Why are over 2,000 engineering graduates out of work or in jobs that don’t need degrees asks Charlie Ball, Prospects’ Head of Higher Education Intelligence?
This year’s issue of Prospects’ ‘What do graduates do?’ analyses data from the HESA Destination of Leavers of Higher Education survey to chart what happened to last year’s graduates six months after leaving university. The engineering data shows a familiar situation – a tale of high employment of subjects in considerable demand, but with pockets of underemployment. What is going on when employers are crying out for engineers?
Last year, 16,025 engineering first degrees were awarded (this includes 4 year MEngs as well as 3 year BEngs – 37% of these degrees were 4 year awards). We know what happened to 12,880 of them. Around 75% (9,675) went into work (some combined work with study) and 65.5% (6,340) were working as engineers or technicians. So, straight away, a third of working engineering graduates were not working as engineers.
It’s a common assumption that engineers are moving to the finance industry. While that does happen, it’s not especially widespread – around 10% of those working at most. More concerning is that nearly 1,300 engineering graduates worked in roles that didn’t require a degree. And engineering graduates entered a huge range of other roles too.
Another 1,810 graduates took another degree – this group were largely 3 year engineering graduates taking a Masters in engineering (mechanical, civil and chemical the most popular specialisms) with about a quarter taking a PhD. A small number take Masters in finance and business, but again whilst a consistent leak in the pipeline, it is not a mass movement.
A further 6.7% of graduates were unemployed, although about one in six had a future job lined up.
Why are over 2,000 engineering graduates out of work or in jobs that don’t need degrees?
Nearly a quarter of last year’s unemployed engineering graduates had a First
The simple answer could be that many engineering graduates don’t have the skills for the jobs market and so are not attractive to employers. There’s no question that not every graduate, even in a high demand field like engineering, is going to be equipped with the skills or mindset employers want right away. But nearly 40% of unemployed engineers had those coveted MEngs. The majority had a 2:1 or above. Nearly a quarter of last year’s unemployed engineering graduates had a First. They can’t all be unemployable.
So what else is there? Unfortunately nearly 45% of all unemployed engineering graduates were from a BME background. Engineering is one of the more diverse degrees – 27% of graduates were BME last year. This would be a real feather in the industry’s cap if it weren’t for the uncomfortable fact that BME graduates are significantly more likely to be out of work than their white counterparts. The industry is doing well at attracting a diverse undergraduate intake, but perhaps less well at equality on graduation.
Another factor is geography. Last year the Midlands, the South West and Scotland were where engineering made up the largest proportion of the new graduate workforce. While there were more engineering jobs in London than anywhere else in the country, the sector had the lowest share of the jobs market. Over 20% of all under or unemployed engineering graduates were from London.
This is an issue because graduates are not as mobile as people think. Last year, 58% of graduates went to work in the region they studied in and 69% went to work in the region they were originally domiciled – because 45% never moved at all, they went to institutions close to home and stayed locally to work.
This means that if you are an industry with a lot of large, dispersed sites outside traditional graduate employment hotspots then you need to convince graduates not just to join your industry, but to move to the places where you are located because those places don’t supply enough engineers to meet demand.
Organisations need to learn how to convince talented young engineers from London to leave their home cities for places like Derby, Coventry, Southampton and Plymouth. Engineering graduates do want to be engineers, but often they want to be engineers in London, and we need to convince them to be engineers elsewhere as well.
To meet the skills shortage, companies also need to consider other routes into engineering. A common route into engineering is a three-year engineering degree and then a Masters. Why not make it easier for graduates with the right maths skills to get an engineering qualification? It would be an interesting reversal if the management consultants started complaining that their quantitative trainees were being poached by engineering firms, with their excellent training, interesting responsibilities and decent rates of pay. We know engineering roles can’t always compete on pay, but there is also the benefits of quality of life, training and employment that compare favourably with auditors or financial analysts.
If we have a pipe that’s leaking, we call for an engineer to fix it. The sector has its own leaky pipeline, so who better to get it patched up properly?
Charlie Ball is Head of Higher Education Intelligence at Prospects which is owned by the registered charity Higher Education Careers Services Unit (HECSU).
“If we have a pipe that’s leaking, we call for an engineer to fix it.” Do we, or do we call a plumber? Professional Engineering still has its identity problem if this is the perception of a top Prospects person – what is his background as a matter of interest? Is he the right person to be representing employers of professional engineers?
Not all jobs need degrees, indeed vocational qualifications are often more than sufficient, and frequently superior. Part of the problem is the education system promoting the acquisition of a degree as being the be all and end all of education guaranteed to lead to a rosy well paid career for life. Many people are pushed into this level of higher education and therefore will choose something that seems attractive at the time, or they think it might be the easiest route to getting a ‘degree’. Many employers are not particularly discerning either and as long as someone has a degree they are deemed readily trainable and adaptable to other disciplines, in contrast to their less well papered counterparts. The possession of a degree has an element of snobbishness to it, and it would be far better developing superior skills and relevant qualifications in the course of a working life rather than before it starts. This would mean people actually gaining a qualification in something they are interested in, is useful in their future jobs and minimises the waste of over training too many, and would provide resources for those who actually want to use the training. Elimination of wasted resources is a common business need, so why train more people than there are jobs available?
The vast majority jobs in this sector are for Engineers with experience. There are very few openings for new graduates.
That is unfortunately true! When I graduated myself, I found that despite the cry for shortages in the engineering sector most of the jobs that were going were for qualified engineers or native English born engineers particularly the nuclear and defense sector. I went as far as the final picks for Sellafield but lost out on the role (was put on the waiting list) as conducting the security clearance etc was going to be too troublesome than getting someone they knew would fly through the clearance with ease. The jobs are indeed there, but not for the skill level and background of the majority of people graduating as engineers.
The correct route could well be get your B Eng, then get some work experience, then M Eng later. Unfortunately the higher the initial qualification, the less employable you become (generally).
This is a good article –and good to see some figures, although it is possible to interpret the figures in different ways or at least dig deeper eg on BME. Good to see that the myth of everyone going into finance is busted too.
On a personal note, I studied an engineering related degree (Aeronautics) but then spent a year or two on other things, then post grad work and then returning back after 5 years to work at BAe, although on the computing side, but with the engineering back ground useful as an intellectual rather than direct skills input, but something that I believed allowed me to do my job better. The intellectual side has helped me throughout my career, the skills one less, because I had to learn new skills.
Finally on persuading young Londoners to move out of London. Good luck with that. If I could have afforded it I would would have rather been working and living in London, since it is one of the worlds’ greatest 2 or 3 cities, at least in the English speaking world. Young people think that too and having been driven towards the creative industries in the 90s onwards by New Labour and then the newer culturally aware Cameronite/Osbourne Tories, who can blame them, as London is seen rightly or wrongly as the UK’s cultural centre. Even the Engineer is based there! Getting older engineers in late 20s/30s who are starting families may be a better idea, but even they would rather stay.
To be fair, The Engineer is based in London because a lot of publishing is based here, and most companies hold press conferences either here or a relatively short distance away.
Interesting that the BBC was forced to move significant operations out of London, C4 is now moving its HQ to Leeds and ITV is involved in media city MCR. I know it’s resources are limited, but maybe The Engineer should open a presence in say Sheffield, to kick start a non London (engineering) publishing media city? And manufacturing/engineering companies should also be encouraged to give briefings there. Some of the Beeb media luvies squealed a bit when they were forced to move, but they either left or ended up making a go of it.
Lovely idea Paul but – as you mention – I’m afraid we don’t have quite the same level of resources as BBC and C4!
Another point/idea. Science has the Science Media Centre** to help scientists communicate. May be we need an Engineering Media Centre. I know The RAcEng probably does some of this, but they may have the resources to launch a northern base? Engineers need help, from the basics (as you can tell I can barely string more than two sentences together…), to higher level communication (beyond just the use of social media) of concepts. I have been watching the recent BBC prog on Steel industry in Sheffield, fronted by Steph McGovern – vaguely entertaining but also a bit anti mass production and ‘crafty’/makery for me. And Steph Mc Govern studied engineering (tehy made a point ofit) but then left to go to the media. One person we could start with to work out why we have a leaky pipeline!? Can’t we develop our own people to front these programmes (and not then loose them to media glories!)
**http://www.sciencemediacentre.org/
The SMC performs an excellent service but I’m not sure it needs to be replicated for engineering. We regularly attend briefings at the SMC and engineers are generally well represented.
Part of the problem is the impression through film and the media that people can walk into highly paid jobs as soon as they graduate. Very little coverage of the need to generate several years of varied and relevant experience, and that is not helped as Ken says above, that it is very hard to get a job if you are over qualified for the role you are trying to get into. Hence developing qualifications along with real experience is the only sure way of moving ahead, unless someone is lucky!
I am reminded of the definition of a Professor: one who knows more and more about less and less until they know everything about nothing
Mike B, many of your comments are useful and shed light, but I think we should not reject this article in its entirety . Whilst I don’t agree with much of CBs analysis.(eg ‘The simple answer could be that many engineering graduates don’t have the skills for the jobs market and so are not attractive to employers’ yawn…), we have been running round in circles on this subject for a decade of more. We do need to analysis the data that organisations like Prospects have (a relation works there, so I know a bit about their history and what they do). I have a real problem about the term ‘pipeline’ as applied to humans ( I think in my day we referred to conveyor belts and sausage factories wrt careers) . If we are to really break out of the cycle of despair, we need to dig in to at least categories of young individuals thoughts and aspirations and this data may help make a start.
The great trouble with the concept of “Engineer” to most of the populace is the fact that when they buy an electric drill they suddenly assume that they are an Engineer. For too long the term has been associated with mechanics and not those that have to use their ingenuity to solve a problem.
Gosh lots of graduates with degrees but do any of those degrees include innovation?
Do any or even many engineering employers require innovation?
Engineering employers are looking for people who are:
a) willing and able to learn (a degree is supposed to demonstrate this), and
b) flexible and adaptable.
If a graduate is not prepared to move to a different part of the country, they may not meet the second requirement. When I left college, I applied for jobs all over Britain – even London – and ended up in Coventry (some 150 miles from where I grew up).
Reminds me of the chap who was “Brain of Britain” in the 80s and was ….unemployed!
Good point. British Gas (apparently) have 3000 ‘engineers’ driving round in vans ready to fix boilers and only yesterday I heard someone on the radio call themselves an “Agricultural Engineer” and then he explained how he went about digging a hole in the ground, with his digger, to bury an aeroplane in it.
And being in engineering is not the same as being an engineer!
Looking out of my window here in Prague I can immediately see signs of a shortage, not just of engineers, but of people. There are job adverts just everywhere. If I look at LinkedIn on my phone it tells me that there are more than a dozen jobs related to my profile in buildings I can see from my window. Not many of the 7 million tourists will see this, thanks to the language barrier, and even less will be tempted to learn what is one of the most complicated languages on the planet so as to take a job. But, at lunch times, I can see and hear the Indian (and many other nationalities that I can’t identify) engineers here on a three year visa. They tell me they’re having the time of their life, both in work and play. And no problem with the “engineer” title placed before your name on your business card. The guy who fixes my washing machine is certainly not an “inženýr”
You will have zero chance tempting engineers from London. Being based in London myself we find it much easier to recruit highly talented people than our sister Birmingham site. For engineering to succeed we need to break this issue where engineering jobs are in a remote industrial estate and/or less desirable locations. Sure the costs are going to be higher being in London or other desirable cities but you get to tap into an extremely talented pool of high achieving and innovative people.
Take a look at your team and particularly your research and innovation and question how they compare to other companies, sectors and even other nations. We have graduates through to highly experienced people creating many high impact patents every year (I’m onto my 6th so far this year). When I worked outside of London previously it was very difficult to innovate. The environment was poor and it a small focus of what the company did. When I moved to London suddenly the research was the top priority and I was exposed to what the rest of the world did and how they effectively carried out research. The culture and mentality was different to the previous 3 companies I had worked for. It was a pivotal point in my career and one that I’m unbelievably happy I did.
We should look at how we help companies into London and particularly help them break that low innovation mentality. A far more agile and startup mentality is required and tapping into London talent will give you that. It will revolutionise your business and its future direction.