Generally, it helps in life to have rich parents. Yes, there are plenty examples of prominent bankers who don’t (Lloyd Blankfein, Ian Hannam). And yes, Goldman is known for its propensity to hire hungry people from ordinary backgrounds, but for every British banker from a council estate there are probably at least two who are solidly middle class.
In this climate, recruiters say having parents with money has become an important asset for financial services professionals who are trying to manage their careers.
As the pool of redundant bankers grows, people without parental money to back them up are being forced to accept whatever they’re given. People with parental money are able to be a lot more choosy.
“There’s a real dichotomy,” says one recruiter. “A lot of very good people are out of the market, but some of them are being very picky. They don’t want to just jump in and accept anything that will devalue their brand and detract from the fact that they’ve worked somewhere like Morgan Stanley.
“In many cases their parents are bankrolling them and they can afford to wait,” he adds.
On the other hand, he says redundant bankers with less wealthy parents are accepting positions with second or third tier houses simply so that they can get paid. This could impact their careers long-term.
Parentally-sustained redundant bankers can keep their CVs unsullied with lesser names and keep pitching themselves to the first tier. Non-parentally sustained bankers can’t