That's a really interesting article - thanks for the link. Not directly relevant to me, since getting a mean mark ~2% higher than yours apparently makes me somehow a class above you
, but interesting - I've always thought it's silly of universities to impose any kind of cut-off, seeing as a candidate who got a 2.2 from Oxford would probably have managed a 2.1 at a 'lesser' university - using a 2.1 as the gold standard seems to penalise people for being near the bottom of an excellent cohort, which doesn't seem fair.
When did the whole "2.1 = ESSENTIALWEAR" thing happen, anyway? My dad got a 2.2 in Politics from a mediocre university and managed to get a reasonably good job, back in the early 70s, and I have plenty of friends whose mums and dads tell a similar story.