he should ask himself why employers feel the need to vet potential employees by offering internships at all? A generation ago getting a job involved writing an application form and an interview. Today we have the submission of the application form, on line verbal reasoning tests, psychometric tests, telephone interviews before an assessment day (not an interview), which usually involves a group exercise, presentation, a written test, the obligatory pointless office tour and finally the interview. Some employers admittedly probably enjoy such macho 'work until you bleed' posturing, but most do not as it incurs substantial unnecessary costs. Most employers have devised such a rigmarole because they have no faith whatsoever in an examination system that – to use that irritating political soundbite – is 'not fit for purpose'.

Exams no longer distinguish between people, which is their raison d'etre. An A at A- level is by no means a guarantee of an individual's intellectual prowess. In my Father's day getting three As at A-level was pretty much unheard of as many went to Oxbridge with Bs and plenty of people failed their exams. Passing an exam deserved a jolly good pat on the back in those days. Now over 25% of people achieve As at A level and virtually everyone passes and at university graduates usually achieve a 2:1. GCSEs have the same standing as swimming badges. How on earth are employers meant to distinguish between an army of candidates with three As at A-level and 2:1 degrees without setting out their own criteria to distinguish between applicants and assess their virtues?

Surely a better idea would be to have a rigorous examination system that distinguishes between people allowing employers to dispense with work experience and employ people safe in the knowledge that their intellectual capability is not in question? This would help bright kids from poor backgrounds stand out immeasurably. A bright kid with an A who has had limited opportunities because of his background might suddenly look more enticing than a splendid chap with a C who has done a few internships, captained the rugger team and gap yahed in Thailand. Under the present system the splendid chap would probably get an A putting himself in pole position with an altogether more enticing and bulky CV. Actually such a CV would be repellent to me if I was an employer, but that's just me. It's not most employers unfortunately Nick Clegg.

*I don't know what 'Homes under the Hammer' is exactly (although I could make an educated guess at a push), but it seems to be frequently on BBC 1 mid-morning during the week according to TV listings.