Should Firms Pay Interns for Their Service?

Internships have become a standard bridge between academic study and the labour market. In Nepal, thousands of students from BBA, BBS, journalism, engineering and IT programmes join firms each year as interns. The question of whether such interns should be paid is debated on both economic and ethical grounds. In my view, firms should pay interns for their service, though the amount may reasonably be modest and may vary with the nature of the work.

The strongest argument for payment is that interns perform real work. When an intern drafts reports, maintains accounts, handles social media, codes software, or attends clients, the firm earns revenue or saves cost from that labour. Paying nothing for work that produces value is simply unfair. The principle of fairness holds that those who contribute to output should share in the return. An unpaid intern is, in effect, a worker whose wages have been quietly transferred to the employer's profit.

Secondly, unpaid internships create inequality of opportunity. Only students from well-off families can afford to work for months without income. Talented students from poor or rural backgrounds are forced to choose paid but irrelevant jobs instead. This narrows the talent pool from which firms recruit and reproduces social privilege. Payment widens access and makes the internship market merit-based rather than money-based.

Thirdly, payment improves the quality of the internship itself. When a firm pays, it tends to assign meaningful tasks, set clear expectations, and supervise properly, because it expects a return on its investment. Unpaid interns are often given photocopying and tea-serving duties. Payment thus converts an informal favour into a structured learning arrangement that benefits both sides. It also raises morale and motivation, which directly affects productivity.

Critics argue that many firms, especially small ones in Nepal, cannot afford to pay, and that the training and mentorship they provide is itself the intern's compensation. This point has some merit. A firm that spends staff time teaching an intern does bear a real cost. However, this argument justifies low pay, not no pay. A modest stipend, a travel and lunch allowance, or a token honorarium can recognise the intern's contribution without straining the firm. Moreover, the law in many countries, including Nepal's Labour Act in spirit, discourages using learners as free labour for extended periods.

A balanced position, therefore, is that interns should be paid at least a minimum stipend covering transport and food, with higher pay where the intern performs work equivalent to that of a regular employee. Firms should also state the terms in writing, so that neither side is exploited. Payment need not mean full salary; it means respect for labour and a fair sharing of the value created.

In conclusion, paying interns is justified by fairness, equal opportunity, and better performance. Firms that pay build a reputation as good employers and attract better candidates. The practice of long, wholly unpaid internships should be discouraged. A fair stipend is a small cost for a large gain in justice and quality.

Applying the Four Levels of Reading to Kate Chopin's "The Story of an Hour"

1. Literal Level (What the text says)

The literal level deals with the plain, surface facts of the narrative — who, what, when, where, and how.

• Characters: Mrs. Louise Mallard (the protagonist, afflicted with a heart condition), Josephine (her sister), Richards (her husband's friend), and Brently Mallard (her husband, presumed dead).
• Setting: The Mallard home, chiefly Mrs. Mallard's room, facing an open window; the time is spring, and the action spans about one hour.
• Plot: Richards learns at the newspaper office that Brently Mallard's name heads the list of those killed in a railroad disaster. He verifies it by a second telegram and rushes with Josephine to break the news gently. Mrs. Mallard weeps stormily, then shuts herself alone in her room. Sitting in an armchair before the open window, she gradually becomes aware of something approaching her. She whispers "free, free, free!" and recognizes a monstrous joy at her newfound freedom. Later, she descends the stairs with Josephine. The front door opens and Brently Mallard walks in, alive and unaware of the accident. Mrs. Mallard dies on the spot, and the doctors pronounce that she died "of heart disease — of the joy that kills."

2. Interpretive Level (What the text means)

The interpretive level examines meaning, theme, character motivation, and symbolism.

• Theme of freedom vs. marriage: The central meaning is that marriage, even a loving one, can be a form of confinement. Mrs. Mallard's whispered "free, free, free!" reveals that her husband's death liberates her — not because she hated him, but because she now owns her life: "There would be no powerful will bending hers."
• Character: Mrs. Mallard is not a monster; she is a woman awakening to selfhood. Her "vacant stare" and "suspension of intelligent thought" mark the transition from wife to individual. The "lines" on her face "bespoke repression and a certain strength" — she has endured, and now she sees possibility.
• Symbolism: The open window symbolizes opportunity and the future. The "tops of trees all aquiver with the new spring life," the "delicious breath of rain," the sparrows, and the "patches of blue sky" all signify renewal and hope, contrasting with the death below. The armchair represents the comfort and confinement of domestic life. The "heart trouble" is both literal and symbolic — her heart is the site of both her physical frailty and her emotional awakening.
• Irony: The final line — "of the joy that kills" — is deeply ironic. The doctors assume she died of happiness at seeing her husband alive; the reader knows she died of the shock of losing her newly found freedom. The "joy" is not reunion but liberation, and its loss kills her.

3. Critical Level (How the text works and what it assumes)

The critical level analyzes the text's construction, ideology, and the assumptions it makes or challenges.

• Narrative technique: Chopin uses a close third-person narrator limited to Mrs. Mallard's consciousness. The reader learns her inner life while the other characters — Josephine, Richards, the doctors — remain outside it. This creates dramatic irony: we know what they do not.
• Structure and pacing: The story is compressed into one hour, mirroring the brief window of Mrs. Mallard's freedom. The plot moves from news → grief → solitude → revelation → return → death, a tight arc that maximizes the final shock.
• Feminist critique: The story exposes the patriarchal assumption that a woman's identity is defined by her husband. The doctors' verdict — "the joy that kills" — represents patriarchal medicine's inability to comprehend a woman's inner life; it imposes a sentimental narrative over a subversive one. Chopin critiques the institution of marriage as a legal and social cage, even when affection exists.
• Assumptions challenged: The text challenges the Victorian ideal of the devoted widow and the notion that a woman's greatest joy is her husband's return. It assumes the reader will sympathize with Mrs. Mallard's desire for autonomy, and it punishes — or perhaps frees — her through death.

4. Evaluative Level (How good is the text, and why)

The evaluative level judges the story's artistic merit and its place in literature.

• Artistic economy: The story is a masterpiece of short fiction — every detail (the heart trouble, the window, the spring imagery, the armchair) is functional. Nothing is wasted.
• Emotional impact: The ending is devastating and memorable. The irony is perfectly prepared and delivered, producing the "shock of recognition" that characterizes great short stories.
• Thematic depth: It raises enduring questions about love, freedom, marriage, and selfhood that remain relevant. It is a foundational text in feminist literary criticism.
• Historical significance: Published in 1894, it was ahead of its time; its frank treatment of a woman's inner life and its critique of marriage were radical. It continues to be widely anthologized and studied.
• Minor limitations: Some readers may find the ending abrupt or the symbolism heavy-handed, but these are generally considered strengths within the compressed form.

Conclusion: "The Story of an Hour" rewards reading at all four levels. Literally, it is a brief tale of mistaken death; interpretively, it is a study of a woman's awakening; critically, it exposes patriarchal ideology; and evaluatively, it stands as a near-perfect example of the short story form.