theglobaljournal.net: Latest articles of Matt Hamilton

UN Internships Undermine the Organization's Commitment to Youth Issues

2012-08-10T16:06:47Z

With the world economy still struggling to recover, young people continue to face unprecedented levels of unemployment. The United Nations has responded by producing several events and studies, including May’s Youth Employment Forum at the International Labour Organization, as well as publishing the World Youth Report in 2011. Consultations with young people will continue this year as Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has called for the creation of a System-Wide Action Plan on Youth, a map for how the United Nations system will address youth issues. The United Nations will also celebrate International Youth Day, held each year on August 12, in recognition of young people worldwide.

While it is to be commended for its increased focus on youth issues, the United Nations has failed to address problems young people face within the organization, particularly the thousands of interns that contribute to its work for no pay. As an unpaid opportunity, UN internships are only available to those who can afford them, rather than those who deserve the experience based on merit alone. The UN clearly states that all expenses must be borne by the intern, including airfare, visas, medical insurance, and room and board. With operations conducted in cities like Geneva, New York, and Vienna, few of the world's youth can afford the high living costs of a UN internship, no matter how deserving they may be of such an opportunity.

According to Ban Ki-moon, "youth should be given a chance to take an active part in the decision-making of local, national and global levels." To the defense of all young people interested in contributing to the UN's work, I fail to see how the organization thinks that we can participate in decision-making when it only accepts those who can afford the high costs associated with an unpaid internship. Young people are an amazing source of new ideas, passion and creativity. The contribution they make to the UN should not be uncompensated.

Luckily, I am not the only one who has noticed this inconsistency. Just over a week ago, I started a petition through Change.org to call on Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and other heads of agencies to make a commitment to pay UN interns a fair wage. As of this week, we have over 1,000 signatures, demonstrating that this is a legitimate concern of youth all over the world.

The UN has been fairly quiet on the issue of unpaid internships, a point I criticized in an article last February. A report by the Joint Inspection Unit concluded that UN internships are "overwhelmingly positive for all the parties involved" and are seen "as a win-win experience,” providing the "real possibility and hope that interns eventually may be hired within the United Nations system and be in policy- and decision-making positions." While the report recognized that interns face financial difficulties in undertaking an unpaid position, the Inspectors stopped short of recommending a full living stipend without giving any reason. They did, however, call on heads of organizations to consider requesting “appropriate funds,” such as a specific budget line, to ensure that internship programs are adequately funded.

Provision of some form of funding has been implemented in a number of other international organizations, including the World Trade Organization, the Inter-American Development Bank, and more. Within the UN system, the International Labour Organization is the only one that provides a full stipend to cover basic expenses. ILO Director-General Juan Somavia has said that he is “totally against” unpaid internships, stating that asking an intern to work for free represents a “total and absolute disrespect for a young person.” As head of an organization fighting for higher labor standards, Somavia concluded that ILO internships had to “set an example” by supporting its interns with a fair living stipend.

For the rest of the UN system, unpaid internships remain the norm and it is clear that such a system has serious implications for young people. According the JIU, only 5% of interns participating in the 2007 program came from the poorest countries in the world. The vast majority, nearly 60%, came from developed countries, representing a clear discrimination against those who cannot afford the experience. For an organization that claims to value fairness and opportunity for all, the UN fails to live up to its ideals when it comes to its interns.

While the system clearly favors the wealthy, a UN internship does not guarantee a job with the organization. Despite its commitment to youth issues, UN hiring practices ensure that few young people actually have a place within the organization. According to another report by the JIU in 2007, out of 23,006 professional staff recorded worldwide in 2004, only 680 were below the age of 30, a mere 3%. Compare that to the 3,500 unpaid interns it registered in 2007 and it's hard to deny that the UN is not hiring young people in any professional capacity.

Rather than finding paid work, too often interns are used as a cheap source of labor, undermining the integrity of a system that is supposedly looking out for young people. Just take a look at this current offer for a “Finance/Administrative Internship” with the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) in London. Among other things, the intern will be tasked with “undertaking filing and mailings; organising meetings and arranging catering,” all for no pay.

This is just one example of many where the use of unpaid interns has become a shameful way to fill posts that should be paid. Adding the word “intern” to the end of what clearly should be a paid job title does not change the fact that what the UN and its various agencies are doing is wrong. While it claims that interns are “exposed to high-profile conferences, participate in meetings, and contribute to analytical work as well as organizational policy,” it seems dubious that organizing a luncheon for absolutely no pay significantly contributes to a young person's understanding of the policymaking process. On the contrary, it merely reinforces the idea that young people are an expendable source of free labor, a message few at the UN would (or should) support.

Ban Ki-moon has stated that “young people everywhere deserve the power to get information, connect and ask hard questions – about justice, equality and opportunity” and that policymakers have the obligation to “listen to youth and answer their calls.” When it comes to unpaid internships, now is the time to start asking those questions. As the UN prepares to celebrate International Youth Day on 12 August, young people and UN staff alike need to call into question a system that clearly discriminates against the very people this day commemorates. Fair pay will ensure that all qualified young people, rich or poor, are able to contribute their passion and ideals to the United Nations.

For more information about this initiative, please visit UnpaidIsUnfair.org

(Images: IYD logo and Ban Ki-Moon speaking to UN Summer 2012 Interns © UN; Unpaid is Unfair logo © Unpaid is Unfair)

Opinions voiced by Global Minds do not necessarily reflect the opinions of The Global Journal.

UN Youth Employment Conference Overlooks Unpaid Internships

2012-02-27T14:43:05Z

The Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) of the United Nations (UN) is to hold an event today (February 27) on the current and future status of youth employment, “Breaking new ground: Partnerships for more and better jobs for young people”. Organized by the Department for Economic and Social Affairs (DESA) and the International Labour Organisation (ILO), the conference will bring together international organizations and the private sector. The outcome of the one-day event will be submitted to the UN Member States during the Council’s High-level session in July 2012.

While its concern for youth employment is laudable, perhaps the UN should start by taking a look in its own backyard...

Of the UN agencies participating in the youth conference, only one provides compensation to its interns (the ILO). For the thousands of young people coming through the UN system each year (around 3,500 in 2007), the vast majority must do so at their own expense. Students and their families fork out thousands of dollars to get a foot in the door, resulting in a situation rife with elitism. Despite their best efforts, few interns actually gain employment with the UN, often taking on yet another internship in the hopes of eventually being paid. For the lucky few who do manage, paid work usually comes in the form of precarious short-term contracts, most of which lack the various benefits provided to permanent staff.

The trend in unpaid internships has been widely covered in the press, yet there has been little reported on what is taking place at the UN. In 2009, the Joint Inspection Unit (JIU) published a report on internships within the UN system. Surveying 18 organizations, it concluded that internships were "overwhelmingly positive for all the parties involved" and were seen "as a win-win experience". Besides gaining valuable experience, the JIU stated that internships provided the "real possibility and hope that interns eventually may be hired within the United Nations system and be in policy- and decision-making positions."

Speaking to current interns, the picture appears quite different. One recent graduate stated with regret how today’s unpaid interns are "disposable". While internships were originally intended to give current students exposure to the working world, they have in many cases become a convenient way for organizations to cut costs. Graduates who have already earned their qualifications are told they are unqualified for professional positions, leaving them little choice but to take on additional internships. Despite the conclusions of the JIU report, it is clear in many cases that interns are replacing workers who would otherwise be paid.

The current system is flawed on multiple fronts. While in some cases interns are able to secure outside funding, many rely on family, personal savings, or even loans to gain UN experience. Given the costs of living in cities like New York and Geneva, an unpaid internship for a period of three to six months could easily cost tens of thousands of dollars, putting the experience out of reach for all but the most privileged. These conditions skew the geographic distribution of interns, most of whom come from developed countries. According to the JIU, 59% came from developed countries, with a mere 5% from Least Developed Countries. For an organization that prides itself on inclusion, diversity, and equality, the UN’s refusal to compensate its interns has created a system that counters those very ideals.

Beyond the issue of pay, the UN system discriminates against its interns by placing unnecessary constraints on how they can later be employed. At most agencies, former interns are required to have a 3-6 month break of contract before they are allowed to start any paid work. This arbitrary break is inconvenient and frustrating, both for the intern and for the supervisor in need of a worker. The JIU report recognized this fact in 2009, suggesting that such breaks be eliminated. Three years later, little has been changed at most organizations, including the UN Offices in Geneva (UNOG).

Furthermore, the United Nations does not recognize internships as a valid form of work experience. Human Resources staff at UNOG tells young people that their time spent as interns counts as half the rate of "real" work experience. Therefore, a graduate student with over a year of internship experience and a Masters degree would be ineligible for any type of entry-level professional position within the UN. This leaves young people stuck in a catch-22: without internship experience, they cannot get jobs, yet with internship experience, they are ineligible for professional posts, driving them to take on more unpaid work.

If the UN system wishes to attract and retain the best and the brightest, the system needs to change. Organizations cannot continue to view their most junior staff as an easy way to save money and free up backlogs. A decent living stipend should be provided and rules should be changed to facilitate hiring interns for professional positions. Such systems are already in place at the ILO, IOM and the WTO. The UN should work with these organizations to share best practices and improve the intern system.

Having concrete objectives and a proactive attitude will be essential in engaging the UN. Young people should approach the administration in a positive and professional way. Joining organizations like the Geneva Interns Association is one way to get involved and give feedback to improve the system. Current UN staff with a sympathetic ear should also step up and show support for young employees.

While the 2009 JIU report was a good first step, there is a clear need for follow-up. The survey period between 2007 and 2008 took place just before the financial crisis. Youth unemployment has skyrocketed since then, driving many to take on unpaid internships. As budget cuts have reduced the availability of paid work, the line between what was once seen as a learning experience - and what now resembles something more - has blurred. If finding "more and better jobs for young people" is truly a UN priority, improving the way it employs its own young workers should start today.

If you'd like to let the UN know what you think, tweet your suggestions to ECOSOC at #UN4youth.

(Photo © DR)

In the Press:

Meritocracy For Sale

The UN & Agenda 21: A Plot For World Domination?

2012-02-20T16:45:53Z

With the Rio+20 Conference steadily approaching, leaders and diplomats around the globe are preparing for the world’s latest attempt to reach an agreement on climate change. While the outcome remains uncertain, there is one group that will undoubtedly object to even the weakest of agreements: the Tea Party Movement. Active since 2009, the Tea Party Movement has gained momentum across the United States. Its strongly conservative and libertarian viewpoints have had an effect on the Republican Party as a whole, a fact which can clearly be seen in the current presidential primaries.

One of the main targets of the Tea Party’s agenda is any measure that attempts to regulate the environment. According to Tea Party loyalists, the sustainability movement is a just a cover-up for more government control, stemming from a broader UN plot to dominate the world. The plot in question is Agenda 21, the UN action plan passed at the original Rio Conference in 1992. Among other things, Agenda 21 provides guidelines as to how countries can implement more sustainable policies at the local, national and international levels - although none of the guidelines are legally binding. Since the text was published in 1992, a number of municipal governments around the world have adopted plans based on its broad principles.

Despite the fact that Agenda 21 lacks any legal standing in the United States, the Tea Party Movement has used it as the whipping boy for the environmental movement at large. The New York Times recently ran an article, profiling the Tea Party’s opposition to everything from emissions trading to building bike lanes. According to Tea Party activists, such measures are all part of a UN plot to take Americans out of their cars and detached houses, stripping them of their individual freedoms. Tea Party favorite and former Fox News anchor Glenn Beck hosted a segment on Agenda 21 in June of last year. According to Beck, Agenda 21 is a "40 chapter document to control the world". Likewise, he equates the notion that developed countries should assist developing countries in achieving sustainable development to communism, telling viewers that “green is red”.

Though it remains largely on the fringes of the US mainstream, the Tea Party Movement has managed to put several candidates in the House of Representatives and has swayed the Republican Party in a more conservative direction. In January, the Republican National Committee passed a resolution, stating: "The United Nations Agenda 21 plan of radical so-called 'sustainable development' views the American way of life - of private property ownership, single family homes, private car ownership and individual travel choices, and privately owned farm - all as destructive to the environment."

Republicans have also been successful in defeating a number of pro-public transit measures, including what would have been the first high-speed rail system in Florida. The Republican-controlled House recently introduced a transportation bill that would eliminate dedicated federal funding for mass transit projects. According to US Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood, it is "the worst transportation bill" he has seen in nearly 35 years of public service. While the bill seems unlikely to pass, it is a reflection of just how strong anti-environment sentiments have become within the Republican Party.

As one planner recently wrote, the Tea Party Movement should not be ignored, especially in its criticism of Agenda 21. If activists continue to gain ground, the work towards creating more sustainable patterns of development in the US will be jeopardized. Not only will it become more difficult for planners and policy-makers to do their work, but the Tea Party campaign will undermine the work of the UN - a fact that could create a spillover effect in Rio. A UN-hostile Congress is not likely to ratify any new treaty, especially if the Agenda 21 conspiracy theory persists. While the American Planning Association released a publication to help defend Agenda 21; perhaps it’s time that the UN followed suit.

(Photo © DR)

Consuming with a Conscience - What Labels and Standards May Fail to Tell Us

2012-02-06T10:45:48Z

As the world becomes more intertwined, an increasingly complex supply chain has emerged. From computers to coffee, the end products that consumers purchase often travel thousands of miles before landing in the hands of their new owners. While that may not be such a bad thing per se, longer supply chains mean more chances that respecting sustainability will slip through the cracks, a fact that the media has picked up on in recent years. As a result, human rights abuses and environmental degradation are becoming more of a concern for the average consumer. A slew of labels (Fairtrade, organic, locally-produced, etc.) have become a way to help make informed purchasing decisions.

However, reports increasingly demonstrate that these standards are not always followed. In 2006, the Financial Times reported that Fairtrade-certified coffee growers in Peru had been underpaying their seasonal workers, a direct violation of the certification requirements. In a report to Bloomberg last year, journalist Cam Simpson exposed the child labor practices of cotton farms in Burkina Faso. Such a report would not be quite so surprising if it weren’t for the fact that the cotton produced was being used almost exclusively by Victoria’s Secret for its “sustainable” underwear. The US Federal government is now investigating the matter.

Most recently, Apple was hit last week, following the publication of a New York Times exposé that revealed its workers had been exposed to toxic chemicals, as well as arduous working conditions. According to the report, some workers were forced to work 12 hours a day, 6 days a week. Such conditions clearly go against Apple’s own codes of conducts. Created in 2005, the standards dictate ''that working conditions in Apple's supply chain are safe, that workers are treated with respect and dignity, and that manufacturing processes are environmentally responsible.'' Despite its good intentions, it is clear that Apple has been unable to control its supply chain.

Consumer advocacy groups and think tanks have come down harshly on many of the standards and labels used today. According to Tom Clougherty, policy director of the Adam Smith Institute, “Fairtrade is a marketing device that does the poor little good.” Similarly, Greenpeace has a dedicated blog on “greenwashing,” which they describe as “the act of misleading consumers regarding the environmental practices of a company or the environmental benefits of a product or service.” The project showcases ad campaigns by major companies that tote their environmental credentials, while simultaneously lobbying against stronger regulation.

Dr. Lucio Baccaro, director of the Masters in Standardization, Social Regulation, and Sustainable Development at the University of Geneva, describes standards and labels as a “second-best solution.” Baccaro and others acknowledge that given the complexity of the global production, it is nearly impossible to have complete oversight over supply chains at all times. Proponents of standards and labels believe stronger enforcement mechanisms and more reliable third-party inspections may help to curb violations. They recognize that although the system may be imperfect, labels and standards help raise consumer awareness that would otherwise not be there.

While much controversy remains, the market value for sustainable goods has increased substantially over the past years and will continue to do so in the future. It is estimated that global consumers spent just over $2.5 billion on Fairtrade certified products in 2007 alone. Such figures demonstrate that more focus is being placed on improving supply chains, as corporations are being held accountable for how their goods are produced. If the stories above are indicative of a growing trend, it is certain that more scandals will unfold. As long as consumers continute to vote with their pocketbooks, corporations will have to pay greater attention to their supply chains. But should standards and labels continue to prove unreliable, more consumers may begin to take corporate promisies with a pinch of salt, whether it's certified or not.

(Photo © DR)

NTBs Threaten Growth of Green Economy in the Year of Sustainable Energy for All

2012-01-11T10:09:09Z

2012 has been declared the International Year of Sustainable Energy for All. Capturing one of Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon’s priorities in his second term, it seeks to meet three objectives by 2030:

Ensuring universal access to modern energy services
Doubling the rate of improvement in energy efficiency
Doubling the share of renewable energy in the global energy mix.

While such goals are laudable, the reality of achieving a viable transition towards a less fossil-intensive future is being made even more complicated by non-tariff trade barriers (NTBs). From Angola to Argentina, barriers to trade in sustainable energy technologies are appearing across the world, notably in the form of domestic content requirements for key components that make up a sustainable energy system.

Domestic legislation has been passed to favor local manufacturing interests, much to the displeasure of their foreign competitors. Ontario’s Green Energy Act, passed in 2009, has come under fire for its domestic content requirements. Under its provisions, electricity companies that seek to benefit from its feed-in-tariff program for renewable energies must use a minimum amount of local goods and services when developing wind or solar energy projects. Governments complained that such rules violated Canada’s obligations as a member of the WTO. Following Japan’s consultation requests with the Canadian government, the WTO’s Dispute Settlement Body established a panel to decide on the issue. While a decision is still pending, the results will surely have wide-reaching consequences as similar measures have been enacted in countries all over the world.

Industry representatives complain that these requirements limit the spread of clean energy technologies. Speaking at the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development in November, Jens Martin Alsbirk from Vestas Wind Systems presented some of the negative effects of domestic content requirements. According to Alsbirk, costs can increase 20-25% in some cases, while competition becomes limited to those firms willing to establish domestic manufacturing capabilities. Given the cost of setting up new factories in individual countries, domestic content requirements could make for a riskier investment should markets turn bearish.

So-called trade wars could erupt among a number of countries. For example, following the passage of the 2009 US Stimulus Package, Canada threatened the US with trade sanctions for its ‘Buy American’ provisions that stipulated domestic content requirements in all public works projects, including those in the sustainable energy sector. It now appears that the US may be prepared to take similar measures against Chinese solar panel manufacturers, following accusations by the International Trade Commission of dumping. India has claimed it may follow suit.

But as Steven Cohen, Executive Director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University, recently wrote, trade wars will get us nowhere in achieving the growth of a green economy. The slew of suppliers, designers and producers of the complex components that go into creating sustainable energy technologies demonstrate how the industry is increasingly - and perhaps inevitably - a global endeavor. While national governments may be eager to bolster domestic production capacity, ignoring this fact could have dangerous consequences for achieving green growth.

One proposed solution: a Sustainable Energy Trade Agreement (SETA). Spearheaded by the ICTSD (International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development), the proposed agreement would serve as a means to liberalize trade in sustainable energy goods and services. Proponents claim that stalled WTO agreements and ambiguous rules surrounding energy services necessitate a new way forward. While still a relatively new concept, the development of a future SETA appears to be gaining traction - especially with the private sector.

As 2011 reached its end, December’s WTO ministerial meeting provided a glimmer of hope for the year to come. In a joint pledge, a number of countries, including the United States, Japan and Canada, and the EU, agreed to not “raising new barriers to trade in goods and services, imposing new export restrictions, or implementing WTO-inconsistent measures in all areas, including those that stimulate exports.” If such promises hold true, the future need for a SETA-like agreement may be diminished. But, if the rising US-China solar spat is any indication of where things are headed, a new venue for resolving these trade issues may prove itself necessary.