I, too, am a 3rd class graduate. Not only that, I actually failed a couple of subjects (multiple times in some cases) and got pushed back a year due to very dismal results. The humiliation that I endured, entirely through my own faults, was rather great. To make a long story short, I graduated a year later than my colleagues who scored much better grades than I did. I suffered greatly during my uni years because I simply hated the position I was put in. Plain and simple.

Fast forward 2 months......

I'm now working for a prolific IT firm, earning a more comfortable sum and set of benefits compared to my other university colleagues who were more booksmart. The only reasons I can think of? It's either because I'm more confident, have more hands-on experience, much less arragont and demanding, or better spoken than they are. The thing is, a 1st and 2nd rate degree isn't necessarily an automatic ticket to a good job. It's the amount of work applicable knowledge you have in that skull of yours that counts. Would an employer hire:

A) a 3rd class, well-dressed, down to earth guy who can troubleshoot virtually any Windows/OS related problem, build a PC from scratch in 10 minutes, melt his customers like cheese on a hot knife and work like a steroid-pumped bull

OR

B) a 1st Class Honours, arragont and ultra-demanding kiddo who attends the interview dressed like a disco reject, whose PC knowledge revolves only around CS and DOTA, acts like the world owes him a favour, and sleeps on the job more than a 3 month old toddler?

I've actually seen a lot of the B) type candidate during my uni years. Some 2nd Class Upper candidates I know can't even install a fresh copy of Windows, format or partition a HDD, or even update an anti-virus software's definitions. I'm not trying to glorify myself as a lower ranking bum, but merely to show all those dejected 3rd Class graduates out there that just because you don't look good on paper, doesn't mean you can't get a decent job or excel in your career. It's your attitude towards your future career that matters most.

That's quite true, but I'd like to think that a good resume is what large companies filter through the pile of garbage they get. A diamond in the rough, so to speak. Think of it as a very good preview for your prospective employer to gauge how well you communicate, how good your grammar and vocab are, and how convincing you can be. If your English is excellent, it's possible to overtake even the most promising guy who's got a good degree but crappy communication skills.

I've been counting on my resume as my ONE AND ONLY trump card in getting even an interview. Don't get me wrong, my resume is by no means the greatest out there, but I try to write my resume as straightforward as possible. No beating around the bush, no unnecessary information that will give even Sherlock Holmes a 2-week migraine attack, and certainly no unneccesary sob story on why you want the job. If you can't even make good sense about what you want and expect of your company, you're basically wasting the employers time, earning your resume a one-way ticket to the shredder.

I agree on the part that CGPA is very important in securing jobs in high-profile companies. I notice that such compaines tend to be ones involved in R&D, corporate players and those who rely heavily on new innovation to progress. Siemens is one of them, IIRC, because they pooh-poohed my application right away when they heard I got less than 3.0 (this was during my internship). Who can blame them? R&D is a very touchy field where new and better ideas are crucial to their survival. It's the ability to think critically for long periods of time that matters most to such companies.

With regards to the bolded statement:

Back in my uni, most of the high scorers are genuinely smart. Make no mistake about that. Their killer blow is their propensity to work much harder than their rivals as well. It's what you call the ultimate combo. It's smart AND hardworking people like these that possess the best of both worlds, and that's why they have jobs running after them, not the other way round. An E&E faculty acquaintance of mine actually had 4 big-shot companies (Intel included) calling HIM for recruitment because of his superb results, plus he's really smart. Some people have it all.

3rd Class Degree holders aren't actually lazy. They just lack the physical drive to do something that clashes with their interest (I know, because I'm one of them). If you force a whizgeek to do anything other than building and overclocking PCs, what are the chances he'd do it wholeheartedly? Zilch. They also tend to be ones who 'live for the day, leave the rest for tomorrow'. They possess the right material for success (dilligence, streetsmarts, survival instincts and a undemanding stance), but not the ability to see far ahead. Perhaps we can tag this attitude as being lazy, lazy to think about the future, that is.

I don't think it's right to lump 3rd Class Degree students with lazy people in general. Most of these students make a 180 degree turn when they start their career because they're not working for intangible numbers (exam results and grades) anymore. They have to work hard for the 'bling-bling', tangible figures in the bank account, and that's why we shouldn't be surprised when some lazy punk turns into a hustler at the end of the day. Cutting of their allowance sure works miracles. Hey, think about it this way: if a student is truly lazy, how did he manage to get a degree at all? He could have just slacked off and got his sorry a$$ kicked out right away. THAT'S genuine laziness.

Ho ho ho......thanks. I'm happy for your compliments.