David Sipress in The New Yorker
If Reuters financial writer Felix Salmon can engage in art
criticism I feel qualified to comment on a major but under-reported trend
contributing to our lackluster economy: NO ONE WANTS TO PAY FOR LABOR. Corporate
profits are at their highest, wages are at their lowest. If we can get away
with it, we want people to work for next to nothing, or for free. Call me
old-fashioned, but I believe if you work, if you're making a contribution to
another person’s income, you should be paid commensurately.
I’ve read endless articles about how Walmart
doesn’t pay a living wage, forcing employees to apply for food stamps, with universities following suit in their use
of adjuncts. A friend in England works in an America designer outlet store
that brings in over £400,000 a week (that’s $600,000 to you and me) where the ten
or so employees make just over minimum wage. Et cetera, et cetera. What about
the art world?
Now that it’s almost fall, my in-box is littered with
“opportunities” for people with “excellent writing and editing skills” who are proficient
in basic HTML, Excel, Quickbooks and PhotoShop to work as interns without
compensation—for artists, bloggers, and galleries who are presumably profiting
(or intending to profit) from their enterprises.
Now I’m a really interesting person with lots of life
experience; a younger person could learn a lot just by being around me and
participating in what I do—perhaps more than they could learn in school. There’s a ton of work that needs to be
done here that someone else could do and I, like many artists, am not exactly
rolling in dough. Nevertheless, if someone’s going to put in hours toward my
wellbeing, doing what I tell them to do, I feel honor-bound to pay them—especially
if it’s QuickBooks, for god’s sake.
Since I doubt that my colleagues advertising for interns are in
the Tea Party camp, I'm wondering how being a socially compassionate liberal fits with taking advantage of a climate that presumes people should work for
free. Just wondering.
