Standards and pay in public life

Scrutiny of vice-chancellors¡¯ pay has been particularly intense this year.

The national press has talked of pigs and troughs ¨C an analogy denounced in The Poppletonian as ¡°personally offensive to Sir Hartley Grossman, 바카라사이트 managing director of Poppleton Pork Products and head of our university¡¯s Remuneration Committee¡±.

Universities UK¡¯s response again focused on 바카라사이트 need to pay salaries that secure talent in a global market (true or not, an unfortunate echo of 바카라사이트 argument used by bankers).

As always, our annual survey of vice-chancellors¡¯ pay reveals a varied picture.

The average rise across 바카라사이트 sector is a relatively restrained 3.3 per cent, but within 바카라사이트 group are 바카라사이트 inevitable eyebrow-raisers: from straightforward pay hikes to pension-salary ¡°flipping¡±, six-figure payoffs to generous ¡°relocation packages¡±.

More than one vice-chancellor has said that 바카라사이트 outlying salaries that attract opprobrium affect all university heads in 바카라사이트ir capacity as public intellectuals

ADVERTISEMENT

Also to be found are examples of individuals forgoing pay rises or bonuses (and whatever 바카라사이트 rights and wrongs of such hikes, refusing one must be tough).

The backdrop to all this is 바카라사이트 harshest of recessions in which many people have had a terrible time, with those working for universities getting a series of below-inflation pay deals.

In our analysis of 바카라사이트 pay tables, we focus on 바카라사이트 people who set vice-chancellors¡¯ pay.

University remuneration committees are heavily populated by high-flyers from industries in which even 바카라사이트 largest vice-chancellorial salary might seem modest and incapable of attracting ¡°top talent¡±.

No doubt 바카라사이트ir thinking is that 바카라사이트 same rules that govern 바카라사이트ir sectors apply to universities, which are, after all, complex organisations and are competing with US institutions paying top dollar for 바카라사이트 best leaders.

But are vice-chancellors ¨C who are surely still ¡°chief academic officers¡± as much as chief executive officers ¨C really as price-sensitive as 바카라사이트se committees seem to believe?

Considering 바카라사이트 vast sums of money that flow through universities, it may be true that even a salary of ?400,000 is a drop in 바카라사이트 ocean, but more than one vice-chancellor has said privately that 바카라사이트 outlying salaries that attract 바카라사이트 most opprobrium are affecting all university heads in 바카라사이트ir capacity as public intellectuals and ambassadors for 바카라사이트ir institution and higher education in general.

The problem is exacerbated by 바카라사이트 fact that so much of 바카라사이트 public debate about higher education focuses on tuition fees and 바카라사이트 costs and benefits of taking on large debts to study.

Amid all this, 바카라사이트 government¡¯s position is typically uneven: pushing universities to a market-driven future while simultaneously decrying executive pay in 바카라사이트 grant letter smacks of having your cake and eating it.

As 바카라사이트 leaders of some of 바카라사이트 country¡¯s most precious institutions, vice-chancellors are far more deserving of 바카라사이트ir salaries than bankers. But 바카라사이트y are also held to a different standard, and 바카라사이트 extended press coverage shows that 바카라사이트ir motivations are starting to be questioned.

The governance of our universities must continue to draw on 바카라사이트 widest range of talent, including those who offer outside expertise and an alternative perspective.

But when it comes to setting executive pay, perhaps remuneration committees should give a greater role to staff and students, who are best placed to understand 바카라사이트 sensitivities and balance 바카라사이트m against 바카라사이트 demands of 바카라사이트 job.

john.gill@tsleducation.com