Aerospace graduates going into finance - annoyed!

[RatherBeOnVacation]

My DD wants to study aerospace / aeronautical engineering at university with a view to either building things to send into space or working for an F1 team. It’s all she wants to do and has huge amounts of work experience to support this (arranged herself in her spare time).

She went to the Imperial open day recently and was horrified to learn that 25% of their recent graduates went straight into finance. A lot of them never had any intention of carrying on in engineering when they started their degree. A bit of digging online and The Student Room is full of people talking about the same thing.

Is this really a thing?

I can understand being tempted by the money, particularly with debt levels. I also get deciding it’s not for you. But it’s a specialist degree and why are you studying it for four years if you have no intention of using it when you first start out? And 25%?????

I guess I’m just annoyed as offers are three / four A stars, or two A stars one A at most top ranking universities. It feels like genuine applicants are having places taken away from them.

Sorry, rant over.

Ok, let's agree that it's really annoying. What do you hope to be able to do about it OP?

OP, I see what you mean, but the thing to remember is that not all students applying will have the demonstrable track record of strong interest in the discipline that your DD has. The evidence of her genuine demonstrated passion for it - as long as it’s backed up with the top grades too - will improve her chances of getting an offer. And these kids are only what, 17 right now? They may want the joy of studying aerospace, and might be thinking right now that they’ll head in another direction but who knows if they will or not? And some of the ones going in determined to be true engineers may become disillusioned and head into finance.

Personally I’m glad that finance has people with the rigour of stem courses - a huge amount of it is brain training.
There are also “engineering for business” degrees out there - but you can’t blame kids for wanting to get onto the most challenging courses to demonstrate their calibre and learn at the highest pace.

@CurlyhairedAssassin Who is “they”? Who should increase pay? How?

Until it’s a protected profession it remains dumbed down in terms of earnings. As I said, anyone can describe themselves as an engineer. Many are technicians. Also some aspects of engineering pay far more - consultancy mostly. The buck stops here type of design. Consultants train well and can promote fairly quickly after CEng if engineer wants responsibility. Many don’t though.

Companies will compete with similar companies on salaries and of course young people starting out have to fit into the hierarchy of salaries. Most firms have a structure for salary increases and just giving huge increases, without increasing fees or sales, is impossible. That risks no work and bankruptcy. There are engineering grads who want the work and are willing to become more senior and earn more . It’s also possible to even run a company. Young people rarely see consider career progression at 22 and live in the “now”. Somebody will get to the top - why not them?

My DS went to the same presentation, though his interest is in physics. The fact that there is the potential of a career in finance if proceeding onto a PhD or industry is not feasible in 3-4 years was reassuring for him as he has no real idea how he will apply his degree. He is applying for summer training programmes and internships that offer a week in finance along side weeks in missile aeronautics and electronic engineering. The issue here is in your limited expectations of the career options a degree in her subject will offer her.

STOP THE PRESS - Young people change their mind!!

Who knew and how disgraceful all those pesky students taking up those degree courses.

It is a thing
DD2 is in the final year of an Economics degree . During the summer she did an internship in one of the top investment banks
There were interns who came from a variety of disciplines, namely ;Pharmacy, Law , Medicine , Biomedical Science Mechanical engineering .
All of these students wanted careers in finance because of the money

@Mycatissohandsome Obviously it doesn’t matter for the university. It matters for engineering firms though! Lack of the best grads can be problematic.

The best grads are the ones that love engineering. I work in a science / tech type company and we want our engineers to come in and spend years developing their engineering skills - of course many of them will move into management and broaden out into portfolio / finance / audit etc, but the ones who want to do that almost as soon as they’ve come in are annoying. And we don’t need an entire cohort from Imperial to choose from - just a good handful from across great universities. There are lots of engineering jobs but not as many as there are engineering grads, I think.

Not sure DH ever interviewed a grad from Imperial! I expect his consultancy was below their radar! They didn’t employ engineers to go into finance but if they were commercially savvy, so much the better.

To reiterate AGAIN for those of you failing to read all my other posts. I am not talking about those who change career paths after starting their degrees or get wooed by the money on graduation.

I am talking about those who apply with no intention of ever having a career in engineering and see it as a way of getting a rigorous degree at a top institution with the sole goal of going into investment banking.

It happens at these top universities. I am struggling with why these people are choosing a more vocational type degree?

Ffs. Does it actually matter? There are not enough jobs openings in many of those careers anyway. Who are you to dictate that 18yo should only be allowed to study a subject if they are planning to use it in a specific career?

Uni is about studying a subject you love, experiencing semi idependence in a supportive environment, and preparing yourself for the world of work. It’s the skills they acquire completing the degree and not necessarily the specific subject knowledge that prepares them for work - research, analytical, presentation, time management skills for example. Most 18yo have absolutely NO idea what they want to do when they graduate or, for that matter, as a career for the rest of their lives.

Why should it matter if they fancy a career in banking after a STEM degree? STEM degrees produce numerate critical thinkers that the industry appreciates. Just as those who study classics or hsitory have no intention in becoming teachers or academics but may be planning to go into the civil service, publishing or journalism.

You clearly have no understanding what university is actually about or how the real world works perceives and values degree level education.

Getting a great degree from a great university opens up doors. It enables students to enter the career they want to enter. Finance recruits numerate highly intelligent students, and engineering degrees are one way of those students demonstrating that they are one of those students. It may be a degree that plays to their strengths and enables them to demonstrate how smart they are. There are loads of transferable skills from engineering and it’s a v enjoyable degree. It’s not a wholly vocational course, much as you’d like it to be.

Engineering used to be considered vocational. All DHs friends became engineers and all but one stuck at it. The one who didn’t made a fortune but in a slightly “off” company - ambulance chaser. Takes all sorts. The degree engineers knew they would be doing that job and wanted that career. This was before the city big bang and finance seemed possible. I think they had fairly limited aspirations and none were exposed to the City and most probably didn’t know about finance or wanted it. DH enjoyed running his own company. I think some dc are natural engineers but others are take it or leave it! There’s far more degrees now there’s no control over what grads do.

Because investment banks need engineers!

Why is it so hard to understand this?

This is a weird take on it. It’s a degree which anyone who is good enough to get the grades/pass the interview (if applicable) can study. That’s true of all degrees surely, none of us are tied into anything unless you’re military-funded. I hardly know anyone with a degree in history, classics or English who is using their degree knowledge directly in every day life but they do use the critical thinking skills and written language skills and so on. I’m guessing there are lots of transferable skills between engineering and finance. If the aerospace engineering grads can afford to study the course, are happy to take on the debt and then want to go work in finance after, then that’s totally up to them isn’t it? You say why are they studying it for four years, well presumably because they are interested and enjoy it, and if you can afford it then what’s wrong with that? I have two bachelors degrees and only use one of them, but I really enjoyed studying the other one, should I not have been allowed to do the course because I later went into a different field?

Because there isn’t really a “finance” degree at many universities, economics being the nearest. And because city banking jobs need you to have a degree. And they like science and maths based degrees. So you need to do something in that type of area if you want to be a banker, and maybe you find aerospace engineering interesting and you’re good at it and want to study it at university. So that’s what you do.

How is aerospace engineering any more vocational than finance? If Im a student who wants to make $$$ in financial services, why wouldn't I choose a degree with high entry requirements (in order to signal intelligence) which also develops my STEM skills to a much greater extent than a finance/econ degree?

The decision makes perfect sense to me.

I think your main misunderstanding is that this is a vocational degree.
The other thing you aren’t appreciating is that all students will be choosing and are entitled to choose the degree that plays to their strengths and best fits their career priorities. As indeed your daughter is.
There’s nothing wrong with prioritising a high-paying job and it doesn’t make these students less worthy than your daughter.
You are at least embarrassing yourself anonymously on the internet but your daughter will be embarrassing herself in front of her peers if you encourage her in this attitude.

It has always been thus. Two of DH friends went in to finance and like him they have doctorates in engineering which they all did at Cambridge. Couple of decades on and they are incredibly wealthy. I think engineering is viewed as having some of the cleverest people studying it. DH is certainly making a very good living in engineering but not at the levels they are. I also know someone who works in finance who has a PhD in physics.

AGAIN for you, engineering degrees whilst leading to further vocational training, are not vocational in their own right. Anyone can chose to study them without the plan of pursuing a career in engineering.

Some people taking the degree with the plan to go into finance might fall in love with the subject and end up in engineering firms.

What a lot of angst!

Maybe but this means less competition for your daughter when she applies for jobs

I’m a recruiter and have some experience working with aerospace engineers. Yes some will end up working in finance but there are plenty of (well paid) opportunities for aerospace engineers. Great career option IMO!

To reiterate AGAIN .. if they enjoy the subject why shouldn't they study it?

What do think should happen differently?

This. We don’t really want people with a ‘finance’ or ‘business’ degree.

Engineering is not vocational. It’s a degree with many lucrative career paths, people are smart to chose it, for whatever end purpose they want.