How important would a Russell Group uni be to your employer?

[paygride]

I work for a well known global company, employs about 2000 in UK. I was speaking to someone from our People team about how important it is for a candidate to have attended a Russell Group unti and she said it wasn't something that was especially relevant when they were looking at CVs and a few young people have joined our team recently and only one of them attended a RG uni (she did go to Cambridge). I spoke to DH about this and he works for another global company (totally different sector) and he said it's not something he looks for when he's been recruiting either. What they both said is they were bothing looking for 'something extra' (well my People officer actually described it as a 'sprinkling of fairy dust'.)

By contrast I worked for a Consultancy firm in the city and they pretty much only recruited people from Oxbridge, much smaller firm and pretty much all their business was UK based, huhe salaries and huge bonuses (which defintely isn't across the board where I work but lots very senior of people on high salaries).

DS is going to be applying to Unis and is fixed on the idea of a RG uni even though some non RG unis (Lancaster & Leicester) seem to be offering much more interesting courses in his chosen field but he will only apply to the RG unis.

Interested to know what others think. .

As regards UK rankings, bear in mind that the differences can be in a metric that may not be of huge value. For example, employment stats are only relevant if they refer to graduate-level employment rather than just any employment, research quality is interesting but only relevant to undergraduates if the people carrying out the exciting research are actually lecturing-tutoring them.

And to return to a hobbyhorse of mine, entry standards tells you something about the academic qualifications of those going to a university - they don’t really tell you anything about the people graduating 3/4 years later. Higher A level grades are useful in so far as they give you more choices when applying to university, but once you have a degree the majority of employers won’t give a monkey’s about your A level grades.

@thing47 It can though. Stats show a whole bank of post 92 universities have grads that don’t earn what RG and RG plus ones do and find it hard to get those really high paying jobs. If it equals out how does that happen if employers don’t care about university? I think they do and skills acquired begin to matter as well. Some courses are better than others and they are not all equivalent. Employers probably do think a LSE grad was better than a Wolverhampton grad. Why wouldn’t they? However if you want to be a dr nearly all medical schools have 99/100% employability so the nhs employs nearly everyone, eventually! All at the same salary too!

@Parker231whilst passing exams first time doesn’t make a good doctor, you would know passing exams are important to progress in your career.

What makes a good employee as a doctor is another debate altogether…….

@Parker231 also interested to know what proportion of your grad scheme entrants are non RG as you said you hire entirely on your own testing and are uni blind

It’s not information provided by candidates or successful employees so unless we discuss it, I wouldn’t know. I’ve a couple who have stood out - one went to UEA and another Dundee.

I don’t equate ‘good’ with ‘high-paying’ when it comes to jobs. No one in my immediate family is much motivated by money in the way that perhaps those who choose legal or financial careers may be.

Perhaps that makes us unusual, but I think a lot of people have income as only one part - and not necessarily the biggest part - of what motivates them. But neither me nor DH nor any of our 3 DCs have that mindset and we are all in quite different fields of work.

@thing47 That depends on where you live and whether you expect dc to leave home and how you think they can afford children etc. It’s a great worry to lots of people these days. You are indeed blessed if you live in a wonderful area,(you do) without needing well paid jobs. Are you dc buying near you?

I could have written your post @thing47 That pretty much sums up our family and friends and DD's friends.

All of DD's friends have jobs that could be seen as ones that are more vocational or community minded - police, social work, prison service, nursing and other healthcare services. DD will also be in healthcare once she qualifies. None of them lack ambition. They just have no interest in law or finance.

We don't live in London or the south east and DD is hoping to move back to Newcastle where she did her undergraduate degree. She particularly dislikes London.

One has bought in this area, one rents in it and one doesn’t live in the UK. I admit 2 lived with us until they were in their mid-20s so had a chance to save, but we loved having them live at home, unlike many on MN it seems 😁

Well buying in your area is very expensive and they needed a good job to save up didn’t they? I’m sure you were a generous parent and paid for nearly everything and, truthfully, your dc are privileged. As are mine. It’s a privilege to have enough to buy a property at 25. I’m sure you realise a teacher on £40,000 won’t be able to buy where we live. Many parents worry about this and do need dc to earn more. Parents don’t have the luxury of money to help out whilst dc save up and avoid them whopping rent payments. In many families earning money matters.

I work for a large global company and it’s not something we would look for or think was particularly important.
Would perhaps get a plus point but other things like relevant experience and qualifications would be far more important

I went to a RG uni. I recruit for NHS. None one mentions the status of the uni, ever. Some of our best staff didn't attend a RH uni. We look for best candidate regarding qualifications, experience, skills and best fit with team

none whatsoever. my profession/career requires an rics accredited degree, we dont care where you got it as long as you got one.

@thing47if you don’t mind me asking what fields are you all in? It sounds as though all have well paying jobs despite not making it a priority. It’s amazing what peer group and subconscious will influence though.

none whatsoever. my profession/career requires an rics accredited degree, we dont care where you got it as long as you got one.
Last time I looked, there was no such thing as a RICS-accredited degree run by an RG University. Has that changed?

Doubt most people dealing with recruitment at my most recent workplace would even know what that meant.

I think a lot of comments on these HE threads come across as ' If you can't work in a Big 4 finance/law etc job and earn 6 figures by the time you're 30 why bother going to University- just go work in a shop at 16' or 'get an apprenticeship- we need plumbers' as if everyone else's only point in life is to service the people at the top- not pursue careers they are interested in or enjoy or might even be good at despite shock horror not getting 3 A stars at A Level! The jobs at the top are very few, which is why they are at the top. Good for DC's who get those jobs. We also need thousands more other people doing other jobs below that level.

@RainbowBagels Yes but many grads want a house, want a career with prospects and cannot keep living at home with parents for 20 years because they cannot afford to move on. If they don’t care and have oodles of parent money or inherited money, great, but for others pairing career and future needs matters. Of course the majority of grads sit in the middle in terms of earnings but for many, a grad salary is £25,000. With the best will in the world this is not great for future independence. Lots of careers paying this should not need degrees at all. Sadly it’s the norm and it’s not unusual in London either. DC going on some degrees do need to understand future earnings might be limited. So is it wise to do the degree or do training another way.

Maybe some degrees paying £25k should not be graduate degrees but they are. It is always young people that are blamed for it when really organisations have neither the time or the inclination to train young people. They are the ones who aren't employing young people who just have A Levels or providing them with apprenticeships or are advertising jobs as non graduate then only considering graduates. A £25k starting salary won't get a house but it may be a start that that young person may not get if they hadn't got a degree. They may quickly go on to earn more. Most graduates don't live in London, many can live at home earning £25k for a year or two until they get a better job/ save for a deposit. The estimate is now that most young people will pay off their student loans. So the majority won't stay on £25k forever. Careers with prospects come in many forms. Not just working in corporate law or accounting (much of which is highly vulnerable to AI) and people who didn't go to RG universities also have careers and prospects. They don't all work in McDonalds!

I agree with you.

These threads do tend to attract the most vociferous high earners who work in finance or law in London.

DD will be in a healthcare position when she qualifies (not in London).

I also meant to add that there is a range of grad salaries. It isn't £25k in a provincial office vs £50k plus in a law/finance job in London.

A lot of starting salaries in engineering, for example, are higher than £25k.

Universities need to be offering far fewer places on accounting, finance and law courses. There are already too many leaving Uni without a training place and the junior roles are going to be badly hit due to AI.
A much better use of the money would be apprenticeships in trades - a big shortage nationally and actually needed.

DD is doing a post grad course for a healthcare position that is in short supply, although the NHS needs to be able to fund these places.

This has always been the case. Especially in Law. About 1/3 of Law grads don't go into Law, and about half of grads that do go into Law are grads of other subjects. There are solicitors and paralegal apprenticeships. They are like hens teeth and extremely difficult to get.
Re apprenticeships in trades. The issue isn't funding. It's staffing. There is a lot of demand for courses and there is money available. The problem is that you can't just rock up and rewire a plug. You need someone to teach you how to be an electrician. Electricians firstly would have to take a massive pay cut to work in FE ( which not enough of them want to do) and teach young people. Then electricians ( and other tradies) would need to commit to taking on an apprentice, paying them and taking the time to teach them skills on the job. Which many can't or won't do because either they are too busy or they are self employed and don't have the time.
Quite apart from that, 53% of young people don't go to University. Why would you force kids who ( for example) want to study an academic subject to learn how to be a plumber when the main problem with youth unemployment, people not being trained into fulfilling careers and not learning a skill is among young people who have a below Level 3 attainment level? Apprenticeships in the trades are not degree level apprenticeships. They are not an alternative to University. They are Level 2 and 3. They are designed to give fulfilling careers to people who do not want to or are not able to go onto further academic study. The majority of young people.