-
Under fire Southampton head had his £352,000 pay deal
questioned by universities minister last year
-
He accepted new deal worth £433,000 while saying 75
academics must be axed to save money
-
Southampton also recently advertised for an executive
chauffeur
-
Southampton is one of only two universities to refuse
to answer union’s FoI requests on senior pay and perks
Controversial University of Southampton vice-chancellor Sir
Christopher Snowden has been accused of insulting staff and being
out of touch after it was revealed he accepted a pay rise to take
his pay package up to £433,000 a year while
announcing plans to axe 75
academics to save money.
Accounts just released
(P43) show that Snowden received £433,000 in 2016-17, up
from the £352,000 he was paid the previous year for the 10 months
he was employed. This latest pay rise comes despite public
criticism of Snowden’s pay deal by universities
minister , and just weeks after the
university advertised for an executive chauffeur while planning
to axe academic jobs.
The University and College Union (UCU) said the latest pay
revelation demonstrated once again just how out of touch
university vice-chancellors were and called for changes to the
way senior pay was decided.
The University of Southampton has already been criticised by UCU
for being one of the least transparent universities in the
country. It is one of only two universities that
has refused to answer any of
the union’s Freedom of Information requests on the
vice-chancellor’s pay and perks.
UCU general secretary Sally Hunt said: ‘This latest revelation
demonstrates just how out of touch university vice-chancellors
can be. Professor Snowden was already one of the best-paid
vice-chancellors in the UK, on a salary that had been publicly
questioned by the universities minister. To accept this kind of
pay rise while saying he must axe 75 academic jobs because money
is tight beggars belief. As does the fact that he has also
recently advertised for an executive chauffeur.
‘Following a summer of damaging headlines about the abuse of pay
and perks by senior staff in universities, it is almost as if
vice-chancellors are engaged in some offensive game to see who
can shock the most. From Dame Glynis Breakwell thinking her
golden goodbye is acceptable at Bath to Professor Snowden’s
insulting pay hike while axing staff, the time has clearly come
for proper scrutiny of the pay and perks of vice-chancellors.’
ends
