<p>^ I’m not an expert but as I look at the Department of Labor guidelines it seems to me White House internships are probably OK. The internship is broadly speaking “vocational” in nature, albeit for the very specialized vocation of high-level politics and government service. The internship clearly benefits the intern more than the employer. Look, the White House doesn’t “need” the extra help; they can get all the top-notch professional help they want. The point of these internships is to give a few stellar (or well-connected) students the benefit of exposure to the inner workings of the White House. Their function is not to replace regular workers—though they may end up doing some routine clerical tasks that could be done by clerical employees. That’s where the program really needs to watch itself. In theory White House interns are also closely supervised; again, I don’t know if it works out that way in fact. “Immediate advantage to the employer”? Well, here’s where I’d say the White House is on very safe ground as a 19-year-old intern isn’t going to have all that much to offer in the way of political expertise, legislative relations, national security decision-making, etc—they’re there to learn primarily by observing and lending a hand at the margins, and the benefits of that relationship clearly run to the intern, not to the White House which could probably run as efficiently, if not more so, without them. No guaranteed job at the end of the internship, and a mutual understanding that the position is unpaid (I think). So I’d say they’re OK under these guidelines. The White House can easily decide to make a limited number of these internships available as a public service. </p>
<p>It may be trickier for businesses. Many businesses will want to give interns the opportunity to show what they’re capable of, and some will probably be tempted to try to make sure they’re getting their money’s worth—i.e., that the business IS getting “an immediate advantage” in the form of the intern’s work output. If not, why take on interns in the first place? Ironically, though, the more valuable the intern’s work is to the employer, the thinner the ice the employer is on with respect to the guidelines. So as an employer, what do you do? Hire bad interns who won’t provide you an “immediate advantage”? Confine them to menial tasks? But then it may not look sufficiently “vocational.” Have them do make-work under close supervision? That might qualify your internship program, but it sure won’t satisfy the interns, and it’s not clear why a well-run business would invest time and resources in that project. It seems to me the only way to approach this as a business is the way the White House does: view it as a kind of public service project on the business’s part, allow the interns to “shadow” your professionals and possibly assist them at the margins (but not too much assistance please), keep them under close supervision, and probably include some explicit instructional time, including possibly class-like settings. That sounds like a net drain on the business’s resources. But it may be legal under the guidelines. (Though I can’t really offer an opinion on this last point as I’m not licensed to practice law in your jurisdiction).</p>