"Charlie Rose Show" sued by "exploited" intern

[David]

http://www.deadline.com/2012/03/does-charlie-rose-exploit-interns/#more-244094

Does Charlie Rose Exploit Interns?
By DAVID LIEBERMAN

That’s the central allegation in a class action suit filed today at
the New York State Supreme Court. Former intern Lucy Bickerton — who
worked at PBS’ The Charlie Rose Show in the summer of 2007 – says that
the program “operates on an annual budget of approximately $3.5
million, which is low for a television program airing five nights per
week.” Interns allegedly pick up the slack. They “perform background
research from print and online sources to prepare Mr. Rose for guest
interviews, escort guests through the studio and set, and break down
the set and clean up the ‘green room’” after tapings. The problem:
Under New York law, the suit says, “an unpaid internship is only
lawful in the context of an educational training program, when the
interns do not perform productive work and the employer derives no
benefit.” But the suit says that Rose “did not provide academic or
vocational training” to interns including Bickerton, who’s said to
have regularly worked two to three days a week for a total of about 25
hours a week. As a result, Rose “denied them the benefits that the law
affords to employees, including unemployment, workers’ compensation
insurance, social security contributions, and, crucially, the right to
earn a fair day’s wage for a fair day’s work.”

The suit wants the court to stop Rose from continuing to depend on
interns. In addition, it seeks unpaid minimum wages for all of his
interns ”in an amount that cannot currently be ascertained but that
readily exceeds $150,000.” Rose’s lawyer told The New York Times,
which first reported the story, that “we are confident that Charlie
Rose Inc.’s employment practices are appropriate.”

[thinbluemime thinbluemime]

On Mar 14, 7:57 pm, David <dimla...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> http://www.deadline.com/2012/03/does-charlie-rose-exploit-interns/#mo...

>
> Does Charlie Rose Exploit Interns?
> By DAVID LIEBERMAN
>
> That’s the central allegation in a class action suit filed today

> hours a week. As a result, Rose “denied them the benefits that the law
> affords to employees, including unemployment, workers’ compensation
> insurance, social security contributions, and, crucially, the right to
> earn a fair day’s wage for a fair day’s work.”
>
> The suit wants the court to stop Rose from continuing to depend on
> interns. In addition, it seeks unpaid minimum wages for all of his
> interns ”in an amount that cannot currently be ascertained but that
> readily exceeds $150,000.” Rose’s lawyer told The New York Times,
> which first reported the story, that “we are confident that Charlie
> Rose Inc.’s employment practices are appropriate.”

Maybe Charlie compensates the interns with copious quantities of show
sponsor Coka-Cola products.

http://www.charlierose.com/about/show/#contact

[Professor Bubba]

In article
<08aa8ead-e478-4b3f...@h12g2000yqi.googlegroups.com>,

thinbluemime thinbluemime <thinbl...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mar 14, 7:57 pm, David <dimla...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > http://www.deadline.com/2012/03/does-charlie-rose-exploit-interns/#mo...
> >
> > Does Charlie Rose Exploit Interns?
> > By DAVID LIEBERMAN
> >

> > Thatąs the central allegation in a class action suit filed today
>
> > hours a week. As a result, Rose łdenied them the benefits that the law
> > affords to employees, including unemployment, workersą compensation

> > insurance, social security contributions, and, crucially, the right to

> > earn a fair dayąs wage for a fair dayąs work.˛

> >
> > The suit wants the court to stop Rose from continuing to depend on
> > interns. In addition, it seeks unpaid minimum wages for all of his
> > interns ˛in an amount that cannot currently be ascertained but that

> > readily exceeds $150,000.˛ Roseąs lawyer told The New York Times,
> > which first reported the story, that łwe are confident that Charlie
> > Rose Inc.ąs employment practices are appropriate.˛

>
> Maybe Charlie compensates the interns with copious quantities of show
> sponsor Coka-Cola products.

Or maybe the interns get to put the Charlie Rose show on their starter
résumés, giving them about sixteen legs up on their competition for
their first "real" job.

This is the way it generally works in journalism, and without a doubt
Ms. Bickerton knew that going in. If she didn't like it, she should
have flipped burgers instead. Her suit is bullshit.

[Mason Barge]

Well, you have to respect the law.

I don't care so much about these tv interns, but I'm glad NY and a number
of other states finally got around to setting maximum hours for medical
interns. That was scary.

[thinbluemime thinbluemime]

On Mar 14, 9:10 pm, Professor Bubba <bu...@nowhere.edu.invalid> wrote:
> In article

> <08aa8ead-e478-4b3f-8436-9f3c6bc2f...@h12g2000yqi.googlegroups.com>,

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> thinbluemime thinbluemime <thinbluemi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Mar 14, 7:57 pm, David <dimla...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >http://www.deadline.com/2012/03/does-charlie-rose-exploit-interns/#mo...
>
> > > Does Charlie Rose Exploit Interns?
> > > By DAVID LIEBERMAN
>

> > > That¹s the central allegation in a class action suit filed today
>
> > > hours a week. As a result, Rose ³denied them the benefits that the law
> > > affords to employees, including unemployment, workers¹ compensation

> > > insurance, social security contributions, and, crucially, the right to

> > > earn a fair day¹s wage for a fair day¹s work.²

>
> > > The suit wants the court to stop Rose from continuing to depend on
> > > interns. In addition, it seeks unpaid minimum wages for all of his
> > > interns ²in an amount that cannot currently be ascertained but that

> > > readily exceeds $150,000.² Rose¹s lawyer told The New York Times,
> > > which first reported the story, that ³we are confident that Charlie
> > > Rose Inc.¹s employment practices are appropriate.²

>
> > Maybe Charlie compensates the interns with copious quantities of show
> > sponsor Coka-Cola products.
>
> Or maybe the interns get to put the Charlie Rose show on their starter
> résumés, giving them about sixteen legs up on their competition for
> their first "real" job.
>
> This is the way it generally works in journalism, and without a doubt
> Ms. Bickerton knew that going in.  If she didn't like it, she should
> have flipped burgers instead.  Her suit is bullshit.

Of course an internship with Charlie Rose would look good on a resume
and aid in gaining a position with a potential employer, that is why
the intern position is desired. But that is not the issue of the
complaint. The labor laws are alleged to have been violated and are
generally outlined in the publication below:
http://wdr.doleta.gov/directives/attach/TEGL/TEGL12-09acc.pdf



The U.S. Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division (WHD) has
developed the six factors below to evaluate whether a worker is a
trainee or an employee for purposes of the FLSA:

1. The training, even though it includes actual operation of the
facilities of the employer, is similar to what would be given in a
vocational school or academic educational instruction;

2. The training is for the benefit of the trainees;

3. The trainees do not displace regular employees, but work under
their close observation;

4. The employer that provides the training derives no immediate
advantage from the
activities of the trainees, and on occasion the employer’s operations
may actually be impeded;

5. The trainees are not necessarily entitled to a job at the
conclusion of the training period; and

6. The employer and the trainees understand that the trainees are not
entitled to wages for the time spent in training.

If all of the factors listed above are met, then the worker is a
“trainee”, an employment relationship does not exist under the FLSA,
and the FLSA’s minimum wage and overtime
provisions do not apply to the worker. Because the FLSA’s definition
of “employee” is
broad, the excluded category of “trainee” is necessarily quite
narrow. Moreover, the fact
that an employer labels a worker as a trainee and the worker’s
activities as training and/or
a state unemployment compensation program develops what it calls a
training program
and describes the unemployed workers who participate as trainees does
not make the
worker a trainee for purposes of the FLSA unless the six factors are
met.

[Ken from Chicago]

"Mason Barge" <mason...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:5r22m7dglpn7k6hmu...@4ax.com...

It's like hazing. Folks who've gone thru it often defend it since they had
to suffer thru it. Yet if you step back and look at it objectively and you
go, are you insane?

Same goes for college athletes being unpaid. Sure, there's a multimillion,
if not billion, dollar industry built on their backs and only a small
percentage of them make it on to the pros. It's insane not to pay them for
their work.

-- Ken from Chicago