Universities that pay vice-chancellors more than 8.5 times the institution’s average salary will have to publicly justify their decision, under new guidelines aimed at curbing excessive pay.

The new code aims to provide a framework for ensuring senior staff receive “fair, appropriate and justifiable” pay, and comes in the wake of damaging headlines on the issue – particularly of the £468,000 salary paid to the vice-chancellor of Bath University.

It also aims to improve transparency around remuneration decisions, after it emerged that some vice-chancellors had sat on the committees deciding their salaries.

Under the new guidance, universities will be expected to reveal how much more their vice-chancellor earns compared with the median pay of the overall workforce. Currently, more than 80% of institutions are within the multiple range of 4.5 to 8.5, the guidance says.

Bath University vice-chancellor quits after outcry over £468k pay Read more

“Institutions that wish to position themselves outside this range will need to be prepared to justify to stakeholders and their regulator why this is desirable.” According to analysis by Times Higher Education, Bath’s vice-chancellor, Dame Glynis Breakwell, was paid nearly 12 times the mean average salary at her institution in 2015-16.

The guidelines are an attempt by the higher education sector to put its own house in order. But critics say the new code, drawn up by the Committee of University Chairs (CUC), lacks teeth. Compliance is voluntary and the CUC, which represents the non-executive chairs of universities’ governing councils, is regarded as being too close to vice-chancellors.

The guidance, which is out for consultation and is likely to be adopted later this year, was drawn up in response to growing pressure from politicians, including the former universities minister Jo Johnson and Labour’s former education minister Andrew Adonis, who were appalled by spiralling salaries.



The code also calls on universities to ensure that severance payments are “reasonable and justifiable”. Last year it emerged that the vice-chancellor of Bath Spa University received a £429,000 golden handshake when she left her role, on top of her £250,000 salary.



It also signals a crackdown on extracurricular earnings from roles on external boards, warning that vice-chancellors are unlikely to be able to retain significant sums in future, and any they do should be disclosed and justified.

The guidance also seeks to tighten remuneration procedures, making clear that vice-chancellors should not sit on the committees deciding their salaries and should play no part in the decision-making process. In addition, the committees need to be “as independent and expert” as possible to ensure procedural fairness.

Launching the consultation, the CUC chair, Chris Sayers, said: “We must enshrine the values of transparency, fairness and accountability at the heart of our procedures to ensure we maintain the trust required for the long-term success of our world-leading sector. The draft guidance, launched today, balances these values with our sector’s need to be able to continue to recruit and retain the best talent.”

The University and College Union, which represents university staff and publishes an annual survey of vice-chancellor pay, dismissed the new code. Its general secretary, Sally Hunt, said: “If we are serious about tackling the problems of senior pay and perks in our universities, then we need a body not so closely linked to vice-chancellors to look at it.

“Last month the CUC said it saw no evidence that most vice-chancellors are paid an unreasonable amount. Ministers have been calling for a check on massive pay hikes for university leaders for years and we have highlighted how many sit on the remuneration committee that sets their own pay.

“The time has come for vice-chancellors and their supporters to be removed from the setting of their pay and a national register of senior pay and perks.”

Nicola Dandridge, the chief executive of the new universities’ regulator, the Office for Students, welcomed the guidelines but said they were insufficient. “We also need to see leadership from institutions in setting fair remuneration – people are rightly concerned by the level of pay, not just the process.

“We very much hope that the sector will act in the spirit of this proposed CUC code and manage the issue of excessive pay itself. However, in the face of unjustified levels of pay, the Office for Students will not hesitate to intervene.”

