QuitNotice:
I was just looking for the "minimum of 2.1" aspect, but wasn't disappointed though. Now, outta the thread...

That's another problem with recruiters.

While it is important to get the best hands for the job, it should be totally unethical to be on the extreme end by sidelining candidates with less than a 2.1 not giving them a chance at all. There should be an avenue where they try to empower people with less than 2.1, besides they went to school as well with the hope of pursuing a dream career.

For example I hear people say KPMG do well by recruiting hundreds of people in a year which may be considered some sort of CSR to the economy but if only the true ethical stance of this firm can be seen. They simply recruit this people expecting that they are the best and will make their business more profitable, however these days companies fail to understand that they have several stakeholders and their CSR stance should not only be based on what they can instrumentally get by doing so, but the fact that it is right to do so. I also laugh when i hear the word equal opportunity employer from these companies.

If every institution for example employs only those with 2.1 without giving others a chance. What happens to these other people, they should remain jobless for life? Won't they be tempted into Vices of some sort in order to survive as human and therefore ruin the society, possibly hunting the successful? (Except the few with entrepreneurial spirit)

We blame government everyday for several woes but if only we know how much power these companies have to solve these woes with ease then we would probably be having some claims on them too. Companies really need to be regulated when it comes to their selection criteria for recruitment.

If KPMG for example gives an equal opportunity for candidates to write the tests irrespective of their grade, that shows they are indeed an equal opportunity employer and we will be discovering several talents that may have been swept under the rug because they didn't make a 2.1.

Unfortunately they care more about what they can get by employing these candidates (so they employ the supposed best only to enhance profitability), ignoring the fact that companies should generally give back to the society without necessarily expecting something back. It will be important for example to employ few candidates every year that are above 25 years, with less than a 2.1.. e.t.c in the spirit of a social responsibility and adopting an ethical approach that reflects a normative view on stakeholders where it is simply right to give back rather than an instrumental view where it is proper to give back only when something is expected back in return.

haibe:
thats a very important requirement because it is a control that can reduce labor turnover. It ensures that they are employing those who really want to be in the accounting profession and not opportunists waiting for their "right job" and just passing time for a while. If you really want to be an accountant, you should have a Bsc in accounting, if not then you would have started your ICAN exams to still put yourself in the accounting line. Its wrong to just accept applications from every tom dick and harry simply because they they are very young or made good grades.

Unfortunately because i have known KPMG to be "not so smart" and inflexible in recruitment, i doubt they actually did put that requirement. All they typically want is cheap labour, if possible an 18 year old graduate in chem engineering from any university who will accept to work for a token. They don't look at the big picture, no wonder they normally have a massive labour turnover.

Going through this piece makes me laugh. Firstly KPMG pays all your fee and get you enrolled in any course necessary in the profession including ICAN. And as for cheap labour maybe you should inquire how much KPMG pays her GT and i bet your opinion will change.

2nioshine:


Going through this piece makes me laugh. Firstly KPMG pays all your fee and get you enrolled in any course necessary in the profession including ICAN. And as for cheap labour maybe you should inquire how much KPMG pays her GT and i bet your opinion will change.

You realised some of the candidates have not completed nysc? You then think they will be paid the normal fee? Dude i know what GTs collect at kpmg and its the 2nd lowest among the big 4 so i know what I'm talking abt.

Read the benefits: one says opportunity for immediate employment after ACA.. so you see they aren't really full staffs for now, so dont expect any full package. Again its a means to get cheap labor because these candidates will do the normal work a regular GT will do.

haibe:
You realised some of the candidates have not completed nysc? You then think they will be paid the normal fee? Dude i know what GTs collect at kpmg and its the 2nd lowest among the big 4 so i know what I'm talking abt.

Read the benefits: one says opportunity for immediate employment after ACA.. so you see they aren't really full staffs for now, so dont expect any full package. Again its a means to get cheap labor because these candidates will do the normal work a regular GT will do.

I have friends who got the job prior to their Nysc, some chose to pause the process till there were done with service(showing you how flexible the Scheme can be) and others who took the offer immediately got all their professional training including their accommodation paid for. If they is one thing i can tell you, working in KPMG is indeed a career fulfilling path for many. I can attest to that. Just my opinion tho