CEO Says Zero Pay and 10-Hour-a-Day Internship in His Company a Great Career Opportunity. How Did Netizens React?
Recently, a startup owner has found himself at the center of a social media storm. Peter Ninovski, the founder of the tech company Brainster, posted on LinkedIn an offer for a one-year apprenticeship for new graduates. What was meant to be a proposal for an unique learning opportunity turned into a heated debate online due to its unconventional terms.
Ninovski highlighted that the internship did not offer a traditional salary, instead proposing a zero-dollar first-year salary with a modest monthly stipend of $500. The apprentices were expected to work 8-10 hours a day, five days a week. This was pitched as an uncommon but profoundly rewarding opportunity to work directly under his mentorship across the three multi-million dollar companies he operates.
The narrative Ninovski pushed was of immense career growth, showcasing the journey of a previous apprentice, William Dodevski, who at 17 undertook a similar path and transitioned into a vital role within one of the companies after five years of dedication and hard work. This framed the apprenticeship as a gateway to significant professional development.
The opportunity promised prospective apprentices a hands-on role involving shadowing the CEO, partaking in strategic and executional aspects across three companies, and collaborating on high-stakes projects. These include involvement in early-stage investments and pioneering AI projects, promising a dynamic and challenging experience for those who seized the opportunity.
Ninovski underscored the importance of total commitment, emphasizing that the apprentice should approach each task with a high degree of seriousness, as each would potentially impact the company’s future. Candidates were expected to be intelligent, tenacious, industrious, and ideally, possess some exposure to AI. Despite the absence of a traditional paycheck, Ninovski noted the invaluable mentorship he would provide, allocating five hours weekly to coach the apprentice personally.
Illustrating the apprenticeship as a transformative experience, he assured that participants would glean critical skills such as negotiation, leadership, decision-making, and investment strategies—skills that transcend textbook learning. Moreover, potential longer-term benefits include the prospect of a substantially higher salary after the initial year and a possibility of obtaining equity within the business, albeit these rewards were portrayed as neither quick nor without challenge.
In addition to mentorship, access to all Brainster programs would be extended to the apprentice, allowing them to learn from leading industry experts. Ninovski reiterated the potential life-changing value of this intense dedication, highlighting William’s story as a testament to the transformation that hard work coupled with this apprenticeship could facilitate.
Despite the optimism conveyed in the proposal, it provoked widespread backlash on social media, with users criticizing it as exploitative. While some commended the on-the-ground learning experience on offer, many lamented the demanding work conditions and minimal compensation as unjust. The discussion brought to the forefront an ongoing debate surrounding fair wages, work-life balance, and the ethics of unpaid or underpaid internships in today’s professional landscape.
The backlash was particularly intense on the subreddit LinkedIn Lunatics after the post circulated there. Critics mockingly questioned the narrative of learning under a CEO unable to provide remuneration for full-time work. Comments highlighted the disconnect between high expectations and the lack of financial compensation.
A particularly scathing response included sarcastic remarks about unconventional leadership styles: “You don’t understand. He’s operating on another level. When I offer an unpaid apprenticeship, I overwork, berate, and even torment the candidate… It might cost me a trip to urgent care, but that’s what leadership is some days…”
On LinkedIn, too, Ninovski faced stern critiques. Users admonished the proposal, with remarks suggesting embarrassment that a leader of three multi-million dollar companies could not fund a paid intern position.
As the post continues to circulate, it highlights the tension between providing career-building opportunities and ensuring fair labor practices. The discourse sparked by this contentious offer serves as a reminder of the ongoing necessity to evaluate and refine the frameworks that govern unpaid or low-paid roles in the entrepreneurial sphere.
