“Nigel Thrift does have a say over his pay”

Nigel Thrift can or does have a say over his pay and it is unsurprising that people call his pay into question, Students’ Union (SU) president Cat Turhan wrote in a blog post last Thursday, 15 January.

Ms Turhan’s remarks over the vice-chancellor’s pay comes at a time when Prof Thrift’s recent knighthood, and pay, has been a subject of controversy.

Last year, Prof Thrift’s annual salary increased by 4.8 percent (£16,000) to £348,000 – an increment figure above the inflation rate of under 3 percent.

In the summer of 2013 and January 2014, there was controversy over Prof Thrift’s pay rises of £42,000 for 2011/12, and of £16,000 for 2012/13. In the last three years since 2010/11, Prof Thrift’s salary has increased by 27 percent.

Nigel Thrift’s pay over the last five years, photo: Ann Yip

Ms Turhan argued that though vice-chancellors across the country claim that they have no say over their salary which is set by separate remuneration committees, they still have an influence over the decision of their pay.

She pointed towards the fact that, unlike conventional practices of employee performance evaluation, it is the vice-chancellors themselves who present reports to remuneration committees which detail their achievements and objectives. It is these reports that determine their pay recommendations.

She said that in these reports, any detrimental impacts or connotations in the long-run are not acknowledged and that no student representatives sit on this remuneration committee.

In the context of Prof Thrift’s recent pay rises, pay recommendations have to be approved by the University Council, on which two SU representatives sit.

VC Thrift’s pay recommendations were “snuck into papers presented to University Council at short notice”

Ms Turhan however claimed that the proposals on VC Thrift’s pay were “snuck into papers presented to University Council at short notice.”

She wrote: “The two Sabbatical Officers who sat on this body at the time were not given a chance to review these properly, but were instead told that the resolution had to pass that evening.”

The University responded to Ms Turhan’s post: “As we have said many times the vice-chancellor plays no part in the deliberations of the Remuneration Committee in deciding his salary.

“The Remuneration Committee gives its report to the Council which has two student representatives. The Remuneration committee reports to the Council have not in any way altered in their form, structure or timing.”

When people perceive him to be rewarded in the context of people losing jobs or other incidents of significant dissatisfaction or concern, it is unsurprising that people call this into question.

Ms Turhan also said that the announcement of Prof Thrift’s knighthood was “poorly-timed,” making reference to the potential redundancies in the Life Sciences and the Medical School; the police violence on protesters last year, “an action which the University is still yet to condemn or even apologise for”; and nationwide disputes regarding staff pension and pay.

Following a petition calling for Prof Thrift’s knighthood to be rescinded, students held a satirical payday celebration protest on campus on Friday 16 January.

In response to the controversy over Prof Thrift’s knighthood, Ms Turhan said: “When people perceive him to be rewarded in the context of people losing jobs or other incidents of significant dissatisfaction or concern, it is unsurprising that people call this into question.”

Prof. Thrift’s knighthood and 4.8 percent pay rise also comes after international and postgraduate fees increased 4.5 percent last year, an increase which the University claims to take into account the inflation rate; and after academic staff bargained for a two percent pay rise in the pay dispute last year.