I would say 20 years of relevant experience in its own would be equivalent to a 2:1 degree for a job application.

Depends if there is any growth over the 20 years.

I’ve worked with people with 20+ years in a role who’ve only managed to gain 2 years experience. They’re really good at those 2 years though. They’ve done it 10 times…….

<span style=”color: #444444; font-size: 12px;”>I’ve worked with people with 20+ years in a role who’ve only managed to gain 2 years experience. They’re really good at those 2 years though. They’ve done it 10 times…….</span>

This – at least as regards to the value of experience. I’ve seen second-jobbers who have a broader commercial understanding gained from 18 months of work, than people coming in with five+ years in the same role / company / level.

Back to the OP – it depends on how senior the role is (at least in my experience). Although it’s a pretty lazy metric TBH – my company use it as a simple demonstration of rigor/application but I think it’s pretty meaningless when looking at anything other than a junior hire (where your available points of comparison/reference are fewer).

And FWIW my role requires a minimum of a Masters and 5-8 years experience in a fairly specific field of engineering.

I have neither.

I’d say that’s fine, I read it as they are not being too strict on qualifications as long as you can demonstrate you’re up to a certain level, a slightly lower grade and lots of  relevant experience I would say satisfies that. Relevant experience is often better if you can demonstrate you know what your doing in practice rather than on paper.

The only slight hitch is if the cv goes through HR screening rather than seen by the hiring manager, it could potentially get dropped on a technicality, but no harm in applying.

I know highly qualified people who are utterly useless, and people under qualified who are far better at thier jobs.

You have to look at the bigger picture with candidates, if you just look at ‘must have 2:1’ your really limiting who you might get.

Depends whether you get past Human Remains or not. 2:2 20 years ago does not equal 2:2 now. After 20 years degrees of minor importance.

depends if the want someone that knows what they are talking about, or someone that thinks they know what they are talking about! 😆

IMO. Strictly speaking no. Equivalent to means a degree from another country at a similar grade

It depends who’s sifting the applications. If they have many applications to go through then you having a 2:2 rather than a 2:1 could see you dropped at the first pass by admin in HR.

“Equivalent” is likely to refer to degrees from other countries that are equivalent or some other variation like HND plus a post grad or professional qualification.

The years of experience required for the role is no doubt specified elsewhere.

But that said you have to be in it to win it, so no harm in applying. Go for it

Just make sure you note either on your CV, covering letter or application that you have the equivalent of a 2:1 Degree so that it gets past any filtering.

Equivalent could also mean passing entrance examinations for some kind of professional body, such as CIOB if you are building.

I have a vague recollection of a degrees classification expiring in some way after a number of years. So you either have a degree, an honours degree or whatever. The actual numbers having expired.

As I say, this is a vague recollection of a discussion with on of my tutors nearly 30 years ago. …… just after I made a moderate cock up of my finals. …

Costs you nothing to apply, if you have the skills they want they will talk to you if not you can blame hr.

Currently sat in a bar pondering the new job i start tomorrow that I applied for on a whim from the other side of the world

This is very hard to answer without more information, but there could be a few things going on.

1: If they are looking for the capability to do the job then 20 years of experience usurps the 2:1/2:2

2: If they are stating the degree because they are seeing this as a job for someone who is fairly recently out of uni and on a sharp upwards curve then it would be an issue.  This means they see this as a job for someone who has taken 3-5 years, not 20, to get to this point, and are hoping for future progression.

3: It could just be an artefact of an existing job advert (very likely) or it’s something they stick on all adverts, just because.

4: It could be HR being HR and looking for something other than their own grey matter to whittle the CVs down.

In case of 1,3, and 4, if you don’t get a positive response then get on the phone.  Ask for the person that runs the site/office/whatever and have a chat.  If you don’t get through to them talk to number 2 or 3.  Believe it or not most companies quite like it when people show a real interest in joining and chase them down.  Don’t be weird or narky of course, that goes without saying!  There might be a good reason they’ve not picked you, the might tell you, they might not, but speaking on the phone is an excellent foot in the door.

Signed, ex recruiter and Head of Internal Recruitment.

As an interviewee, I just lie.  No-one’s ever checked.

As an interviewer, 20 years of job experience trumps degree.  Especially knowing that they might be as honest as I am