But alongside not being paid, the other part of the current situation I do not like, and judging from feedback I get from many young professionals a pet peeve of theirs, is that many internships are just doing the hosts scut work and nothing more. What the regulations you posted say is NOT that you have to pay interns (which, I'd like to point out again I think museums should) but that if you do not pay interns, here is a test you need to apply to your internship program to see if it passes the FLSA guidelines (which, btw are not new but, according to your second link, stem from a 1947 court case. What is new is that as a result of the Black Swan case these guidelines have gained judicial clarification and additional support.) The Black Swan interns were angry enough to sue not only because they didn't get paid, but also because their experience consisted of nothing more than fetching coffee and running errands.

You post seems to assume (and my apologies if you did not intend for this implication, but it is how I interpreted your comments) that most museums will be making interns do nothing but scut work anyway, so we should pay them. Allow me to point out, based on the links you provided, that there is a second alternative. Provide an internship with such a robust educational component that it meets all six of the factors and passes the "Test For Unpaid Interns."  Then you don't need to pay them. (Even though I still think you should. Did I mention that?)

And it needs to be mentioned at this point, that even the test for unpaid internships, as good as I think it is for assessing the quality and ethicality of your internship program, does not even apply to the vast majority of museums. 

This from your first link at the DOL:

"The FLSA makes a special exception under certain circumstances for individuals who volunteer to perform services for a state or local government agency and for individuals who volunteer for humanitarian purposes for private non-profit food banks. WHD also recognizes an exception for individuals who volunteer their time, freely and without anticipation of compensation for religious, charitable, civic, or humanitarian purposes to non-profit organizations.  Unpaid internships in the public sector and for non-profit charitable organizations, where the intern volunteers without expectation of compensation, are generally permissible. WHD is reviewing the need for additional guidance on internships in the public and non-profit sectors."

Since most, though certainly not all, museums are not-for-profit or public sector jobs, the DOL considers it "generally permissible" for them to offer unpaid internships that do NOT pass the Unpaid Internship Test. That does not make it ethical necessarily, but according to these guidelines the DOL won't come after you. But this is a pretty weak exception in my opinion and there was the promise in 2010, when this document was written, that the DOL was going to review internships in the public and non-profit sector. I figure the museum world is one lawsuit away from having all this apply directly to them and the present crop of graduates might just be angry enough about the employment situation and how they are being exploited for free labor to do it.

And with all due respect. If your institution is using the professional labor of people with education and experience, slight though that might be for recent grads, then you should provide them with the educational experience outlined in the Unpaid Internship Test or you should pay them. (I prefer both, as you might be aware) Calling them "volunteers" might be okay with the DOL, but it is unethical in the extremest. It is exploiting the young professional and keeps a paying job off the market. And that some institutions do it with teasing promises of  some sort of job, someday, if we find the money, is reprehensible.

All of the above is based upon the readings I have done on this issue, including the two Michelle provided. If I have misread or missed something, please point it out. This is a discussion the museum world needs to have before some plaintiff and judge(s) have it for us.

Have a lovely day,

Matthew White