Degrees

[206xsi]

I got a 2.2 in chemistry at Bristol - and I'm really annoyed that people with 2.1s in lesser degrees (ologies from polys) get preference to me for jobs

[Muncher83]

From what I've heard about Law, very few people gets firsts anyway.

My Uni said they'd be pleased to give out 5 firsts to 200 students in the yeargroup

[edc]

I got a 2(i) in my Law degree a few years ago. We must have all been stupid cos nobody graduating in my year got a 1st.

[samn01]

Many end clients I recruit for insist on a 2.1 or above.
There are also so many candidates fighting for some jobs right now that I have clients that will only accept candidates with certain A level results (in certain subjects) even if the candidate has a degree and 10 years work experience (just to bring applicant numbers down I suspect). Candidates who took their qualifications before A levels were in place are excluded on the basis of not having the right qualifications.

I have never had a client insist on a first class degree although where you studied is quite often taken into account.

[M@H]

Hmmm... Must remember to lie on my CV about my degree then...(cos no-ones going to check are they?)


Matt.

[SparkyJohn]

samn01 said:

Many end clients I recruit for insist on a 2.1 or above. There are also so many candidates fighting for some jobs right now that I have clients that will only accept candidates with certain A level results (in certain subjects) even if the candidate has a degree and 10 years work experience (just to bring applicant numbers down I suspect). Candidates who took their qualifications before A levels were in place are excluded on the basis of not having the right qualifications. I have never had a client insist on a first class degree although where you studied is quite often taken into account.

I worked in the city when I first graduated. Many recruiters were demanding a minimum of X (can't remember, but it equated to ABB iirc) UCAS points and a 2.1. Dreadful method of recruiting people as it tends to select exam passing machines - supported by the fact that several 'premier league' city firms have dropped it in favour of a more holistic approach - but it's still in widespread use.

I'm now involved in the recruitment process for our company. The people our sales team have to pitch to are frequently at the highest levels of major companies so they need to be both exceptionally bright and socially succesful (I'm thick and insular, but I got in when we were a 4 person business ). To keep applicant numbers reasonable we insist on a 2.1 minimum and one of a limited range of subjects. We'd much rather see a 2.1 (from a decent uni) with strong evidence of work and life experience than a 1st held by someone who has only worked on their studies. Indeed degree result is only the first hurdle, the rest of the CV is of vastly more importance.

A 2.1 certainly isn't going to hold you back if you're a good applicant in other ways. I'd have to confess, however, that there are some universities* that would see your application going straight into the circular file.

*I won't name them for fear of causing offence.

[bga]

Plotloss said:

Fair enough. I only heard that from a HR man at KPMG...

My fiance is in HR at KPMG and has not heard of it, it may have been like that at KPMG before she joined a couple of years ago?? many firms fail to attract great candidates because they are too inflexible to look past results at degree and a-level. after 3/4 years in a job your degree is irrelavent as it has been superceded by experience, why is it then different with A-levels. It places an unfair advantage with those who were fortunate to go to public school as grades are generally better (which in turn gets you into better uni's blah, blah). That is why firms like the one I work in are easy to stereotype regarding the people they employ (although it's getting better)