While a similar programme has been run in previous years, the timing of this year’s notification was perhaps unfortunate. In April, a panel discussion had been held at the prestigious California architecture school Sci-Arc (Southern California Institute of Architecture in Los Angeles) called ‘Basecamp: How to be in an office’¹. It sparked student and alumni protests, particularly relating to the ethics of unpaid internships. A “slew of events unfolded within the school that rippled into the architecture community, prompting passionate discourse about ethics within professional practice and academia, especially as it relates to internships and the treatment of students and young professionals”.² New Zealand architecture students, following architecture-related social media, would have likely been well aware of these protests unfolding.

Then, in June and July, another architectural student uprising occurred at arguably the UK’s most prestigious school of architecture, UCL Bartlett (University College London’s Faculty of the Built Environment). This protest centred around racism and sexism by academic staff, and academic staff bullying students, revealing the ethical dilemma of how well practitioners teaching at the Bartlett were promoting students’ wellbeing. It is perhaps no wonder, then, that when the ‘Open Desk’ notification was posted in August about unpaid internships in New Zealand, a New Zealand student forwarded it to @dank.lloyd.wright, with 70,000 followers, where it was reposted to a global audience for comments and reposting.

The New Zealand ‘Open Desk’ poster noted that students: “will participate in office projects by making models, preparing drawings or renderings, or working on a competition. As well (sic) gaining practical experience, the program will help you make valuable contacts in the profession.” While some of the most insightful social media responses from New Zealand students openly acknowledged the potential value of a two-week internship programme, they pointed out that only affluent students would be in a position to take on full-time unpaid work during the mid-trimester break — in their minds, a clear issue of inequity. Other social media messages questioned the ethical role of architecture schools in promoting unpaid internships within private practices: “How can we expect architects not to do scams, when their own schools do it to them.” But the issue is not at all black and white. One could argue that in a two-week event like ‘Open Day’, firms would gain little if any benefit from unpaid interns; in fact, it can be legitimately argued that overseeing inexperienced interns comes at a cost to the firm.

The answer may well lie in our realisation that architecture schools cannot deliver a complete architectural education in the number of years that are available. Our architecture schools provide students with the foundation to learn about architecture, while our architecture firms teach students the practice of architecture. It takes many years of training in a firm before a graduate gains the skills required to work independently. Most firms are fully committed to their own unique role in an architecture graduate’s ongoing education — by taking on interns and by agreeing to act as unpaid critics at student reviews. This is why the ‘Open Desk’ invitation is laudable in what it aspires to achieve. But we need to consider how such events might be restructured in ways that encourage equity.

“…only affluent students would be in a position to take on full-time unpaid work during the mid-trimester break …a clear issue of inequity.”

In his article Understanding Architecture Internships, Archinect editor-at-large Sean Joyner points out that “There is a significant difference between having internships while in school and waiting until you graduate to first step into an office. When you are working in a real-world setting while you are also taking your core coursework, your learning and growth become exponentially more potent. …Going to class, doing good school work, and not doing an internship is not a bad thing; just expect to have a steeper learning curve when you enter the profession.”³ Internships can provide an invaluable gateway into a student’s understanding of how learnings from the profession and the academic arena fundamentally build upon one another.

“Employment New Zealand reflects that unpaid internships can be considered to be beneficial for interns if they are the ‘party that gets the primary benefit from the internship, not the organisation that you are working for.’”

Are unpaid internships even legal in New Zealand? According to Employment New Zealand, volunteers are not considered to be employees — and therefore, they are not covered by employment law.⁴ Internships are not defined in the Employment Relations Act, which means that interns can legally be unpaid as long as they are ‘volunteers’. Employment New Zealand reflects that unpaid internships can be considered to be beneficial for interns if they are “the party that gets the primary benefit from the internship, not the organisation that you are working for.”⁵

To be considered a volunteer — and not free labour or a victim of exploitation — Employment New Zealand argues that the employer needs to “avoid getting an economic benefit from the work done by the intern (apart from registered charities); avoid having the intern do work that an employee would ordinarily do; ensure that the internship is mainly about learning new skills and gaining experience, and limit the duration of work and the hours worked by the intern.”⁶

“And what happens if a firm crosses the line and gains economic benefit from the work done by an intern, by asking them to do work that a paid employee would normally do?”

There is no question that two-week internships can be invaluable for New Zealand architecture students fortunate enough to be selected. But how do we address the issue of equity that is fairly raised by students who are financially incapable of committing to two weeks of unpaid labour? And what happens if a firm crosses the line and gains economic benefit from the work done by an intern, by asking them to do work that a paid employee would normally do?

Ultimately, the issue is about finding the best ways we can support the training of our architectural students throughout their ongoing education, both in school and in practice. Most particularly, we need to find ways to enable students who need to earn money to have an equal opportunity to compete for these invaluable learning experiences. Compensation would go a long way to achieving this important goal.

^References:

<sup>1. “Basecamp: How to be in an Office” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iszdoZCdWZE
2. Joyner, Sean. Debunking Architecture’s Mythological Work Culture, Archinect Features. Apr 24, 1922. https://archinect.com/features/article/150305199/debunking-architecture-s-mythological-work-culture
3. Joyner, Sean. Understanding Architecture Internships, Archinect Features. Jun 10, 1919. https://archinect.com/features/article/150140629/understanding-architecture-internships
4. Volunteers, Employment New Zealand. https://www.employment.govt.nz/starting-employment/who-is-an-employee/volunteers
5. The legality of no-pay or low-pay internship, Employment New Zealand. 12 November 2020. https://www.employment.govt.nz/about/news-and-updates/legality-of-no-pay-or-low-pay-internship
6. Ibid.</sup>