I agree. Masters in general are a funny degree, as they serve so many purposes...
Many people I know took them just to put off work for another year or two, or because they didn't secure a job, and carrying on studying was more respectable then being unemployed
A few people took them out of passion for their study/academia
The third group of people.. Ill cal lthem the late-maturers.. they took them because they 'grew up' later then normal.. maybe they messed up their ALevels, but are reasonably clever, got into an average university, and then decided to turn their life around. A masters is a good way to do this.
The 4th group are those who leave university, enter the workforce, and then return to study a masters years later beaus its a necessity or it will help them in their current career.
---
Generally speaking I am suspicious about anyone who does a masters straight after their undergraduate degree, and doesn't intend to go into academia.. it screams avoiding work or cant get a job.
Its always worth remembering those who go back to studying after working for a few years though, as masters taken into account work and life experiences as well as just grades to a much higher degree then undergraduate degrees. Take me for example, My undergraduate degree is very average, but I have approaching 4 years experience running my own company in my field. When I was applying for part-time master courses, this was a huge boost, and after learning about my work, my past education became largely ignored.
(I also agree that PHD goes back to better reflecting undergrads)
Overall, If I were in charge I would shake up the masters structure a bit, and devide it into multiple different courses that better fit the people studying them. Have 1 course heavily academic, with high requirements, for those wanting to move on to doctoral study. Have another that is more pratical, flexible, and focused on developing skills ready for working etc. Make sure they are very distinct so people know what they are getting.