A recruiters group is calling for an end to government targets to get 50 per cent of school leavers involved in higher education. It claims the views represent its 750 members who between them hire 30,000 graduates a year. The recruiters said that aiming to get half of under-30s into higher education has driven down standards …
I used to work in IT at a bank that has offices all around the world and workign at the main HQ
I had people from IT who have 3 to 5 certification from Microsoft and Linux always come up to me askign me things and I get this look on my face.....Like..
Hey wait... I am the one who is self taught with no certifications at all not even an A+ cert and
I get all these wankers comming to me all the darn time asking me for pc,network,OS issues and support.
Really now. I am sick of it! Besides it proves that these tests they take prove nothing!
It sounds like all these people had found a way to get their work done much more easily - ask you to do it. We've all been in the position of being flattered when people ask us to help them. However after a while the nice warm feeling you have from being known as "the guy" starts to pall. It's truly surprising how many of these requests disappear as soon as you ask the asker to do even the most trivial task: such as documenting what they've done so far. Most of the rest can be deflected by responding "certainly, I'll help you - but where are you taking me for lunch, first?", or that old favourite of asking for their cost code.
If you want a job done, give it to a busy person
"Most of the rest can be deflected by responding "certainly, I'll help you - but where are you taking me for lunch, first?"
Not likely I don't want to sit there and be bored to death by how they can't do something trivial.
Self taught = yes
Degree = yes but in a relevant subject. Hint: ! (Art History || Media Studies)
Ending the caps is all very well for the poor and the rich, but what about those of us who are in the middle? Social engineering is already rampant - one friend's daughter was not allowed to go to an open day at Cambridge because she is not in receipt of the £30/week bribe that the government gives to disadvantaged pupils. Doesn't seem to matter that she's a straight-A* student, instead they are dropping the entry requirements to C grades for certain groups, just what we need for our future doctors/vets...
re : Tuition Fees
They have A* grade at A-level now!? Christ the education system's getting bad.
No, A* at GCSE
If she's going to uni open days, she's probably not sat her A-Levels yet, and might not have sat her ASs.
Most universities take GCSEs into account, now that you can't tell much about a student from their A-level grades.
@ Shig 14:01
Well, some of us - even losers without proper degrees - are old enough to have done 'S-levels'. Good thing we are getting so old that early-onset Alzheimers is wiping the fact they existed from living memory, or we would have the fatuous Ed Balls (who is just too young for his traditional public school to have pushed him through them on the way to Oxford) popping up on TV to tell us that A* is both fully equivalent to the old Special Papers and 'accessible' to small dogs and household plants.
Another wasteful change
"It called for an end to the degree classification system and the supports the introduction of Higher Education Achievement Report - which has already been trialled at 18 universities and should go nationwide next year. This gives graduates a report card which includes existing degree classifications as well as more information on modules taken and extra-curricular activities."
Great, just like the "Record of Achievement" I got from high school which employers didn't give a damn about. How about employers stop whining and decide which subjects they accept. If you want a programmer, then only interview people with computing degrees, don't bother with people with degrees in sociology.
here's a radical idea...
...instead of putting the blame on Universities and hiking up fees, take some responsibilty yourselves.
Don't advertise job as "Degree level" and take on some twat with a degree in French Media and Jazz recital" for a job in IT.
If there are people taking stupid degrees and employers stop employing them, they they will fade out.
One of our sales departments boasted that they took on degree applicants, most couldn't write their own f**king name let alone show any sort of sales skills.
Get the right people for the job, regardless of a bit of paper.
Re: right people for the job
Oh, so true it hurts.
When I was out of work last year, I would apply for jobs I could do with my eyes shut and one hand tied behind by back, yet was consistently overlooked for jobs due to the fact I have no formal degree qualifications. Thirteen years constant, practical experience covering a wide range of app support, tech support, ops and development exposure meant nothing because I didn't have a degree - any degree. Tell me, what would I have learnt had I have taken a BSc (hons.) in Practical Psychological Impact of iPhone Fart Apps in Modern Society that could be more useful to an employer than thirteen years solid experience of using SQL (or some other skill) as stated by the job description?
Morons, I hope you choke on your retarded hoodie graduates.
RE: Re: right people for the job
I sympathise but the problem is usually not the actual person that's going to employ the recruit, it's the gormless HR people that do the adverts and the selection. I get really frustrated when I see jobs I need filled advertised as "graduate-level". I know that there are plenty of people that could do the job but their applications will be binned because some know-nothing HR drone has decided you need a degree just because it's a certain paygrade. I once interviewed eight graduates put forward by HR for a sysadmin role and found all to be unsuitable, only to find HR had binned an application from an experienced admin because he had no A-levels.
Re:RE: Re: right people for the job
You're right, of course - my vitriol is not aimed towards the people who actually want applicants who can do the job, but towards the HR/Recruitment morons who think you can't do any kind of job unless you have a bit of paper saying you spent three years or more at a university.
Re: Re: oh I can't be arsed with the Re:s I'll just hit "reply"
Some years back I met a headhunter over lunch. In conversation I asked him what he'd done before going into the business. It turned out he'd been an IT development manager for <a big four bank>.
I asked why he'd dumped that in favour of headhunting. He replied that in his previous job all candidates were pre-selected by HR before he ever got to see them. This meant an intial CV-weeding-out process on qualifications followed by an HR interview. One of the more heavily weighted questions asked there was "How do you see your career progressing within <a big four bank>?"
He'd decided that advising IT professionals on the best way of lying through their teeth to HR droids was a far more valuable contribution to the industry than trying to educate junior bank manager material in the intricacies of COBOL.
How many of them have degrees
Recruitment people are worse than estate agents, they cold call...
I remember a joke that was doing the rounds when I was a student:
Q: What do arts students say after they graduate?
A: Do you want fries with that?
These day you can get degrees in things like "BA in nose picking" and "BSc in scratching own arse", so I'm not really surprised that they're considered "mickey mouse". It's because they're completely pointless and valueless!
Take it you didn't do uni....
Who's the leader of the club
That's made for you and me?
It was always a rediculous idea to have 50% of young people going to Uni.
The whole point in a University degree was to allow for the brightest students to prove their abilities - but over the years things have been dumbed down so much that 1 in 2 people are capable of doing them.
So then, the elite 10% end up spending another year doing a Masters, or even 3 doing a PhD just to separate themselves from the pile.
Waste of time
20 years ago when I did my degree in Electronics, employers did not require a degree as you don't actually need a degree to do Electronic design. Interest, hobby and a HND (two year course after O'Levels) was more than enough. Now they are asking for masters and PhDs but you still don't really need a degree to do the job. The whole thing is a complete waste of time and money.
Ask yourself, when was the last time you used calculus or even a sine function. Most people could have stopped studying maths at the age of 10.
Some bits I agree some I don’t.
My Degree was abit watered down which is a terrible shame consider the amount of money I paid for it, It wasn't technical enough and thus left a lot of my fellow Graduates Frustrated at the lack of education compared to the costs! I agree too many people go to uni and do stupid degrees; one of my mates did "American Studies" which he admits is totally micky mouse. But ramping up costs isn’t really an answer is it. Its a recession people cant really afford things, expecting people to chuck money towards degree's isn’t going to happen. Maybe the answer is simply to make degrees more worth while by improving the value of the teaching, and/or make hybrid courses that allow you to study Industry certifications as part of the degree (eg. computing studies with an MCSA/E). Also for a lot of courses I ensure there are placements as It’s incredibly important to gain practical skills. However I wouldn’t charge 1/2the cost of a years tuition for this (as in my case my tutor came out twice for a total of 1 hour the university took 700quid, students the year after were meant to pay roughly 1500 for this which explains why 90% skipped the placement year
they are snobs nurtured in cotton beds.
"The recruiters also want an end to caps on tuition fees, but this should happen in stages and safeguards put in place for disadvantaged students. Parents and students should be encouraged to save for a university education"
first they bitched about mickeys degree ( i agree with most of their critics) and then that little gem appears out of no where.
actually degrees should be as hard as F''k and free of charge if you are targeting to transform them in undeniable proof of knowledge and skill and nothing else.
no, these (rich?)guys want to reduce the number of people with bad\"poor" degrees but at same time have the premium buy option for their sons and daughters.
You beat me to it
What they are actually saying is make degree graduation an elite club the elite and make my child one them. Or put another keep the riff-raff in their place
Another crew of muppets
Hmm so too many graduates being produced but they are crying about not being able to bring in people from overseas.
So the truth of the matter is "we don't like you poor smelly Brits who actually want a living wage" instead they prefer to bring in staff from overseas with dodgy degrees who they can recruit for the minimum wage, despite their total lack of competence and total lack of English language abilities.
So the latest scheme seems to be "price Brits out of universities so we can then claim there is a shortage of graduates and make piles of cash bringing in Indian and Chinese grads on the cheap"
Sounds just like the CBI and certain Tory party members to be honest.........
How about instead no foreign graduate places, a requirement to train British candidates for the position before being allowed to apply to bring in Non EU workers (we have probably 4 million unemployed so plenty of people who could and would willingly do the work if given the opportunity.)
But again the government (of either shade) will cave to these special interest groups or simply tinker around the edges instead of properly dealing with the issue.
How about instead employers sponsoring candidates through university on a part time basis (similar to day release some construction companies use) in exchange for a bigger say on how the course is composed. Employers get properly trained candidates who understand the business and the role and the candidate gets the guarantee of a position and the work experience to back it up.
Nah won't happen though, too much common sense and not enough commission for the "ruperts " of the recruitment world.
Read - think - respond
I think rather than commenting on the story, what you are doing is turd-spurting your bigotry and self interest.
I think I can rewrite your comment much more succinctly as follows:
The reason that I am not hailed as the new messiah is not because I am ordinary but because everyone is working against me.
You really dont know what your talking about do you?
For one thing, the requirement to prove that there is no Brit/EU perosn who can do your job already exists across the entire EU including the UK.
Secondly, the Tier 1 migrants visa (the one that lets you work where you want in the UK and is reserved for highly educated people) now requires a person to have a masters degree and to have earned the equivalent of £40k in the previous year - so the whole hiring cheaply skilled workers on this particular visa is not going to happen. In fact bery few non-managers get through on this visa these days.
Thirdly, in engineering most of the overseas staff you are complaining about are actually obtained through offshoring and in my experience usually have the skills and work ethic to get the job done well. If they dont there quickly replaced with someone that does!
Lastly, if UK degrees where worth anything company's might not look so regularly for the foreigners. Hell just recently, the UK gov proposed reducing the length of an engineering degree from 3 years (which is already too short to learn the skills you need to become a full engineer) to 2 years! Australia, New zealand and South Africa all require 4 years to become an engineer (and believe me thats 4 solid years - there are no easy subjects) and in Germany they require 5 (although there slowly moving to 4) to think you can become an engineer after 3 is ridiculous.
Sorry rant over... but honestly, your government already makes it more difficult for legitimate foreign workers to work in Britian then in any other country in Europe... If you cant get british people into jobs with the lack of competition this causes then obviously british people dont have the skills the companies want - and whos fault is that?
Did you actually read what I wrote?
I at least put forward a way to improve things.
Employers complain graduates aren't suited to the role, so change the training, rather than complaining.
It is not bigotry to comment on a bias towards candidates from overseas who are willing to work for a rate lower than the grill chef in mcdonalds.
Muppet, I suppose you read the guardian, socialist worker, or someother la la land paper.
£40K...I think your looking at the wrong visa category there, There are other categories which allow staff on £20K plus to be brought into the UK by the company, which isn't that high.
Too right it is hard to bring in foreign workers, we have 4 million unemployed, therefore look after your own first. The requirement for British/EU workers is easily gotten around, using small circulation publications for advertising is a favoured one. The economy of this country needs people working to pay tax to support it. More unemployed, more money spent on benefits and more crime. More people in work, usually less crime and less spent on benefits.
I know plenty of well trained people who get turned down for positions, solely because the recruiter has a cozy deal set up to supply overseas candidates in preference to local candidates. and no most of them don't have a flipping clue how to do the job or speak English. Some of them are a liability, can't speak English yet recruited to drive heavy machinery in a busy area, where the rest of the staff speak English, resulting in people being run over, because they don't understand "STOP"
I dont subscribe to the Mail etc, but I'm a bit tired of companies breaking the rules by not advertising positions that they have available, lying about vacancies when questioned, then recruiting a heap of new staff from outwith the EU to save money and avoid having to offer decent terms and conditions or obey things such as the "working time directive" or health and safety laws.
Also I did suggest a way forward, by giving employers a bigger say in training courses in exchange for taking a set number of graduates from said course. Which of course the recruiters don't want to happen.
Frankly the rate it is going, no one will be in skilled work in the UK soon as either everything gets "outsourced" or foreign "contractors" are brought in, instead of training local staff.
But then that doesn't fit in with your shiny fluffy world view does it?
I agree in getting rid of the 50% target, that was always a stupid idea.
I do not agree with increasing the prices and removing the budget caps! University is already far too expensive for the average person. However, I suppose i would be willing to agree to an increase in the cost of university degrees when all of those members of parliament who obtained there degrees back in the day when they were FREE, pay the current full fee for the degrees they obtained (plus interest naturally). Yeah not going to happen is it...
Lets face facts, the government in the UK wants to dumb down the entire population to the level of the daily fail reader so that there easier to maintain, so what do you expect - of course many UK degrees are effectively worthless. We cant have enlightened prollies can we?
A Title Is Required
While the aim of reducing the number of pointless degrees is laudable, their turn of phrase does make me very concerned as to what they regard as being a good degree course.
"develop the curriculum in a way which embeds employability skills in every degree course"
That would presumably include training on how to rape the English language with phrases such as "embeds employability skills". I've noticed, since I graduated, that a training in how to speak English correctly and make yourself understood counts for nothing. Whereas those who apparently did the modules in advanced bullshitting, how to look busy, and how walking everywhere very fast with a worried expression will make you look important are the ones who seem to progress.
Those last 3, if I'd known them when I left university, would have propelled me into the stratosphere of management and I'd probably be one of the people on this committee by now. But instead, as I turned out to have abilities, I'm still doing pretty much what I trained for in the first place. I am, apparently, extremely employable despite never having had 'employability skills' embedded into me.
I think (or I fervently hope) that what these people mean by 'employability skills' is simply 'skills'.
Surely there must be some sort of compromise here - you go to University for free/at a drastically reduced cost IF you're doing a worthwhile degree to fulfill a shortage in the country (ie, Nursing) AND you take a job in this country for a period of no less than xx number of years (ie, you work for the NHS for 5 years after graduation).
That way we get people not doing Mickey Mouse degrees, and working at their trained job in this country. They get a Uni education of high quality and it doesn't cost them much. Admittedly, needs fine-tuning to ensure people aren't pissing off just as they finish the on-the-job training....
Even just some sort of scale of fees, where the %age subsidy increases as the usefulness of the course increases. Anyone doing a pure science, engineering, medical or teacher training degree pays next to nothing... anyone doing politics, art history or sociology pays the full price plus a fee for wasting the Universities time!
This is very short sighted.
Also, degrees such as pure maths (on which all technological breakthroughs, amazing planes, war technology is based on), are under your criteria of being "fulfilling a shortage in the country", "micky mouse".
Business needs to f**k off and let universities get on with producing what they produce: research.
Undergraduates are just a grimey byproduct and are each as worthless as the next...regardless of degree.
... is pure maths "mickey mouse" or "fulfilling a shortage"?
It's only a suggestion - the actual degrees on the list will vary from time to time. But how many times have you heard the Government or professional body complaining abuot shortages of xxx? And how many times have you seen newspaper stories about "xxx being brought in from abroad"?
And while university research is a bloody good thing, without the eventual production of the grimey byproduct undergraduates, then who continues the research once the current lot kark it?
I'm just trying to say there must be a better way of doing things with a bit more segregation (naughty word in this day and age I know!) and granularity, rather than applying a broad-brush approach and making a mess of the entire system.
Too bad for the employers...
People do not exist solely to service the whims and requirements of a corporation.
who do I need to talk to about getting funding to do an MA on the animations of Walt Disney?
Mines the one with the Mouse ears on the hood.
Lack of vocational training
It's time to stop pretending that degrees are the same as vocational training - or more precisely that the purpose of a university is to train workers for their specific requirements.
What is sorely lacking in the UK is credible alternatives to degrees for vocational subjects. This is the real reason we get pseudo intellectualized degrees such as Golf Course Management, yet can't find a highly skilled building contractor that hasn't come from Eastern Europe.
Keep the university system for theoretical, academic subjects, and use vocational options, such as modern apprenticeships to drive up participation.
Degrees have always be awarded for what some call "vocational subjects". Politicans (and perhaps you) are very confused about what all current universities have ever offered. For example, former polytechnics have never offered degrees in being a car mechanic, hair dresser, etc and the commentards at the BBC (who apparently never went to University or a polytechnic and have chips on their shoulders) constantly waffle on about the sanctity of degrees. People have ALWAYS earned degrees at these institutions for subjects like engineering and sciences. Where do you draw the line between vocational biology and academic biology? When does engineering and computer science stop being a vocation and start being academic?
FE colleages need to deal (and DO deal!) with what the Tories and Labour think is 'vocational' stuff (like hair dressing, cooking, car mechanics, joining, plastering), and the universities need to deal with the rest - the stuff that mixes vocational and academic achievement. Oh, and the government has been slashing funding to FE colleges for decades.
As for the recruitment sector, I would rather ask the scum under my left toenail for it's assessment of the UK education sector. They are worse than conveyencers...and that says more than being worse than estate agents.
re. Lack of vocational training
I kind of agree with this post, but in the main I think that employers and business should be kept away from education.
Business only wants to cut its own costs; they aren't interested in people developing expertise in a subject or the ability to think for themselves, they just want cannon fodder employees who can operate the current generation of office productivity software.
Some degree courses are purely vocational (e.g. medicine), some are partly vocational (e.g. engineering) and some are non-vocational (e.g. some courses in the arts, but I'm not having a go here); however not everyone who gets a degree goes on to work in a related field, people have the freedom to change direction and pursue careers in a completely different field (Harry Hill anyone?).
Ironically I'm currently listening to "Brave New World" where everyone's career is decided before decanting - for Ford's sake, let's not go there eh?
It p*sses me off no end, as a thirty-something who decided to get straight into work after school, that employers & recruitment agencies now virtually demand a degree before even considering you as a candidate.
Never mind years & years of 'industry experience' and a proven track record - as you didn't waste three years ar$ing about pretending to study they you're deemed underqualified and of no use.
Agree with Daniel Garcia 2
I was in the penultimate year of the grant i.e.: before Liebour made a U-turn on their pledge to keep the grant - and looking back on it, I realise I should not have even made it into university, nevermind getting a degree! Some of the places I applied to wanted two E grades at A level - and these places are supposed to be the cream of the accademic crop!
The politicians seem to have it in whatever they have instead of brains that there should be "equality" - but we are all different, so a one-size-fits-all system is never going to work! Abolish tuition fees and bring back grants, and raise the entry requirements levels, so we end up with universities whose students are smart, want to study and are not burdened with having to cram in extra jobs or facing years of debt after graduating, rather than the free-for-all we have at the moment which has left degrees all but worthless and many in with debts that make the idea of work almost not worth their while, assuming they can actually get a job.
Fail. Because it's what the system has done. And, had the system been working, what I should have done.
Degrees seem to be worthless.
As an employer, I've found many people who apply for a job do not have the skills that their degrees actually say they have. "I have a pass with honours at English". OK, fill this form in and do a simple spelling test. Result? Most of them can't spell, many can't write in a legible manner, and some of them can't even read properly.
"I have a degree in maths". Try this (basic) maths test. Result? Half of them can't do simple maths or calculate how much change they would have to give someone unless they have a calculator to work it out on. Almost all are absolutely useless at mental arithmetic. Everything has to be written down, and the answer has to be worked out on a calculator!
So, stop all the mickey mouse degrees, and bring back a decent standard of teaching so these kids can read, write, and do sums. Oh, thinking about it, perhaps we should replace some of the teachers as well. A lot of them don't seem to be able to spell, or write in a legible manner, judging from various letters I've had from the schools my kids went to.
In short, education in general has taken a huge leap backwards over the last 30 years years.
EVERYONE should go to uni
After all if more people had gone from my age group there'd be even more people that I'm three years ahead of in my career.
The Graduate Syndrome...
... is what , as a manager, I used to call the influx of barely-literate graduates I was latterly obliged to accept direct from university, rather than skilled and talented people who had already proved themselves in the workplace but couldn't tick all the requisite squares on the Human Resources computer-generated application form. People who had been getting their knees brown in a workplace while their barely-pubescent new bosses had been playing student drinking games.
In my experience at least 50% of degrees awarded in this country are Mickey Mouse degrees. I've had Engineering graduates who couldn't tell me what Boyle's Law was. English graduates who couldn't write a page in Queen's English, even with a word processor and spell-checker. Management graduates who couldn't organise a booze-up in a brewery.
Worst of all was the common assumption with such types that - if university-educated people couldn't come up with an answer to a problem - that simply proved the problem was insoluble. A situation common throughout government and upper management these days. Almost invariably, they were and are wrong.
In my book, education - especially higher education - is MEANT to be divisive. That's it's purpose, as long as the division is by educational excellence and not parental income. Education - like money - suffers from inflation. Forget that and a job market unable to assess employees by educational 'standards' simply finds its own level.
When I started my career my job required a few good O-Levels. By the time I retired they required graduates - and the comparison was woeful. Better the best of a lower education stream than the worst of the upper.
Degree or common sense
Working at the same company now for 11 years, I've seen my fair share of students waiving their degrees saying "look at me, look how clever I am!"
It's a shame that most of them have no common sense at all after doing a Mickey Mouse degree in Fruit Flies. They may well have spent the past 3 years in University, but they're pretty dim with everyday office based tasks, or throw a hissy fit when the Magic Box doesn't work as it should.
So taxes have gone up but now the middle classes are expected to pay for uni on top? Why? How about cutting the tax if you want me to then pay for the goods. Fucking socialists.
Several issues here
1) Who kept telling the government "we need more graduates"? Was it maybe the CBI (employers), and did they perhaps figure, with the supply increased, they could pick the best, pay them less and chuck the rest on the scrap heap?
2) "Parents and students should be encouraged to save ..." for education, retirement, long term care ... etc etc. Makes you wonder what disposable income most people would have left to spend now. Who benefits? The financial services industry, selling investment schemes, that mostly fail to deliver what they promise.
3) The promise was that increased takeup of higher education would enable us to take advantage of the "knowledge economy". Where have those jobs gone? To eastern Europe, India and the Far East, not because those people are cleverer or better educated, but because they're cheaper.
We should be funding people that do 'real' degrees like sciences etc, as long as they are doing the course and getting decent grades.
We should be encouraging people to do subjects like nursing/teaching by giving them an interest free student loan that is automatically paid of over 15 years of working in the public sector at no charge to them. If they go to work in the private sector they should have to pay back the fees.
But if you want to do things like French Lit. or Media Studies etc you should be paying for it yourself.
The 50% target was a stupid idea, we'd be better with a lower taget for Uni of people that will actually get something real from it, and start funding more apprenticeships for people that aren't suited for Uni.
Plus ca change ...
What a good idea - restricting the number of degree places. But instead of selecting candidates based on wealth, why not select them based on ability? And if you only have 10% of people going to Uni instead of 50%, maybe the government could afford to pay their tuition fees for them (after all, they're going to be the high earners who will return it all in tax), and perhaps even give them some cash to live on. Then maybe we should make A-levels and GCSEs much harder so that we can tell who the good kids are.
Ah - I seem to have accidentally re-invented the system we had 30 years ago when I was doing my funded, grant-laden degree. It worked OK then ... the system wasn't broken, and didn't need fixing.
It's called Grade Inflation
time was when they adjusted the bell curve to let a certain proportion of students get a certain level. But no that's not fair.
Result. More people, higher *apparent* grades but uncertain performance.
One *large* UK employer I was aware of did it this way in IT.
Interview 1) IT person + HR. Ensure candidate has adequate personal hygiene, doesn't drag knuckles on ground, attack random strangers etc.
Interview 2) Candidate placed in room with language manual, logged in PC, program spec and 2 hour clock. Program runs, they get job.
UK has traditionally had something of the "Gentlemen and players" environment. Like the City of London the gentlemen have degrees, the players tend to be more self taught. Emphasizing bits of papers looks to make measuring the "Success" in changing the system easier, but I doubt it will improve the outcomes.
Note employers *like* bits of paper, especially if it says "Microsoft" at the top. My experience of such things has been they might know everything there is to know about Business Server 5 (or whatever) as long as it is set up *exactly* how it reads in the training manual.
Move things about a bit and it's a case of "but that's not how the manual shows it."
Welcome to the real world. You may have been top dog in training, but in the Korean restaurant of life, you're just an ingredient.
Bon a petit.
Then stop demanding degrees!
I agree with the earlier AC about degrees being demanded. Employers only have themselves to blame here, they don't even consider you as an applicant unless you have a "degree".
So they make it so people have to do a Micky Mouse degree because otherwise they don't even get considered as an applicant for a job.
The best one I was was when I saw an advertised role for a "junior ICT Technician", labelled as earning only 14k PA, "good for school leaver" and "degree required".
Please give me a hit of the crack you are taking it must be really good stuff.
- Geek's Guide to Britain Kingston's aviation empire: From industry firsts to Airfix heroes
- Analysis Happy 2nd birthday, Windows 8 and Surface: Anatomy of a disaster
- Adobe spies on readers: EVERY DRM page turn leaked to base over SSL
- Analysis The future health of the internet comes down to ONE simple question…
- Lollipop unwrapped: Chromium WebView will update via Google Play