Vice Chancellor's luxury lifestyle comes to an end - De Montford Watch

Joinedup
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#41
Report 2 weeks ago
#41
(Original post by TimmonaPortella)
Claiming as expenses, rather than receiving as set perks.

I'm not going to spend any more of my evening on this. Your approach to this is extremely woolly and seems largely based on what other people's visceral reaction might be.
Visceral reactions do in fact matter in the real world - people get pissed of every time they get a low pay raise and their boss gets a high pay raise. one or two years of bad pay rises might be acceptable if the employer is having a crisis, a decade of inflation busting executive pay rises while staff pay flatlines has a cumilative effect on morale. The boss is in effect saying that everyone else delivering the service has done a bad job but that the boss himself has been doing a super good job... and if that happens enough times on the trot there are consequences.

This chap was able to get lavish raises and perks while imposing a series of austerity level settlements on his staff and there's not much evidence that he was doing much to improve the university relative to it's peers* - it's pretty much where it was in the league tables when he took over and I predict it'll probably stay more or less the same under the new VC too.

OTOH the maligned super-headteachers do seem to be able to make a significant difference to the culture and performance of failing schools. Super executives can turn around a failing company in a year or two. VC's are not in the same category as these people even though they clearly like to flatter themselves that they are.

*course the peer universities have all been awarding huge VC pay rises
1
reply
Fullofsurprises
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#42
Report Thread starter 2 weeks ago
#42
(Original post by Joinedup)
OTOH the maligned super-headteachers do seem to be able to make a significant difference to the culture and performance of failing schools. Super executives can turn around a failing company in a year or two. VC's are not in the same category as these people even though they clearly like to flatter themselves that they are.

*course the peer universities have all been awarding huge VC pay rises
This. There's strong evidence of a widespread and gross disconnect between senior university management pay (and it isn't just the VCs, it's heads of depts and senior board-level executives generally) and performance, not least that a university can tumble in key indicators yet senior pay still shoots up.

There's clearly a need for university trustees and so on to become far more active on pay, but I think a few good university staff and student strikes on this issue would help focus minds. At the moment, a not inconsequential number of top managers are basically blood sucking parasites off the back of student-provided resources.
0
reply
Joinedup
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#43
Report 2 weeks ago
#43
(Original post by Fullofsurprises)
This. There's strong evidence of a widespread and gross disconnect between senior university management pay (and it isn't just the VCs, it's heads of depts and senior board-level executives generally) and performance, not least that a university can tumble in key indicators yet senior pay still shoots up.

There's clearly a need for university trustees and so on to become far more active on pay, but I think a few good university staff and student strikes on this issue would help focus minds. At the moment, a not inconsequential number of top managers are basically blood sucking parasites off the back of student-provided resources.
Arch Marxists such as errr Jo Johnson, tory MP and former universities minister, have been rather loudly and publicly cracking their knuckles at the universities for a few years... it almost seems like the effect has been to persuade VC's that the party will soon be over so they might as well grab it while they can... most of them are getting into early retirement territory age wise so they won't be particularly be upset to lose their jobs given the vast amounts of moolah they must have been salting away... what with their club memberships being paid for them and all.

That's a high pay problem even for people that really have earned huge salaries btw - if they can walk away and it won't really affect their lifestyle much, the people that they're working for... or more specifically decide their salary don't really have that much control on them.
0
reply
TimmonaPortella
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#44
Report 2 weeks ago
#44
(Original post by Fullofsurprises)
The point is that they actually approved (one assumes) a membership of the Ivy (amongst other things) as a perk for him, which is utterly ridiculous and wasteful of the university's resources and indicates an attitude of slurging and bling-hunger amongst both him and the other senior managers there.
Well, yes, they did, but they also approved his £350k salary. The cost of the club membership is therefore less than 1% of his salary.

I'm simply suggesting it's an odd thing to concentrate on. If you're objecting to his compensation package, obviously the salary is the thing that stands out.

I suspect that they were all pals together, signing off each others's bloated claims and lavish expenses. All part of the money-go-round that is today's university senior management roller coaster.
Well, maybe, but obviously expenses and perks are different things. An expense claim implies that it's a cost of doing business. It's required in the course of carrying out the role. A perk implies no such thing.

(Original post by Joinedup)
Visceral reactions do in fact matter in the real world
Of course they do, practically. Doesn't mean they're right.

- people get pissed of every time they get a low pay raise and their boss gets a high pay raise.
I'm sure they do. Again, doesn't mean they're right. You get what you're able to negotiate.

This chap was able to get lavish raises and perks while imposing a series of austerity level settlements on his staff and there's not much evidence that he was doing much to improve the university relative to it's peers* - it's pretty much where it was in the league tables when he took over and I predict it'll probably stay more or less the same under the new VC too.

OTOH the maligned super-headteachers do seem to be able to make a significant difference to the culture and performance of failing schools. Super executives can turn around a failing company in a year or two. VC's are not in the same category as these people even though they clearly like to flatter themselves that they are.

*course the peer universities have all been awarding huge VC pay rises
I don't necessarily disagree, but I'm not the DMU Board. I've restricted myself to saying that high pay isn't in itself a problem, which I maintain.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

How did your AQA GCSE Physics Paper 1 go?

Loved the paper - Feeling positive (492)
31.04%
The paper was reasonable (610)
38.49%
Not feeling great about that exam... (258)
16.28%
It was TERRIBLE (225)
14.2%

Watched Threads

View All