|
|
 Originally Posted by The Bean Counter
You definitely need to ignore the £2bn part (which pays for new and replacment research facilities and other investments). 6% surplus is what matters.
Let's say we are the average institute. Income =100. Costs = 94. Surplus = 6.
Income opportunities are limited. Domestic fees are capped and research income fluctuates with grants. Income of 103 is realistic.
Staff costs are 47. 10% pay rise = 51.7.
Non-staff costs are 47. 10% inflation = 51.7.
Now we have a deficit of 0.4. So no investments are possible and debt is required, which is difficult to acquire if you expect to run at a deficit. Job losses are inevitable.
This is also the average institute. Many already run a deficit and have high levels of debt. Those institutes are going to have a big problem. It will be painful for the staff that work there.
I mean, I can make up some numbers that support my argument too. But if we go with the numbers from this:
https://www.ucu.org.uk/article/12941...e-to-negotiate
then sector income went from £44.1bn to £44.6bn last year, an increase of ~8%.
surplus was £2.6bn, highest in four years according to UCU. That's a 5.8% surplus
staff expenditures are 51% of income, a record low
increasing SE by 5% (which I assume both of us are ok with) would cost 1.14bn
The financial data covers the 2021/22 financial year, when RPI reached 12.3% and UCEA imposed a pay award of only 1.5%. Since 2009, a series of low pay awards have seen staff wages fall 25% behind inflation and UCEA has now also begun imposing a sub-inflation award worth just 5% for 2022/23. UCU is demanding a better pay offer that helps its members meet the cost-of-living crisis.
UCEA wrote to UCU last week to say it will not negotiate unless UCU calls off a marking and assessment boycott at 145 universities in the ongoing pay and conditions dispute. UCEA's failure to negotiate threatens to disrupt millions of exam results as well as the graduations of well over half a million students. Rather than use their wealth to pay staff fairly and settle the dispute, universities are threatening punitive pay deductions of up to 100% and trying to circumvent academic processes designed to uphold degree standards. Hundreds of academics have responded by raising concerns that degrees risk being devalued.
MPs and Lords from across the political spectrum have written to UCEA and signed a Westminster parliamentary motion to tell the employer body to withdraw the pay deductions and settle the dispute.
Again, I'm not blaming the unis for the gov't not providing enough money. But they need to get after the gov't for more money rather than just pretend the staff can live on less year after year, to the point of falling 25% behind inflation over 14 years. And if the buildings get more run down and the gym room has to settle for a rusty bench press machine until that happens, so be it.
The issue with the executive is not their gross pay, it's the idea that they're worth an above-inflation pay raise year after year but the rest of the staff isn't. Surely you can see why that rankles...
|
Reply With Quote
