The Political-Economics of Career Services: Students Picking up the Check for Employers

About a week-and-a-half ago, students were bombarded with emails from Career Services advertising a Part Time Job & Internship Fair. 

My interest was sparked, though I couldn’t attend the fair. In place, I perused — and ultimately investigated — the Career Services Job and Internship Board.

The board includes approximately 340 open positions, ranging from marketing internships, to full-time editor careers, all the way to part-time odd jobs. The board offers opportunities to make extra cash over the summer; chances to intern and gain desired career-field work experience; and potential leads to full-time, post-undergraduate jobs.

The board is also accessible and easy to navigate. One can conduct a keyword search, and narrow the results based on a plethora of criteria, including type of position, level of experience required, and degree of employment.

In short, the board — as well as the Career Service department as a whole — is an undeniably valuable resource for both students and alumnus.

While the board is an important tool for students, it is also invaluable for employers. It serves as mechanism to both access and advertise to a large and — let’s not forget — desperate pool of labor.

At first glance, the board seems to facilitate mutual, absolute-gains in a win-win, positive-sum game: students’ demand for employment is satisfied while businesses are supplied with labor.

I, however, found something incredibly problematic about the board: employers, candidates, etc. who wish to post are able to post free of charge. Students, on the other hand, pay for access to the board through tuition.

Frankly, by paying for the Career Service, we are essentially subsidizing business advertising.

I’m not suggesting that we get rid of Career Services; rather, in the same way that we students have to pay for services, businesses should have to as well. This is only fair.

Moreover, as everyone is well aware, the University has had some budgetary issues in recent years — which, it’s worth noting, have come at the expense of those at the bottom of the salary totem poll.

Charging businesses a fee for posting on the board is certainly a way to raise revenue and, in turn, replace some of the University’s budget cuts. It won’t raise $600,000 per year (the amount the housekeepers cuts saves), but it’s a place to start.

Ultimately, if we — as a University — aren’t going to pay all faculty a living wage, it’s unethical to allow businesses to profit off our student body at no cost. If we have to pay a poverty wage, we certainly don’t have room for free riders.