The morality of working for free?

[young_dumb]

Let us say that a man has recently entered the workforce after studying, and found himself a prospective employer. The employer decides to take the man on for the agreed two days a week, both as an employee and as a means to further train him.

Eventually the employer takes on more staff, with them all working 5 days a week. The original employee would like to work the extra 3 days a week, but the employer informs him that this is not an option, due to cost vs returns (lack of experience and general skill).

If the man decides to work the extra 3 days without pay, where does this decision stand morally in an objectivist world?

I suppose it hinges on his reasons for doing so, those being possibly either to gain more experience and show his employer he is committed, or the other end of the spectrum, just to help his employer out during a busy season or similar.

Logic says that the man should recieve due reward for his good work, but whose definition of "good work" counts?

[BaalChatzaf]

Let us say that a man has recently entered the workforce after studying, and found himself a prospective employer. The employer decides to take the man on for the agreed two days a week, both as an employee and as a means to further train him.

Eventually the employer takes on more staff, with them all working 5 days a week. The original employee would like to work the extra 3 days a week, but the employer informs him that this is not an option, due to cost vs returns (lack of experience and general skill).

If the man decides to work the extra 3 days without pay, where does this decision stand morally in an objectivist world?

I suppose it hinges on his reasons for doing so, those being possibly either to gain more experience and show his employer he is committed, or the other end of the spectrum, just to help his employer out during a busy season or similar.

Logic says that the man should recieve due reward for his good work, but whose definition of "good work" counts?

Experience gained working, even if some days are worked at no wage, may be of sufficient value.

By the way, I do volunteer work. I see nothing altruistic or unkosher about it. I do some interesting stuff which I otherwise might not get a chance to do.

Ba'al Chatzaf

[Brant Gaede]

Let us say that a man has recently entered the workforce after studying, and found himself a prospective employer. The employer decides to take the man on for the agreed two days a week, both as an employee and as a means to further train him.

Eventually the employer takes on more staff, with them all working 5 days a week. The original employee would like to work the extra 3 days a week, but the employer informs him that this is not an option, due to cost vs returns (lack of experience and general skill).

If the man decides to work the extra 3 days without pay, where does this decision stand morally in an objectivist world?

I suppose it hinges on his reasons for doing so, those being possibly either to gain more experience and show his employer he is committed, or the other end of the spectrum, just to help his employer out during a busy season or similar.

Logic says that the man should recieve due reward for his good work, but whose definition of "good work" counts?

Experience gained working, even if some days are worked at no wage, may be of sufficient value.

By the way, I do volunteer work. I see nothing altruistic or unkosher about it. I do some interesting stuff which I otherwise might not get a chance to do.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Is he being forced?

--Brant

[tjohnson]

I suppose it hinges on his reasons for doing so, those being possibly either to gain more experience and show his employer he is committed, or the other end of the spectrum, just to help his employer out during a busy season or similar.

He might be showing he is committed or he might be showing he is a chump to be taken advantage of. this is something you would have to decide based on the specifics - there is no general rule that would apply.

[Christopher]

Yes, the reasons matter. Is he working for his own self-determined goal like demonstrating an increase of value to his employer in order to maintain the job he wants, or is he working out of fear that he'll be fired otherwise? His motives truly matter, and even then, are his motives for the achievement of his own chosen goals or out of fear that someone else will take his power away...

[young_dumb]

I understand. Thanks for your answers

[anthony]

I don't know why the practice of apprenticeship has all but disappeared; possibly because of its mediaeval connotations, or the flavor of slave labor it carries.

For any youngster keen on entering a certain field, and gaining experience while still studying the theory at college, it must still be appealing.

Photography is one of the professions that has and still does benefit from a sort of mentor, and unpayed pupil/assistant, situation. As long as there is reciprocity and exchange of values , how can this be criticized?

Choice rules here, but as happens in some countries, the State will frown upon or ban the practice, citing minimum wage laws, and 'worker exploitation'. Does apprenticeship exist in any form in the U.S. ?

Tony

[klnielsen]

Use the current position to bargain for another job in the same field, and leverage the hunt and any success obtained through it against the original employer.

[Wolf DeVoon]

Does apprenticeship exist in any form in the U.S. ?

Sure. Apprentice dope dealer, filmmaker, actor, musician. On the other hand, we're all working without being paid 5 months a year -- taxes grabbed by Federal, state, local governments -- and working more years for less because half of U.S. industry was regulated, er, out of existence.

Crackberry apprentices went into politics, texting 'YES WE CAN'

[BaalChatzaf]

Let us say that a man has recently entered the workforce after studying, and found himself a prospective employer. The employer decides to take the man on for the agreed two days a week, both as an employee and as a means to further train him.

Eventually the employer takes on more staff, with them all working 5 days a week. The original employee would like to work the extra 3 days a week, but the employer informs him that this is not an option, due to cost vs returns (lack of experience and general skill).

If the man decides to work the extra 3 days without pay, where does this decision stand morally in an objectivist world?

I suppose it hinges on his reasons for doing so, those being possibly either to gain more experience and show his employer he is committed, or the other end of the spectrum, just to help his employer out during a busy season or similar.

Logic says that the man should recieve due reward for his good work, but whose definition of "good work" counts?

Experience gained working, even if some days are worked at no wage, may be of sufficient value.

By the way, I do volunteer work. I see nothing altruistic or unkosher about it. I do some interesting stuff which I otherwise might not get a chance to do.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Is he being forced?

--Brant

No mention of force or a weapon was made.

Ba'al Chatzaf

[Brant Gaede]

No mention of force or a weapon was made.

If not then the morality will take care of itself leaving only the question of right action.

--Brant

[Chris Grieb]

You haven't mentioned internships which orgranizations like Cato Institute use. These interns provide a great deal of help and also training on idea Cato is trying to impart. I do not think interns recieve much in the way of pay.

[sbeaulieu]

If both parties are in mutual agreement, it would be moral. The employer stated his/her reasons for not being able to provide payment for more than 2 days, so no information was being withheld.

~ Shane