Today's most viewed
University staff fear for their jobs
 |
| TOO EARLY: University senior deputy vice chancellor Professor Adam Wheeler. |
STAFF are fearing for their jobs as bosses at the University of Southampton launch a four-month money saving review.
Academic chiefs are aiming to increase the university's income and reduce its expenditure in a bid to claw back a £2m deficit.
A series of open forums for the 5,000 staff are being held across the university by Professor Adam Wheeler, the senior deputy vice chancellor and Simon Higman, registrar and chief operating officer.
The university blames its financial woes on a higher than expected nationally agreed staff pay settlement.
The joint trade unions of UCU, Unison and Unite met yesterday to discuss the controversial review with director of human resources, Tony Strike.
The unions claim the university management - which is to carry out this review - are to blame for the institution's financial problems.
They also say the manner in which the university has announced the review has created a widespread feeling of fear and rumours that administrative and specialist staff may be the first to face the chop.
A spokesman said: "The trade unions will of course do their utmost to defend not only jobs, but any deterioration in terms and conditions of employment that may result from attempts to implement decisions made through this review.
"While we understand that the university is facing an income expenditure dilemma we maintain that this was not created by the staff group now being reviewed but by the very management now managing this review."
Professor Wheeler said it was too early to say whether there would need to be job cuts.
He said: "As with some other UK universities, our expenditure, especially in terms of staff costs, has risen sharply in the past two years and is currently outstripping our income, resulting in an operating deficit of £2m.
"This is partly because our previous plans had assumed salary increases that were more modest than those agreed nationally.
"Although it is only a fraction of our annual turnover, good management requires that we address it before it grows.
Open forums are being held at the Avenue Campus, Winchester School of Art, Highfield Campus, Boldrewood Building and Southampton General Hospital.
The Daily Echo understands there are currently no plans to cut courses.
The review comes after the Daily Echo revealed how the university is advertising for a new vice chancellor to take over from Professor Bill Wakeham who retires next year.
With the post comes a £214,000 salary, complementary house, car and chauffeur for certain engagements.
Earlier this year the university also unveiled its new logo that cost £160,000.
9:12am Friday 9th May 2008
Print 
Email this 
CommentPosted by: CyberWarrior, so'ton on 9:48am Fri 9 May 08
All Vice-Chancellors like to leave their mark on the University during their term of office. Professor Bill Wakeham’s legacy will be his ‘vision’ of decentralisation, i.e. the splitting of the faculties into individual schools. This has been probably the biggest financial catastrophe in the University’s history but Professor Wakeham and his team will not be picking up the tab for this shocking financial mismanagement. It will be the ordinary workers who pay for this mistake, and some of them will pay with their jobs. Others will have to absorb the work left over from redundant posts, thus increasing their workloads and ultimately their stress levels. The lack of any decent voluntary redundancy or early retirement offers on the table means that it will be highly unlikely that the university will reach its cutback targets through ‘natural wastage’. I feel for the hundreds of staff who will spend the summer being dragged through another painful review with the knowledge that they might not have a job by the autumn.
All Vice-Chancellors like to leave their mark on the University during their term of office. Professor Bill Wakeham’s legacy will be his ‘vision’ of decentralisation, i.e. the splitting of the faculties into individual schools. This has been probably the biggest financial catastrophe in the University’s history but Professor Wakeham and his team will not be picking up the tab for this shocking financial mismanagement. It will be the ordinary workers who pay for this mistake, and some of them will pay with their jobs. Others will have to absorb the work left over from redundant posts, thus increasing their workloads and ultimately their stress levels. The lack of any decent voluntary redundancy or early retirement offers on the table means that it will be highly unlikely that the university will reach its cutback targets through ‘natural wastage’. I feel for the hundreds of staff who will spend the summer being dragged through another painful review with the knowledge that they might not have a job by the autumn.
Posted by: Anon - University Worker, Southampton on 10:04am Fri 9 May 08
The cost of the vice chancellors salary along with the cost of the revamp would pay the salaries of approx 20 admin staff who have to pay to park their own cars out of their salaries
The cost of the vice chancellors salary along with the cost of the revamp would pay the salaries of approx 20 admin staff who have to pay to park their own cars out of their salaries
Posted by: ANON, Southampton on 10:16am Fri 9 May 08
If this was just about rising staff costs, every University in the sector would be undergoing review.
If this was just about rising staff costs, every University in the sector would be undergoing review.
Posted by: anon, soton on 10:19am Fri 9 May 08
At a recent Wheeler-Higman 'Roadshow' it was divulged that re-branding the University cost £300k and not £160K previously reported.
I have already been told my fixed term contract will not be renewed due to a lack of funding. In my opinion this is of a direct result of the InEx review.
At a recent Wheeler-Higman 'Roadshow' it was divulged that re-branding the University cost £300k and not £160K previously reported.
I have already been told my fixed term contract will not be renewed due to a lack of funding. In my opinion this is of a direct result of the InEx review.
Posted by: Another Uni worker, Southampton on 10:23am Fri 9 May 08
Who needs almost £18,000 per month? And a house - bet it's not in the Flower Roads. As always, it's the lower-level workers who will suffer, and ultimately students, some of whom, no doubt, will be running the country in the future.
Who needs almost £18,000 per month? And a house - bet it's not in the Flower Roads. As always, it's the lower-level workers who will suffer, and ultimately students, some of whom, no doubt, will be running the country in the future.
Posted by: anon on 10:43am Fri 9 May 08
A complementary house and car? Are you serious. With a salary like that can he not afford that himself? What a joke.
So in the midst of financial crisis, I wonder who's bright idea it was to do a re-branding project.....could this have not waited until the university was in a better financial state.
Slow hand clap
A complementary house and car? Are you serious. With a salary like that can he not afford that himself? What a joke.
So in the midst of financial crisis, I wonder who's bright idea it was to do a re-branding project.....could this have not waited until the university was in a better financial state.
Slow hand clap
Posted by: Worried-Worker, Uni of Southampton Worker on 11:00am Fri 9 May 08
"Professor Wheeler said it was too early to say whether there would need to be job cuts."
The trouble with the information coming out of the management at the University is it's conflicting. Having attended the Higman & Wheeler road show (Simon Higman Registrar & Chief Operating Officer & Professor Adam Wheeler Senior Deputy Vice-Chancellor) we heard that the whole University would be under review but by the very people that have lead the mismanagement of the University in the first place. When will these people be held responsible for their actions...we are told that we should look at & run the University as a business but they are never held to task regarding their actions.
At the 'roadshow' we were told that 12.5% would need to be cut off the salary costs alone to steady the ship how is this going to be achieved without job cuts yet Professor Wheeler has gone on record in the Echo as stating it's too early to say that this will happen. Should we then expect the VC, Simon Higman, Adam Wheeler & the others responsible for this financial mismanagement to take a huge reduction in salary (or resign their posts with immediate effect)...I for one won't be holding my breath.
"Professor Wheeler said it was too early to say whether there would need to be job cuts."
The trouble with the information coming out of the management at the University is it's conflicting. Having attended the Higman & Wheeler road show (Simon Higman Registrar & Chief Operating Officer & Professor Adam Wheeler Senior Deputy Vice-Chancellor) we heard that the whole University would be under review but by the very people that have lead the mismanagement of the University in the first place. When will these people be held responsible for their actions...we are told that we should look at & run the University as a business but they are never held to task regarding their actions.
At the 'roadshow' we were told that 12.5% would need to be cut off the salary costs alone to steady the ship how is this going to be achieved without job cuts yet Professor Wheeler has gone on record in the Echo as stating it's too early to say that this will happen. Should we then expect the VC, Simon Higman, Adam Wheeler & the others responsible for this financial mismanagement to take a huge reduction in salary (or resign their posts with immediate effect)...I for one won't be holding my breath.
Posted by: A Worker, Southampton on 11:16am Fri 9 May 08
Huge sums (£15 million) are bring spent on external consultants installing off-the-shelf centralised IT systems that are flakey, hard too use and that don't 'talk' to each other. Properly managed, this software could have been written in house, after all we have some of the brightest IT people in the world here. There is a lack of vision and imagination in this University at this time, born out by the bland re-branding.
Huge sums (£15 million) are bring spent on external consultants installing off-the-shelf centralised IT systems that are flakey, hard too use and that don't 'talk' to each other. Properly managed, this software could have been written in house, after all we have some of the brightest IT people in the world here. There is a lack of vision and imagination in this University at this time, born out by the bland re-branding.
Posted by: Osama Bin Laden, A Cave far far away on 11:25am Fri 9 May 08
There needs to be a lot more sackings of teachers, nurses and other service personnel who without our society would crumble. But the politicians have been racking up 50 grand in expenses and they are more important.
There needs to be a lot more sackings of teachers, nurses and other service personnel who without our society would crumble. But the politicians have been racking up 50 grand in expenses and they are more important.
Posted by: MSAunion, Southampton on 11:40am Fri 9 May 08
To clarify the above, it is the Management, Specialist and Administrative staff who are under review, specifically levels 1 to 3, the lowest paid. This smacks of the University’s ‘payment holiday’ towards PASNAS pensions from 1993-2003, which are only available to levels 1-3. USS pensions for levels 4 and above, and academics, were unaffected.
The main problem is transparency. I’ve been told in my school that the reviewers haven’t begun to make any decisions yet. However ‘recommendations’ are being given to committee at the beginning of July. Adam Wheeler and Simon Higman in their awful presentations made us feel small and unwanted, and likened us to people who photocopy. I’ve got a degree, and am extremely insulted.
They told us nothing that we didn’t know, and left us wondering if there were to be 1 or 1000 redundancies. It may have helped to be told that they would exhaust every avenue to prevent redundancies, and to protect the University’s valuable members of staff. Not a chance.
Instead Simon Higman said he wanted to get to the point where he could come to work at 10, sign a few documents and go home at 3. Disgusting when talking about us as if we’re for the chop. If he’s going part time, then how much salary cost will that save us? At least they could give him some interpersonal skills training.
They could have apologised, said their main aim was to treat us as valuable people in the running of the University, and keep us up to date on progress so that we would know where we stood. Instead they stood there as if across no mans land, ready to retaliate if we dared usurp (with our livelehoods at stake???)
The review should be for ALL staff, and not just focused the staff review at the poorest and most vulnerable. With salary bills rising 9%, the amount is insignificant on low pay bands when compared with the MAJORITY of staff (academics) being on much higher incomes – especially professorial rates. Imagine 9% increase on £60,000 across hundreds of professors at the University.
Truth be told though, if they made one academic staff member redundant there would be no recruiting any academics, and they’d all be on strike.
There are many costs that the University wastes money on however.
-The heating has just been turned off (May 8), and has been on since October. There are no thermostats, I’ve had the window open most of the winter to stop boiling. How much does this cost? Several hundred in my small flat… Several million here?
-Budgets need to be ‘spent’ to make sure the same budget is available next year ‘just in case’. Money is wasted on things that could be done without if there are money problems.
-It has been admitted that Agresso will not result in any staff savings, and has in fact meant two new full-time members of staff being recruited. Not to mention hundreds of hours of overtime from all levels of staff, and time wasted across the University trying to understand an incredibly complicated system that isn’t user friendly (and I am extremely IT literate). I also hear rumours of consultants being paid (weekly) enormous amounts of money to rectify problems, and yet we can’t send out a simple purchase order where the text wraps properly.
I understand the University needs to address it’s problems, but the ‘scary’ graph started looking scary one or two years ago. Please don’t tell me they ignored it then? What are we paying them for?
To clarify the above, it is the Management, Specialist and Administrative staff who are under review, specifically levels 1 to 3, the lowest paid. This smacks of the University’s ‘payment holiday’ towards PASNAS pensions from 1993-2003, which are only available to levels 1-3. USS pensions for levels 4 and above, and academics, were unaffected.
The main problem is transparency. I’ve been told in my school that the reviewers haven’t begun to make any decisions yet. However ‘recommendations’ are being given to committee at the beginning of July. Adam Wheeler and Simon Higman in their awful presentations made us feel small and unwanted, and likened us to people who photocopy. I’ve got a degree, and am extremely insulted.
They told us nothing that we didn’t know, and left us wondering if there were to be 1 or 1000 redundancies. It may have helped to be told that they would exhaust every avenue to prevent redundancies, and to protect the University’s valuable members of staff. Not a chance.
Instead Simon Higman said he wanted to get to the point where he could come to work at 10, sign a few documents and go home at 3. Disgusting when talking about us as if we’re for the chop. If he’s going part time, then how much salary cost will that save us? At least they could give him some interpersonal skills training.
They could have apologised, said their main aim was to treat us as valuable people in the running of the University, and keep us up to date on progress so that we would know where we stood. Instead they stood there as if across no mans land, ready to retaliate if we dared usurp (with our livelehoods at stake???)
The review should be for ALL staff, and not just focused the staff review at the poorest and most vulnerable. With salary bills rising 9%, the amount is insignificant on low pay bands when compared with the MAJORITY of staff (academics) being on much higher incomes – especially professorial rates. Imagine 9% increase on £60,000 across hundreds of professors at the University.
Truth be told though, if they made one academic staff member redundant there would be no recruiting any academics, and they’d all be on strike.
There are many costs that the University wastes money on however.
-The heating has just been turned off (May 8), and has been on since October. There are no thermostats, I’ve had the window open most of the winter to stop boiling. How much does this cost? Several hundred in my small flat… Several million here?
-Budgets need to be ‘spent’ to make sure the same budget is available next year ‘just in case’. Money is wasted on things that could be done without if there are money problems.
-It has been admitted that Agresso will not result in any staff savings, and has in fact meant two new full-time members of staff being recruited. Not to mention hundreds of hours of overtime from all levels of staff, and time wasted across the University trying to understand an incredibly complicated system that isn’t user friendly (and I am extremely IT literate). I also hear rumours of consultants being paid (weekly) enormous amounts of money to rectify problems, and yet we can’t send out a simple purchase order where the text wraps properly.
I understand the University needs to address it’s problems, but the ‘scary’ graph started looking scary one or two years ago. Please don’t tell me they ignored it then? What are we paying them for?
Posted by: Uni worker, Southampton on 11:44am Fri 9 May 08
I have attended various meetings including the roadshow hosted by Prof Wheeler and his gang, and the trouble is that I don't think that I believe anything they say. These are really worrying times for us all and not having access to the truth makes it worse.
I have attended various meetings including the roadshow hosted by Prof Wheeler and his gang, and the trouble is that I don't think that I believe anything they say. These are really worrying times for us all and not having access to the truth makes it worse.
Posted by: MSAunion, Southampton on 11:54am Fri 9 May 08
One thing I forgot to mention, it was raised that the estates could be utilised more effectively out of hours. Simon Higman actually said that if it raised a £1 million, it would only be £1 million and the salary bill was due to increase £18 million. It strikes me that this man’s view of one million pounds is a little warped, remind me what his salary is? Taking a level 2b, starting salary £16,500, overheads of maybe £20,000 year to maintain that member of staff, you could employ 27 members of staff with an extra million. Or should I say, not sack 27 level 2b members of staff. But go on Simon, kick us while we’re down and trying to earn enough money to pay the rent (the housing ladder? Can you get one in IKEA?). My degree aside, I think I’m paid too much to photocopy all day. If only I was paid a paltry million.
One thing I forgot to mention, it was raised that the estates could be utilised more effectively out of hours. Simon Higman actually said that if it raised a £1 million, it would only be £1 million and the salary bill was due to increase £18 million. It strikes me that this man’s view of one million pounds is a little warped, remind me what his salary is? Taking a level 2b, starting salary £16,500, overheads of maybe £20,000 year to maintain that member of staff, you could employ 27 members of staff with an extra million. Or should I say, not sack 27 level 2b members of staff. But go on Simon, kick us while we’re down and trying to earn enough money to pay the rent (the housing ladder? Can you get one in IKEA?). My degree aside, I think I’m paid too much to photocopy all day. If only I was paid a paltry million.
Posted by: **** off University employee, Southampton on 12:37pm Fri 9 May 08
This whole fiasco has been caused the Vice-Chancellor's total incompetence when he had his "vision" to restructure the University back in 2002. It was totally obvious to anyone who knew anything about the University that the way he has restructured the University was going to be more costly. I also want to know how it's been allowed to get so bad. Why wasn't somethig done earlier? I understand no one noticed the University's research income hasn't been as high as predicted for the last couple of years but no one noticed! I also think it needs to be made clear the 2 million pound shortfall is "per year" as far as I understand. Is the Daily Echo also aware that the University didn't pay its contributions into the University's clerical staff pension scheme for 10 years, without telling anyone, and there is now a 9 million pound deficit, with clerical staff now having to pay higher contributions to make up the shortfall. What the hell have these incompetents been doing with what,let's not forget, is public money. Has anyone contacted the University's funding body (HEFCE) about this fiasco?
This whole fiasco has been caused the Vice-Chancellor's total incompetence when he had his "vision" to restructure the University back in 2002. It was totally obvious to anyone who knew anything about the University that the way he has restructured the University was going to be more costly. I also want to know how it's been allowed to get so bad. Why wasn't somethig done earlier? I understand no one noticed the University's research income hasn't been as high as predicted for the last couple of years but no one noticed! I also think it needs to be made clear the 2 million pound shortfall is "per year" as far as I understand. Is the Daily Echo also aware that the University didn't pay its contributions into the University's clerical staff pension scheme for 10 years, without telling anyone, and there is now a 9 million pound deficit, with clerical staff now having to pay higher contributions to make up the shortfall. What the hell have these incompetents been doing with what,let's not forget, is public money. Has anyone contacted the University's funding body (HEFCE) about this fiasco?
Posted by: psdoff, Wheelers arse! on 12:40pm Fri 9 May 08
[bold]This is what you get when you put an academic with no managerial experience, aptitude or consonscience & plain COMMON SENSE in the shoes of a Senior Deputy Vice Chancellor![/bold]
This is what you get when you put an academic with no managerial experience, aptitude or consonscience & plain COMMON SENSE in the shoes of a Senior Deputy Vice Chancellor! Posted by: MSA worker, Southampton on 1:51pm Fri 9 May 08
No job cuts? How come then at a meeting yesterday I was told that the number of jobs would have to be reduced by 12%? How can uni employees have any faith in the management when there are comflicting statements such as these? The staff in the MSA job family are one of the hardest working groups of staff at the uni and do not deserve to be targeted in such a way. It is these staff who keep the schools running by supporting academics who would be lost without them!
No job cuts? How come then at a meeting yesterday I was told that the number of jobs would have to be reduced by 12%? How can uni employees have any faith in the management when there are comflicting statements such as these? The staff in the MSA job family are one of the hardest working groups of staff at the uni and do not deserve to be targeted in such a way. It is these staff who keep the schools running by supporting academics who would be lost without them!
Posted by: irate Wintonian on 1:56pm Fri 9 May 08
Professor Wheeler said it was too early to say whether there would need to be job cuts
Translation = there will be job cuts, we just haven't decided whose yet, but you can bet it won't be mine!
Professor Wheeler said it was too early to say whether there would need to be job cuts
Translation = there will be job cuts, we just haven't decided whose yet, but you can bet it won't be mine!
Posted by: mangobean, Eastleigh on 2:00pm Fri 9 May 08
Senior Deputy Vice Chancellor.
How many prefixes does this guy need?
Senior Deputy Vice Chancellor.
How many prefixes does this guy need?
Posted by: in my option, formaly of upper shirley on 2:21pm Fri 9 May 08
I work for a small private University in Boston. The president does not make as much as this person in Southampton, does not have chauffeured cars and certainly does not get free housing and this is a very, very good school. The amount that students pay here does not cover the cost of tuition so therefore we use fund raising to build an endowment. I know that this is new to the UK but it is the way forward. With a deficient that this, it is a wonder that the university can keep its accreditation. As for spending nearly $6,000 on re-branding – that is a joke – all ours was done in house utilizing good publications staff and one outside consultant – not much money at all. The administration at this university need to be fired and any government money going into that school needs to be halted until auditors take a look at the waste that has obviously gone on, and oh let’s fire the senior accounting person, they also have responsibility but the buck stops with the Chancellor or President – it is only a title but most are morons!
I work for a small private University in Boston. The president does not make as much as this person in Southampton, does not have chauffeured cars and certainly does not get free housing and this is a very, very good school. The amount that students pay here does not cover the cost of tuition so therefore we use fund raising to build an endowment. I know that this is new to the UK but it is the way forward. With a deficient that this, it is a wonder that the university can keep its accreditation. As for spending nearly $6,000 on re-branding – that is a joke – all ours was done in house utilizing good publications staff and one outside consultant – not much money at all. The administration at this university need to be fired and any government money going into that school needs to be halted until auditors take a look at the waste that has obviously gone on, and oh let’s fire the senior accounting person, they also have responsibility but the buck stops with the Chancellor or President – it is only a title but most are morons!
Posted by: recently employed uni worker, southampton on 2:57pm Fri 9 May 08
I haven't been working for the uni for very long but I don't think I'll be sticking around much longer because of all this madness. I hope the uni realises all this will mean that all the good staff will shove off somewhere else where they [italic]can[/italic] make a career for themselves where their experience and degrees are valued.
I haven't been working for the uni for very long but I don't think I'll be sticking around much longer because of all this madness. I hope the uni realises all this will mean that all the good staff will shove off somewhere else where they
can make a career for themselves where their experience and degrees are valued.
Posted by: another disgruntled Uni employee, Southampton on 2:58pm Fri 9 May 08
No jobs losses? they are already doing it - most jobs ads are internal only, and the gaps left by current incumbents are unlikely to be filled. They're just shuffling people round and expecting them to take up the slack
No jobs losses? they are already doing it - most jobs ads are internal only, and the gaps left by current incumbents are unlikely to be filled. They're just shuffling people round and expecting them to take up the slack
Posted by: CyberWarrior, sot'on on 3:04pm Fri 9 May 08
[quote][bold]in my option[/bold] wrote:
I work for a small private University in Boston. The president does not make as much as this person in Southampton, does not have chauffeured cars and certainly does not get free housing and this is a very, very good school. The amount that students pay here does not cover the cost of tuition so therefore we use fund raising to build an endowment. I know that this is new to the UK but it is the way forward. With a deficient that this, it is a wonder that the university can keep its accreditation. As for spending nearly $6,000 on re-branding – that is a joke – all ours was done in house utilizing good publications staff and one outside consultant – not much money at all. The administration at this university need to be fired and any government money going into that school needs to be halted until auditors take a look at the waste that has obviously gone on, and oh let’s fire the senior accounting person, they also have responsibility but the buck stops with the Chancellor or President – it is only a title but most are morons![/quote] Southampton University has first class in-house Corporate & Marketing services and IT departments, both of which could have been utilised for the re-branding exercise. They are also bringing in private management consultants to oversee the MSA review and they will have to be paid too - out of the staff budget probably! If these people had screwed up like this in a private company, they would have been fired or asked to resign immediately. Like you say, the buck stops with them but they won't lose their jobs and their whacking great salaries!
in my option wrote:
I work for a small private University in Boston. The president does not make as much as this person in Southampton, does not have chauffeured cars and certainly does not get free housing and this is a very, very good school. The amount that students pay here does not cover the cost of tuition so therefore we use fund raising to build an endowment. I know that this is new to the UK but it is the way forward. With a deficient that this, it is a wonder that the university can keep its accreditation. As for spending nearly $6,000 on re-branding – that is a joke – all ours was done in house utilizing good publications staff and one outside consultant – not much money at all. The administration at this university need to be fired and any government money going into that school needs to be halted until auditors take a look at the waste that has obviously gone on, and oh let’s fire the senior accounting person, they also have responsibility but the buck stops with the Chancellor or President – it is only a title but most are morons!
Southampton University has first class in-house Corporate & Marketing services and IT departments, both of which could have been utilised for the re-branding exercise. They are also bringing in private management consultants to oversee the MSA review and they will have to be paid too - out of the staff budget probably! If these people had screwed up like this in a private company, they would have been fired or asked to resign immediately. Like you say, the buck stops with them but they won't lose their jobs and their whacking great salaries!
Posted by: lifer!, Uni employee on 3:36pm Fri 9 May 08
The re-structuring exercise in 2003/04 was a complete fiasco. People were moved all around campus to new jobs, of which many had no previous experience, (at the start of term which is an horrendous time for School Admin staff). On top of this we were forced to use new UNTESTED and INCOMPLETE IT systems resulting in copious data problems and copious regular data cleansing exercises being required in addition to normal business. AT the same time there was a review of pay and the introduction of Job Families with single pay spines resulting in many re-gradings - again this was not handled well and there are still employees doing the [bold]same[/bold] job as colleagues in other parts of the university on lower grades and hence lower salaries! Many MSA staff suffered severe stress as a result of all this; some left some persevered and stayed through loyalty and undoubtedly to retain the usual excellent service we provide to our students, (working very long hours in order to cope I might add). Why? because we care of course. What is our reward? - well you can see for yourself via these blogs! I cannot be the only one of the older employees that are now so sick of the treatment we have recieved and continue to recieve that we would gladly welcome a redundancy package thereby making way for others to be safe. The university will undoubtedly not even consider this route (that would be too obvious and intelligent a route for them to take), they would it seems prefer to scaremonger hoping that people will leave of their own accord and then not replace those posts. It is all very sad.
The re-structuring exercise in 2003/04 was a complete fiasco. People were moved all around campus to new jobs, of which many had no previous experience, (at the start of term which is an horrendous time for School Admin staff). On top of this we were forced to use new UNTESTED and INCOMPLETE IT systems resulting in copious data problems and copious regular data cleansing exercises being required in addition to normal business. AT the same time there was a review of pay and the introduction of Job Families with single pay spines resulting in many re-gradings - again this was not handled well and there are still employees doing the
same job as colleagues in other parts of the university on lower grades and hence lower salaries! Many MSA staff suffered severe stress as a result of all this; some left some persevered and stayed through loyalty and undoubtedly to retain the usual excellent service we provide to our students, (working very long hours in order to cope I might add). Why? because we care of course. What is our reward? - well you can see for yourself via these blogs! I cannot be the only one of the older employees that are now so sick of the treatment we have recieved and continue to recieve that we would gladly welcome a redundancy package thereby making way for others to be safe. The university will undoubtedly not even consider this route (that would be too obvious and intelligent a route for them to take), they would it seems prefer to scaremonger hoping that people will leave of their own accord and then not replace those posts. It is all very sad.
Posted by: Low Paid Uni- Worker, Southampton on 3:36pm Fri 9 May 08
The Uni is always wasting money THe Managements Wages. Boldrewood it is being pulled down and they still waste on it.
It is time Southampton took back the city and stopped it being over run by these parasites
The Uni is always wasting money THe Managements Wages. Boldrewood it is being pulled down and they still waste on it.
It is time Southampton took back the city and stopped it being over run by these parasites
Posted by: Worried-Worker, Southampton on 3:39pm Fri 9 May 08
As someone has previously said, the information that we are getting keeps changing. The paper says £160,000 for rebranding. But in the road show on Friday it was said £300,000? Just a difference, you not agree? I have to admit, the University's worse thing is COMMUNICATION!!!!! A little respect goes a long way. Can we believe the information is true, we keeping hearing so many things, yes everything is going to be ok, no its not! What do we believe? You must understand from our positions that we are worried as we do not know really what is going on and to see that it is published something different to what was said a meeting arranged by Wheeler can we trust you? Why is it that the University is in this mess I do find asking myself many a time? First of all the pension, that was kept quite and we are paying for that, now this? This is what the University is paying the Finance for is it not, to keep track of the University Finances and if there is something wrong then to make this aware. If we were told long before now that our finances were not to great and we needed to advertise the University more, or we would end up where we are today, I am sure that staff would have been more then happy to promote the University and we could of all used different ideas to help, Instead we are in this position now, which I am sure Wheeler is not happy to be in and for it all to come to this. I do have to say though, I have experienced that other side of the coin with someone who has had to be redeployed and they seem to have been treated well, that the University has done there best to place there in a job which is available
As someone has previously said, the information that we are getting keeps changing. The paper says £160,000 for rebranding. But in the road show on Friday it was said £300,000? Just a difference, you not agree? I have to admit, the University's worse thing is COMMUNICATION!!!!! A little respect goes a long way. Can we believe the information is true, we keeping hearing so many things, yes everything is going to be ok, no its not! What do we believe? You must understand from our positions that we are worried as we do not know really what is going on and to see that it is published something different to what was said a meeting arranged by Wheeler can we trust you? Why is it that the University is in this mess I do find asking myself many a time? First of all the pension, that was kept quite and we are paying for that, now this? This is what the University is paying the Finance for is it not, to keep track of the University Finances and if there is something wrong then to make this aware. If we were told long before now that our finances were not to great and we needed to advertise the University more, or we would end up where we are today, I am sure that staff would have been more then happy to promote the University and we could of all used different ideas to help, Instead we are in this position now, which I am sure Wheeler is not happy to be in and for it all to come to this. I do have to say though, I have experienced that other side of the coin with someone who has had to be redeployed and they seem to have been treated well, that the University has done there best to place there in a job which is available
Posted by: Sad and Blue on 3:44pm Fri 9 May 08
The administrative staff are the backbone of Southampton University. If we crumble, the whole body will fall. We are not lead-swinging dead-enders, we are professional people who do an excellent job of work and who should be accorded respect. As Diana Ross said.... 'I'm still waiting......'
The administrative staff are the backbone of Southampton University. If we crumble, the whole body will fall. We are not lead-swinging dead-enders, we are professional people who do an excellent job of work and who should be accorded respect. As Diana Ross said.... 'I'm still waiting......'
Posted by: brand info, University of Southampton on 3:56pm Fri 9 May 08
The costs of the brand have always been open: Precedent Communications were paid 160k for their brand and visual identity work. The University then spent additional money on implementation totaling 200k the majority of which was spent internally at the Print Centre. AS such the total spent was £360k.
The costs of the brand have always been open: Precedent Communications were paid 160k for their brand and visual identity work. The University then spent additional money on implementation totaling 200k the majority of which was spent internally at the Print Centre. AS such the total spent was £360k.
Posted by: anon, UoS on 4:13pm Fri 9 May 08
[quote][bold]brand info[/bold] wrote:
The costs of the brand have always been open: Precedent Communications were paid 160k for their brand and visual identity work. The University then spent additional money on implementation totaling 200k the majority of which was spent internally at the Print Centre. AS such the total spent was £360k.[/quote] Wow, communication from the University. Give this man a medal.
Would you like to pass this information on the Wheeler-Higman Roadshow? They seem unsure on the figures they are telling us.
brand info wrote:
The costs of the brand have always been open: Precedent Communications were paid 160k for their brand and visual identity work. The University then spent additional money on implementation totaling 200k the majority of which was spent internally at the Print Centre. AS such the total spent was £360k.
Wow, communication from the University. Give this man a medal.
Would you like to pass this information on the Wheeler-Higman Roadshow? They seem unsure on the figures they are telling us.
Posted by: Anon, Soton Uni on 4:23pm Fri 9 May 08
I've worked in admin at the University for a very long time and this, as far as I can recall, is the second big re-structure exercise undertaken whilst I've been here. Most "for profit" companies would go through these annually at least, and even civil service type offices are shuffled if elections bring in new "bosses".
The university is now suffering from years' worth of complacency and it's insistence on only sorting one problem at a time... only time will tell what happens here but, having been re-deployed once already and currently on a fixed term contract, I know that staff are treated fairly in these situations (or as fairly as possible)... so think there's still hope that the scarey headlines are an exaggeration!
I've worked in admin at the University for a very long time and this, as far as I can recall, is the second big re-structure exercise undertaken whilst I've been here. Most "for profit" companies would go through these annually at least, and even civil service type offices are shuffled if elections bring in new "bosses".
The university is now suffering from years' worth of complacency and it's insistence on only sorting one problem at a time... only time will tell what happens here but, having been re-deployed once already and currently on a fixed term contract, I know that staff are treated fairly in these situations (or as fairly as possible)... so think there's still hope that the scarey headlines are an exaggeration!
Posted by: Angry Uni Worker, Southampton on 4:46pm Fri 9 May 08
[quote][bold]brand info[/bold] wrote:
The costs of the brand have always been open: Precedent Communications were paid 160k for their brand and visual identity work. The University then spent additional money on implementation totaling 200k the majority of which was spent internally at the Print Centre. AS such the total spent was £360k.[/quote] Utter Rubbish! Do you really believe the rebranding only cost £360k? Wherever you go you can spot the Dolphin logo, on busses, train stations, signs, uniforms, vehicles- so who is going to pay for all these to be changed to the new BLAND, sorry 'Brand'? No doubt some money will come from the salary bill saving from however many MSA staff are made redundant, owing to the gross financial mismanagement of the senior 'managers' (Managers?...I wouldnt follow them out of curiousity!)
brand info wrote:
The costs of the brand have always been open: Precedent Communications were paid 160k for their brand and visual identity work. The University then spent additional money on implementation totaling 200k the majority of which was spent internally at the Print Centre. AS such the total spent was £360k.
Utter Rubbish! Do you really believe the rebranding only cost £360k? Wherever you go you can spot the Dolphin logo, on busses, train stations, signs, uniforms, vehicles- so who is going to pay for all these to be changed to the new BLAND, sorry 'Brand'? No doubt some money will come from the salary bill saving from however many MSA staff are made redundant, owing to the gross financial mismanagement of the senior 'managers' (Managers?...I wouldnt follow them out of curiousity!)
Posted by: An ex-uni worker, Still in sunny Southampton on 5:40pm Fri 9 May 08
I worked at the uni for several years and never had a complaint about my work. Then with the restructuring came a new boss (my old one was 'retired'). She steadily bullied me out of the department, telling me my work was crap, until I left too sick with stress to care. She was the new broom who wanted to sweep clean and the higher ups seem to applaud her for it! This crisis is now happening to the uni because of incompetent management of a similar nature to hers. I just feel sorry for those at the bottom of wages pile who will be the ones to suffer. As I did. You can bet management will get off scott free.
I worked at the uni for several years and never had a complaint about my work. Then with the restructuring came a new boss (my old one was 'retired'). She steadily bullied me out of the department, telling me my work was crap, until I left too sick with stress to care. She was the new broom who wanted to sweep clean and the higher ups seem to applaud her for it! This crisis is now happening to the uni because of incompetent management of a similar nature to hers. I just feel sorry for those at the bottom of wages pile who will be the ones to suffer. As I did. You can bet management will get off scott free.
Posted by: anon123, southampton on 6:35pm Fri 9 May 08
A lot's of you have made a very good point about incompetent managers. They are the ones that cover their incompetence with smoke screen. Very often they don't understand and don't care to understand the job done by their own staff, preferring overloading them with tasks which they were not employed to do, and at the end they still expect staff to fulfill all their core duties. Most of the Southampton managers have a mentality stuck in the 80s, they believe in the myth of multitasking and bullying to get staff to do what they think they should do. Staff morale is low. People who are trained and qualified are often put down by people who don't have a clue on what they are talking about. And why do these managers get away? Because they talk the talk, everything they do is done just to impress the guys at the top. Often they are an obstacle to get the work done properly. They think that by undermining their own staff, that they will look better. And why are they not being reviewed?
A lot's of you have made a very good point about incompetent managers. They are the ones that cover their incompetence with smoke screen. Very often they don't understand and don't care to understand the job done by their own staff, preferring overloading them with tasks which they were not employed to do, and at the end they still expect staff to fulfill all their core duties. Most of the Southampton managers have a mentality stuck in the 80s, they believe in the myth of multitasking and bullying to get staff to do what they think they should do. Staff morale is low. People who are trained and qualified are often put down by people who don't have a clue on what they are talking about. And why do these managers get away? Because they talk the talk, everything they do is done just to impress the guys at the top. Often they are an obstacle to get the work done properly. They think that by undermining their own staff, that they will look better. And why are they not being reviewed?
Posted by: brand info, University of Southampton on 6:46pm Fri 9 May 08
[quote][bold]Angry Uni Worker[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]brand info[/bold] wrote: The costs of the brand have always been open: Precedent Communications were paid 160k for their brand and visual identity work. The University then spent additional money on implementation totaling 200k the majority of which was spent internally at the Print Centre. AS such the total spent was £360k.[/quote] Utter Rubbish! Do you really believe the rebranding only cost £360k? Wherever you go you can spot the Dolphin logo, on busses, train stations, signs, uniforms, vehicles- so who is going to pay for all these to be changed to the new BLAND, sorry 'Brand'? No doubt some money will come from the salary bill saving from however many MSA staff are made redundant, owing to the gross financial mismanagement of the senior 'managers' (Managers?...I wouldnt follow them out of curiousity!)[/quote] The point you make is valid, in that it would clearly take a lot of money to replace all of the items you mention. But given, as you so rightly point out, that you can still see them everywhere, I would ask that you recognise that (as was stated at brand launch) these items will be altered according to the replacement cycle already in place.
Angry Uni Worker wrote:
brand info wrote: The costs of the brand have always been open: Precedent Communications were paid 160k for their brand and visual identity work. The University then spent additional money on implementation totaling 200k the majority of which was spent internally at the Print Centre. AS such the total spent was £360k.
Utter Rubbish! Do you really believe the rebranding only cost £360k? Wherever you go you can spot the Dolphin logo, on busses, train stations, signs, uniforms, vehicles- so who is going to pay for all these to be changed to the new BLAND, sorry 'Brand'? No doubt some money will come from the salary bill saving from however many MSA staff are made redundant, owing to the gross financial mismanagement of the senior 'managers' (Managers?...I wouldnt follow them out of curiousity!)
The point you make is valid, in that it would clearly take a lot of money to replace all of the items you mention. But given, as you so rightly point out, that you can still see them everywhere, I would ask that you recognise that (as was stated at brand launch) these items will be altered according to the replacement cycle already in place.
Posted by: Worried-worker, 116-422 on 7:31pm Fri 9 May 08
[quote][bold]brand info[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Angry Uni Worker[/bold] wrote: [quote][bold]brand info[/bold] wrote: The costs of the brand have always been open: Precedent Communications were paid 160k for their brand and visual identity work. The University then spent additional money on implementation totaling 200k the majority of which was spent internally at the Print Centre. AS such the total spent was £360k.[/quote] Utter Rubbish! Do you really believe the rebranding only cost £360k? Wherever you go you can spot the Dolphin logo, on busses, train stations, signs, uniforms, vehicles- so who is going to pay for all these to be changed to the new BLAND, sorry \'Brand\'? No doubt some money will come from the salary bill saving from however many MSA staff are made redundant, owing to the gross financial mismanagement of the senior \'managers\' (Managers?...I wouldnt follow them out of curiousity!)[/quote] The point you make is valid, in that it would clearly take a lot of money to replace all of the items you mention. But given, as you so rightly point out, that you can still see them everywhere, I would ask that you recognise that (as was stated at brand launch) these items will be altered according to the replacement cycle already in place.[/quote] Sadly "Brand info" is deflecting the attention from the bigger picture. Who cares when the outdated dolphin is gone for good....what we need to focus on is bringing the management to task over their financial mismanagement of the University. Surely the VC, Higson, Wheeler and to some extent Malcolm Ace (Finance Director) should be held responsible. When will they do the decent thing and resign their lofty, well paid posts - they should be hanging their heads in shame - i bet they will not be spending the coming months stressing out over if their jobs are safe.
Further to a point made earlier I too was at Avenue campus for the "road show" where Simon Higman stated his "vision" of his role turning up at 10am leaving at 3pm - he laughed and joked after almost every remark he made. The man has no decency and should be ashamed of himself for making light of such a grave situation. The man can obviously not be trusted - neither can any of his cronies.
brand info wrote:
Angry Uni Worker wrote: brand info wrote: The costs of the brand have always been open: Precedent Communications were paid 160k for their brand and visual identity work. The University then spent additional money on implementation totaling 200k the majority of which was spent internally at the Print Centre. AS such the total spent was £360k.
Utter Rubbish! Do you really believe the rebranding only cost £360k? Wherever you go you can spot the Dolphin logo, on busses, train stations, signs, uniforms, vehicles- so who is going to pay for all these to be changed to the new BLAND, sorry \'Brand\'? No doubt some money will come from the salary bill saving from however many MSA staff are made redundant, owing to the gross financial mismanagement of the senior \'managers\' (Managers?...I wouldnt follow them out of curiousity!)
The point you make is valid, in that it would clearly take a lot of money to replace all of the items you mention. But given, as you so rightly point out, that you can still see them everywhere, I would ask that you recognise that (as was stated at brand launch) these items will be altered according to the replacement cycle already in place.
Sadly "Brand info" is deflecting the attention from the bigger picture. Who cares when the outdated dolphin is gone for good....what we need to focus on is bringing the management to task over their financial mismanagement of the University. Surely the VC, Higson, Wheeler and to some extent Malcolm Ace (Finance Director) should be held responsible. When will they do the decent thing and resign their lofty, well paid posts - they should be hanging their heads in shame - i bet they will not be spending the coming months stressing out over if their jobs are safe.
Further to a point made earlier I too was at Avenue campus for the "road show" where Simon Higman stated his "vision" of his role turning up at 10am leaving at 3pm - he laughed and joked after almost every remark he made. The man has no decency and should be ashamed of himself for making light of such a grave situation. The man can obviously not be trusted - neither can any of his cronies.
Posted by: n, Southampton on 7:44pm Fri 9 May 08
If I was trying to choose which university to go to I'd be striking Southampton off my list.
If I was trying to choose which university to go to I'd be striking Southampton off my list.
Posted by: Anon, Southampton on 8:10pm Fri 9 May 08
Nice to see Southampton uni rate a stupid sign redesign (which very few people like and was strongly opposed by the students) above the teaching...
The dolphin logo was well recognised throughout the country and also linked in well with the university's maritime and coastal connections.
In my view whoever thought up this redesign of the branding and the people in management who supported it should be sacked for wasting all that money! It's a complete shambles and should have been immediately rejected.
Not to mention the bad image it gives when prospective students see that the Soton uni students' views on the logo were ignored!
Nice to see Southampton uni rate a stupid sign redesign (which very few people like and was strongly opposed by the students) above the teaching...
The dolphin logo was well recognised throughout the country and also linked in well with the university's maritime and coastal connections.
In my view whoever thought up this redesign of the branding and the people in management who supported it should be sacked for wasting all that money! It's a complete shambles and should have been immediately rejected.
Not to mention the bad image it gives when prospective students see that the Soton uni students' views on the logo were ignored!
Posted by: A realist, Southampton on 9:56pm Fri 9 May 08
seriously??? you have to pay a good salary to a VC because if you pay peanuts, you get monkeys! if you had to spend pretty much 24/7 working, i expect you would want to be paid very well for it too, and if you had to use your house as a venue for business, i expect you would want a residence to do so. by not understanding that you have to pay to get the quality of person to run an institution like southampton, you're just demonstrating your ignorance of the situation. try taking a look at the big picture - no-one likes redundancies but if people aren't doing a job that is adding value it doesn't help the business so things have to change. try working in the private sector, you'd be in for a shock...
seriously??? you have to pay a good salary to a VC because if you pay peanuts, you get monkeys! if you had to spend pretty much 24/7 working, i expect you would want to be paid very well for it too, and if you had to use your house as a venue for business, i expect you would want a residence to do so. by not understanding that you have to pay to get the quality of person to run an institution like southampton, you're just demonstrating your ignorance of the situation. try taking a look at the big picture - no-one likes redundancies but if people aren't doing a job that is adding value it doesn't help the business so things have to change. try working in the private sector, you'd be in for a shock...
Posted by: uni employee on 10:34pm Fri 9 May 08
Morale at the uni is very low. Sections are moved around at the whim of the 'suits' and new rationale comes out every year to justify this - usually contradicting the idea they'd so believed in the year before! You end up feeling just like a puppet.
There'd be more respect if the suits just admitted that mistakes had been made, talked openly and engaged with us to find solutions, rather than all the propaganda and management speak all the time. When the suits occasionally pay lip service by asking for our opinions, they never listen and just ignore them. All of this is a real shame, as in many ways the uni is a good place to work.
Incidentally the suits have managed to upset the Student Union too by not allowing the SU President to sit on the committee that chooses the next VC...
Morale at the uni is very low. Sections are moved around at the whim of the 'suits' and new rationale comes out every year to justify this - usually contradicting the idea they'd so believed in the year before! You end up feeling just like a puppet.
There'd be more respect if the suits just admitted that mistakes had been made, talked openly and engaged with us to find solutions, rather than all the propaganda and management speak all the time. When the suits occasionally pay lip service by asking for our opinions, they never listen and just ignore them. All of this is a real shame, as in many ways the uni is a good place to work.
Incidentally the suits have managed to upset the Student Union too by not allowing the SU President to sit on the committee that chooses the next VC...
Posted by: A N Other on 1:56am Sat 10 May 08
I refuse to believe that more courses won't be cut. I am a part time student who has been told that her course is being discontinued at Southampton for a variety of reasons which all boil down to one thing: my course is not research based and therefore not money making enough to suit those higher ups. To add to my anger and disappointment about my course being discontinued I am also a member of staff who after being assured by her Manager that her job was safe is now being told that it isn't. I don't trust anything the University say anymore, I used to love this place and now I can't wait to leave. I think it is disgusting that the MSA job family are taking the hit whilst at the same time academics are being promoted left, right and centre. If the Wheeler/Higman clan get their way and they lose a load of MSA staff the University will start to falter and will not stand a cat in hells chance of being 'top ten by 2010'.
I appreciate that the dolphin logo was outdated and that yes, it probably did need updating however I think the timing of it was appalling. It is a slap in the face to those of us living with uncertainty about our jobs that the University spent all that money on rebranding to end up with a logo that could easily have been produced in-house. The University employs many talented and creative people, it's time they were put to use.
I, like many others in my department am job hunting externally - a case of jump before I am pushed!
I refuse to believe that more courses won't be cut. I am a part time student who has been told that her course is being discontinued at Southampton for a variety of reasons which all boil down to one thing: my course is not research based and therefore not money making enough to suit those higher ups. To add to my anger and disappointment about my course being discontinued I am also a member of staff who after being assured by her Manager that her job was safe is now being told that it isn't. I don't trust anything the University say anymore, I used to love this place and now I can't wait to leave. I think it is disgusting that the MSA job family are taking the hit whilst at the same time academics are being promoted left, right and centre. If the Wheeler/Higman clan get their way and they lose a load of MSA staff the University will start to falter and will not stand a cat in hells chance of being 'top ten by 2010'.
I appreciate that the dolphin logo was outdated and that yes, it probably did need updating however I think the timing of it was appalling. It is a slap in the face to those of us living with uncertainty about our jobs that the University spent all that money on rebranding to end up with a logo that could easily have been produced in-house. The University employs many talented and creative people, it's time they were put to use.
I, like many others in my department am job hunting externally - a case of jump before I am pushed!
Posted by: A N Other on 1:58am Sat 10 May 08
But I mean, what would I know as according to the higman I am just a mindless photocopying drone! (Just like all other MSA's right?!)
But I mean, what would I know as according to the higman I am just a mindless photocopying drone! (Just like all other MSA's right?!)
Posted by: Happy, Prozac on 6:09am Sat 10 May 08
[quote][bold]A realist[/bold] wrote:
seriously??? you have to pay a good salary to a VC because if you pay peanuts, you get monkeys! if you had to spend pretty much 24/7 working, i expect you would want to be paid very well for it too, and if you had to use your house as a venue for business, i expect you would want a residence to do so. by not understanding that you have to pay to get the quality of person to run an institution like southampton, you're just demonstrating your ignorance of the situation. try taking a look at the big picture - no-one likes redundancies but if people aren't doing a job that is adding value it doesn't help the business so things have to change. try working in the private sector, you'd be in for a shock...[/quote] So why has the current VC been given a 25% pay increase a year beofre he leaves having dumped us in this mess? If you want to attract a decent VC with a higher wage you attach the new rate to the vacancy, not give it out as a golden handshake to a proven incompetent.
A realist wrote:
seriously??? you have to pay a good salary to a VC because if you pay peanuts, you get monkeys! if you had to spend pretty much 24/7 working, i expect you would want to be paid very well for it too, and if you had to use your house as a venue for business, i expect you would want a residence to do so. by not understanding that you have to pay to get the quality of person to run an institution like southampton, you're just demonstrating your ignorance of the situation. try taking a look at the big picture - no-one likes redundancies but if people aren't doing a job that is adding value it doesn't help the business so things have to change. try working in the private sector, you'd be in for a shock...
So why has the current VC been given a 25% pay increase a year beofre he leaves having dumped us in this mess? If you want to attract a decent VC with a higher wage you attach the new rate to the vacancy, not give it out as a golden handshake to a proven incompetent.
Posted by: Worried-worker, Uni of Soton on 6:58am Sat 10 May 08
[quote][bold]A realist[/bold] wrote:
seriously??? you have to pay a good salary to a VC because if you pay peanuts, you get monkeys! if you had to spend pretty much 24/7 working, i expect you would want to be paid very well for it too, and if you had to use your house as a venue for business, i expect you would want a residence to do so. by not understanding that you have to pay to get the quality of person to run an institution like southampton, you're just demonstrating your ignorance of the situation. try taking a look at the big picture - no-one likes redundancies but if people aren't doing a job that is adding value it doesn't help the business so things have to change. try working in the private sector, you'd be in for a shock...[/quote] You are correct - a fair wage for a fair days pay - works across the board inc the VC - however we are constantly told at the University from the VC down that we must look at & run the Uni as a business so "in the real world" / private sector these people running these reviews would & SHOULD be held accountable for getting the University into this mess in the first place.
However they are the ones who will be safe from redundancy.
For years the University suits have run roughshod over the staff - we have to make a stand against the financial mismanagement in order that jobs can be saved.
Bring thes "suits" (the VC, Higman, Wheeler & the cronies) to task.
A realist wrote:
seriously??? you have to pay a good salary to a VC because if you pay peanuts, you get monkeys! if you had to spend pretty much 24/7 working, i expect you would want to be paid very well for it too, and if you had to use your house as a venue for business, i expect you would want a residence to do so. by not understanding that you have to pay to get the quality of person to run an institution like southampton, you're just demonstrating your ignorance of the situation. try taking a look at the big picture - no-one likes redundancies but if people aren't doing a job that is adding value it doesn't help the business so things have to change. try working in the private sector, you'd be in for a shock...
You are correct - a fair wage for a fair days pay - works across the board inc the VC - however we are constantly told at the University from the VC down that we must look at & run the Uni as a business so "in the real world" / private sector these people running these reviews would & SHOULD be held accountable for getting the University into this mess in the first place.
However they are the ones who will be safe from redundancy.
For years the University suits have run roughshod over the staff - we have to make a stand against the financial mismanagement in order that jobs can be saved.
Bring thes "suits" (the VC, Higman, Wheeler & the cronies) to task.
Posted by: MSA2b, Southampton on 4:49pm Sat 10 May 08
I was an MSA worker for 24 years and retired very recently. I had had enough of the University's treatment of MSA workers as a cheap, easily disposable, easily replaceable commodity (sorry Human Resource). The Job Family exercise in 2003 was an attempt to keep pay down to what was the bare minimum required to do the job, rather than take any account of the experience and qualities that an individual employee could contribute to the job and their department. I was downgraded because of this exercise, had my wages frozen for 3 years, although I had previously been classed as making an exceptional contribution to my job. As for Agresso and ReBranding - what a waste of money. Does the University really need expensive plasma screens on every available wall telling you what you could find on any noticeboard? Most of my colleagues were envious that I was lucky to be old enough to retire and get away from the uncaring institution that University of Southampton has become. I just hope they don't try to interfere with the PASNAS pension scheme to solve their financial problems.
I was an MSA worker for 24 years and retired very recently. I had had enough of the University's treatment of MSA workers as a cheap, easily disposable, easily replaceable commodity (sorry Human Resource). The Job Family exercise in 2003 was an attempt to keep pay down to what was the bare minimum required to do the job, rather than take any account of the experience and qualities that an individual employee could contribute to the job and their department. I was downgraded because of this exercise, had my wages frozen for 3 years, although I had previously been classed as making an exceptional contribution to my job. As for Agresso and ReBranding - what a waste of money. Does the University really need expensive plasma screens on every available wall telling you what you could find on any noticeboard? Most of my colleagues were envious that I was lucky to be old enough to retire and get away from the uncaring institution that University of Southampton has become. I just hope they don't try to interfere with the PASNAS pension scheme to solve their financial problems.
Posted by: Concerned lecturer, University of Southampton on 10:23am Mon 12 May 08
As a lecturer I have severe concerns about the possibility of redundancies amongst the administration staff. These members of staff provide an invaluable contribution to the smooth running of the service. Due to job freezes in our school we are at least 10 lecturers short and we have had to loose some temporary administrative staff. The work the temp. administrative staff used to do was passed on to the lecturers, who are already covering the vacancies amongst lecturing staff! The plans will impact on staff at all levels, and will make it very difficult for us to achieve the universities aim of being student centered.
As a lecturer I have severe concerns about the possibility of redundancies amongst the administration staff. These members of staff provide an invaluable contribution to the smooth running of the service. Due to job freezes in our school we are at least 10 lecturers short and we have had to loose some temporary administrative staff. The work the temp. administrative staff used to do was passed on to the lecturers, who are already covering the vacancies amongst lecturing staff! The plans will impact on staff at all levels, and will make it very difficult for us to achieve the universities aim of being student centered.
Posted by: temp @southampton on 10:49am Mon 12 May 08
i've worked at the university for about three years now. i had previously managed and ran shops and was tired of the heavy responsiblity for little pay, so decided to take a modest job as a receptionist. to my horror within 7 months i was running the exams during the peak-exam period and was feeling possibly more stressed than i was before. now i've ran away from that to join the temp bank and i maintain it's the only way to go. so i don't get sick pay and few holidays it's the price you pay in this wonderful brave new world for not being prescribed anti-depressants and working from home. go forth - to the temp bank!
maybe the logo has little to do with the job cuts but it sure as hell had bad timing and nobody seems to be denying the connection...
guaranteed that 160k didn't go to the little office junior that probably designed the bloody thing - once again, the already rich get richer.
does anyone else wish the british had more guts? we can't stand up to some management airheads but the french managed to overthow a monachy - the majority of which did not have degrees.
okay, ran over.
i've worked at the university for about three years now. i had previously managed and ran shops and was tired of the heavy responsiblity for little pay, so decided to take a modest job as a receptionist. to my horror within 7 months i was running the exams during the peak-exam period and was feeling possibly more stressed than i was before. now i've ran away from that to join the temp bank and i maintain it's the only way to go. so i don't get sick pay and few holidays it's the price you pay in this wonderful brave new world for not being prescribed anti-depressants and working from home. go forth - to the temp bank!
maybe the logo has little to do with the job cuts but it sure as hell had bad timing and nobody seems to be denying the connection...
guaranteed that 160k didn't go to the little office junior that probably designed the bloody thing - once again, the already rich get richer.
does anyone else wish the british had more guts? we can't stand up to some management airheads but the french managed to overthow a monachy - the majority of which did not have degrees.
okay, ran over.
Posted by: temp @ southampton on 10:51am Mon 12 May 08
'rant' over, rather.
Posted by: temp @ southampton on 10:51am Mon 12 May 08
'rant' over, rather.
Posted by: thin cat, southampton on 11:17am Mon 12 May 08
[bold]So what happened to the millions the university gained when they sold the former LSU site to Linden Homes? Have they already spent it?[/bold]
So what happened to the millions the university gained when they sold the former LSU site to Linden Homes? Have they already spent it? Posted by: anon, Soton Uni (not for long) on 1:00pm Mon 12 May 08
Wheeler is currently out on the balcony in B37 having another set of press photos done. To me the picture looks identical to the one above.
Shouldn't this highly paid man be doing some work?
Oh and Mr A Realist, don't you have the face to say your name is Higman?
Poor...
Wheeler is currently out on the balcony in B37 having another set of press photos done. To me the picture looks identical to the one above.
Shouldn't this highly paid man be doing some work?
Oh and Mr A Realist, don't you have the face to say your name is Higman?
Poor...
Posted by: former student, Bishops Waltham on 1:27pm Mon 12 May 08
I now work for the Uni, but was a student when the lecturers went on strike for better pay, which nearly meant my eaxms wouldn't be marked.
As a result of the strike I am getting a 9% pay rise this year, just for being here, I don't have to do anything else to get that.
Is it any wonder the uni is struggling, bloody trade unions, all short term never thinkning about the affects on the "workers" in the long term. To all those whinging about redundancies, all I can say is you reap what you sow!
I now work for the Uni, but was a student when the lecturers went on strike for better pay, which nearly meant my eaxms wouldn't be marked.
As a result of the strike I am getting a 9% pay rise this year, just for being here, I don't have to do anything else to get that.
Is it any wonder the uni is struggling, bloody trade unions, all short term never thinkning about the affects on the "workers" in the long term. To all those whinging about redundancies, all I can say is you reap what you sow!
Posted by: Senior Lecturer, Southampton University on 3:18pm Mon 12 May 08
[quote][bold]former student[/bold] wrote:
I now work for the Uni, but was a student when the lecturers went on strike for better pay, which nearly meant my eaxms wouldn\'t be marked. As a result of the strike I am getting a 9% pay rise this year, just for being here, I don\'t have to do anything else to get that. Is it any wonder the uni is struggling, bloody trade unions, all short term never thinkning about the affects on the \"workers\" in the long term. To all those whinging about redundancies, all I can say is you reap what you sow![/quote] The pay award last year was 5% but staggered into two slices (to make it cheaper for the Universities). Next year it will be 2.5% or RPI whichever is higher unless an independent investigation of University finances finds that they can afford to pay more.
You might have a point if Southampton's financial woes had anything to do with the fact that they now have to pay a half-decent salary (after 20 years or relative decline). There was more than enough new income to cover the pay settlement, which represented only around 1/3rd of the new income from tuition fees. Look around you at all the new buildings, sports facilities and senior salaries if you want to know where they spent all the loot.
In fact, the financial problems are because the VC implemented a catastrophic restructuring exercise, which broke up academic teams, made it harder to teach and administer the University and so meant nobody had time to apply for research grants. If he had listened to the Trades' Unions - or indeed anybody - then that restructuring would have been far less disastrous.
The result of not listening, and continuing to not listening to the unions is that the University is now far less efficient and less productive than when Professor Wakeham arrived. It is certainly a much unhappier working environment - bullying ahd harrassment are reaching epidemic proportions.
Simon Higman (?) claims (above) that if you pay peanuts you get monkeys. Unfortunately, we pay fat-cat level salaries for ours.
former student wrote:
I now work for the Uni, but was a student when the lecturers went on strike for better pay, which nearly meant my eaxms wouldn\'t be marked. As a result of the strike I am getting a 9% pay rise this year, just for being here, I don\'t have to do anything else to get that. Is it any wonder the uni is struggling, bloody trade unions, all short term never thinkning about the affects on the \"workers\" in the long term. To all those whinging about redundancies, all I can say is you reap what you sow!
The pay award last year was 5% but staggered into two slices (to make it cheaper for the Universities). Next year it will be 2.5% or RPI whichever is higher unless an independent investigation of University finances finds that they can afford to pay more.
You might have a point if Southampton's financial woes had anything to do with the fact that they now have to pay a half-decent salary (after 20 years or relative decline). There was more than enough new income to cover the pay settlement, which represented only around 1/3rd of the new income from tuition fees. Look around you at all the new buildings, sports facilities and senior salaries if you want to know where they spent all the loot.
In fact, the financial problems are because the VC implemented a catastrophic restructuring exercise, which broke up academic teams, made it harder to teach and administer the University and so meant nobody had time to apply for research grants. If he had listened to the Trades' Unions - or indeed anybody - then that restructuring would have been far less disastrous.
The result of not listening, and continuing to not listening to the unions is that the University is now far less efficient and less productive than when Professor Wakeham arrived. It is certainly a much unhappier working environment - bullying ahd harrassment are reaching epidemic proportions.
Simon Higman (?) claims (above) that if you pay peanuts you get monkeys. Unfortunately, we pay fat-cat level salaries for ours.
Posted by: Admin Monkey on 11:43pm Mon 12 May 08
That is utter rubbish. If you lecturers who have been getting your 10% pay rises every year had actually bothered to make any research income, then my job wouldn't be under threat.
So much for a fair wage, when its the useless academics who are to blaim not us in the MSA
That is utter rubbish. If you lecturers who have been getting your 10% pay rises every year had actually bothered to make any research income, then my job wouldn't be under threat.
So much for a fair wage, when its the useless academics who are to blaim not us in the MSA
Posted by: astudent, Southampton on 12:12am Tue 13 May 08
the university is aliensating its staff as well as its students, who will support the staff if they choose to take action
the university is aliensating its staff as well as its students, who will support the staff if they choose to take action
Posted by: Had it too good for too long, Southampton on 2:51pm Tue 13 May 08
This is the only industry where staff get above two inflation pay awards a year, and an increment every year, for doing no extra work. In the commercial sector work is performance related rather than Passage of Time. Staff are also gratefully accepting a Final Salary Pension. And likewise 27 to 37 days holiday a year. Academics are meant to do 20% admin, yet there are surplus admin staff and some departments even employ full time photocoping staff. So lets get real. If staff are happy to accept the above, then either Income into the Uni needs to increase, or costs reduce. HSBC who make £4bn a year do not simply sit back and employ non-performers. They are lean staffed with resources in the right places, with a poor pension scheme and PRP. Likewise the Employers in London sack the worst 10% of staff a year. You cannot win-win. The University needs to be in a financial stable position to go forward without unnecessary roles being carried.
This is the only industry where staff get above two inflation pay awards a year, and an increment every year, for doing no extra work. In the commercial sector work is performance related rather than Passage of Time. Staff are also gratefully accepting a Final Salary Pension. And likewise 27 to 37 days holiday a year. Academics are meant to do 20% admin, yet there are surplus admin staff and some departments even employ full time photocoping staff. So lets get real. If staff are happy to accept the above, then either Income into the Uni needs to increase, or costs reduce. HSBC who make £4bn a year do not simply sit back and employ non-performers. They are lean staffed with resources in the right places, with a poor pension scheme and PRP. Likewise the Employers in London sack the worst 10% of staff a year. You cannot win-win. The University needs to be in a financial stable position to go forward without unnecessary roles being carried.
Posted by: Enough, Southampton on 5:28pm Tue 13 May 08
[quote][bold]Had it too good for too long[/bold] wrote:
This is the only industry where staff get above two inflation pay awards a year, and an increment every year, for doing no extra work. In the commercial sector work is performance related rather than Passage of Time. Staff are also gratefully accepting a Final Salary Pension. And likewise 27 to 37 days holiday a year. Academics are meant to do 20% admin, yet there are surplus admin staff and some departments even employ full time photocoping staff. So lets get real. If staff are happy to accept the above, then either Income into the Uni needs to increase, or costs reduce. HSBC who make £4bn a year do not simply sit back and employ non-performers. They are lean staffed with resources in the right places, with a poor pension scheme and PRP. Likewise the Employers in London sack the worst 10% of staff a year. You cannot win-win. The University needs to be in a financial stable position to go forward without unnecessary roles being carried.[/quote] Had it too good for too long? Where's the shame in talking about staff like this? What good do you think will come from it? It's bad enough to be told our jobs are unnecessary. Even Sr'Alan gives his apprentices better sackings than this.
Had it too good for too long wrote:
This is the only industry where staff get above two inflation pay awards a year, and an increment every year, for doing no extra work. In the commercial sector work is performance related rather than Passage of Time. Staff are also gratefully accepting a Final Salary Pension. And likewise 27 to 37 days holiday a year. Academics are meant to do 20% admin, yet there are surplus admin staff and some departments even employ full time photocoping staff. So lets get real. If staff are happy to accept the above, then either Income into the Uni needs to increase, or costs reduce. HSBC who make £4bn a year do not simply sit back and employ non-performers. They are lean staffed with resources in the right places, with a poor pension scheme and PRP. Likewise the Employers in London sack the worst 10% of staff a year. You cannot win-win. The University needs to be in a financial stable position to go forward without unnecessary roles being carried.
Had it too good for too long? Where's the shame in talking about staff like this? What good do you think will come from it? It's bad enough to be told our jobs are unnecessary. Even Sr'Alan gives his apprentices better sackings than this.
Posted by: **** off University employee, Southampton on 12:40pm Wed 14 May 08
[quote][bold]Worried-worker[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]A realist[/bold] wrote: seriously??? you have to pay a good salary to a VC because if you pay peanuts, you get monkeys! if you had to spend pretty much 24/7 working, i expect you would want to be paid very well for it too, and if you had to use your house as a venue for business, i expect you would want a residence to do so. by not understanding that you have to pay to get the quality of person to run an institution like southampton, you\'re just demonstrating your ignorance of the situation. try taking a look at the big picture - no-one likes redundancies but if people aren\'t doing a job that is adding value it doesn\'t help the business so things have to change. try working in the private sector, you\'d be in for a shock...[/quote] You are correct - a fair wage for a fair days pay - works across the board inc the VC - however we are constantly told at the University from the VC down that we must look at & run the Uni as a business so \"in the real world\" / private sector these people running these reviews would & SHOULD be held accountable for getting the University into this mess in the first place. However they are the ones who will be safe from redundancy. For years the University suits have run roughshod over the staff - we have to make a stand against the financial mismanagement in order that jobs can be saved. Bring thes \"suits\" (the VC, Higman, Wheeler & the cronies) to task.[/quote] I agree with the comment regarding paying peanuts and getting monkeys but we are NOT paying peanuts but have still ended up with monkeys, the VC and Adam Wheeler being the biggest two!
Worried-worker wrote:
A realist wrote: seriously??? you have to pay a good salary to a VC because if you pay peanuts, you get monkeys! if you had to spend pretty much 24/7 working, i expect you would want to be paid very well for it too, and if you had to use your house as a venue for business, i expect you would want a residence to do so. by not understanding that you have to pay to get the quality of person to run an institution like southampton, you\'re just demonstrating your ignorance of the situation. try taking a look at the big picture - no-one likes redundancies but if people aren\'t doing a job that is adding value it doesn\'t help the business so things have to change. try working in the private sector, you\'d be in for a shock...
You are correct - a fair wage for a fair days pay - works across the board inc the VC - however we are constantly told at the University from the VC down that we must look at & run the Uni as a business so \"in the real world\" / private sector these people running these reviews would & SHOULD be held accountable for getting the University into this mess in the first place. However they are the ones who will be safe from redundancy. For years the University suits have run roughshod over the staff - we have to make a stand against the financial mismanagement in order that jobs can be saved. Bring thes \"suits\" (the VC, Higman, Wheeler & the cronies) to task.
I agree with the comment regarding paying peanuts and getting monkeys but we are NOT paying peanuts but have still ended up with monkeys, the VC and Adam Wheeler being the biggest two!
Posted by: just staff on 3:25pm Wed 14 May 08
[quote]Had it too good for too long wrote:
This is the only industry where staff get above two inflation pay awards a year, and an increment every year, for doing no extra work. In the commercial sector work is performance related rather than Passage of Time. Staff are also gratefully accepting a Final Salary Pension. And likewise 27 to 37 days holiday a year. Academics are meant to do 20% admin, yet there are surplus admin staff and some departments even employ full time photocoping staff. So lets get real. If staff are happy to accept the above, then either Income into the Uni needs to increase, or costs reduce. HSBC who make £4bn a year do not simply sit back and employ non-performers. They are lean staffed with resources in the right places, with a poor pension scheme and PRP. Likewise the Employers in London sack the worst 10% of staff a year. You cannot win-win. The University needs to be in a financial stable position to go forward without unnecessary roles being carried.[/quote]
The above just show the 80's mentality that dominates the top management at the University. Some people think that putting a suit on is enough to be called a businessman. A few points:
1. The University of Southampton is NOT a business. The University of Southampton is an EDUCATIONAL institution. We should never forget that.
2. Yes, we can learn a bit from business. But do these people saying that we should run as a business know anything about business? Their idea of 'business' is still stuck in the 80s. But let's tackele what we could learn from business: In the business sector, people make use of their resources in full. They don't devalue their own resources and go around bringing consultants just to say exactly what their own staff had said before. That's how business can save money: by making a full use of the resources they have.
3. In a lots of situation for a business to thrive you have to put an injection of capital. So, instead of going through this futile exercise have they thought about employing a good, forward thinking organisational behaviourist to shed some light on how to make use of existing resources? What we need here is an environemnt that it is conducive to team building. Unfortunately the guys in suit have managed to destroy that, by creating unhealthy and destructive competition and sense of job insecurity.Who is going to review them.
Finally, a business is normally run by their founder. Wheeler and Higman did not create this University. Do they really care about the University or about their next career move upwards?
Had it too good for too long wrote:
This is the only industry where staff get above two inflation pay awards a year, and an increment every year, for doing no extra work. In the commercial sector work is performance related rather than Passage of Time. Staff are also gratefully accepting a Final Salary Pension. And likewise 27 to 37 days holiday a year. Academics are meant to do 20% admin, yet there are surplus admin staff and some departments even employ full time photocoping staff. So lets get real. If staff are happy to accept the above, then either Income into the Uni needs to increase, or costs reduce. HSBC who make £4bn a year do not simply sit back and employ non-performers. They are lean staffed with resources in the right places, with a poor pension scheme and PRP. Likewise the Employers in London sack the worst 10% of staff a year. You cannot win-win. The University needs to be in a financial stable position to go forward without unnecessary roles being carried.
The above just show the 80's mentality that dominates the top management at the University. Some people think that putting a suit on is enough to be called a businessman. A few points:
1. The University of Southampton is NOT a business. The University of Southampton is an EDUCATIONAL institution. We should never forget that.
2. Yes, we can learn a bit from business. But do these people saying that we should run as a business know anything about business? Their idea of 'business' is still stuck in the 80s. But let's tackele what we could learn from business: In the business sector, people make use of their resources in full. They don't devalue their own resources and go around bringing consultants just to say exactly what their own staff had said before. That's how business can save money: by making a full use of the resources they have.
3. In a lots of situation for a business to thrive you have to put an injection of capital. So, instead of going through this futile exercise have they thought about employing a good, forward thinking organisational behaviourist to shed some light on how to make use of existing resources? What we need here is an environemnt that it is conducive to team building. Unfortunately the guys in suit have managed to destroy that, by creating unhealthy and destructive competition and sense of job insecurity.Who is going to review them.
Finally, a business is normally run by their founder. Wheeler and Higman did not create this University. Do they really care about the University or about their next career move upwards?
Posted by: **** off University employee, Southampton on 4:09pm Wed 14 May 08
Can we please stop this petty squabbling and keep to the point. The University's finances have obviously been totally mis-managed. They may as well have dipped into the clerical staff pension scheme because that's the effect their 10 year non-contribution has had on the scheme and they have still managed to get us £2 million in the red each year for the last few years. Someone should be held accountable and taken to task over this. That's what would happen in the outside world surely? What auditing procedures does the University have because it's all very suspect to me?
I know the guy isn't very highly thought of and has the inter-personal and presentation skills of a slug, but Simon Higman has not worked at the Uni that long and is obviously the person who's "noticed" the University was in financial difficulty and probably pointed out something should be done about it. That doesn't say much about the other 2 dim wits, Wakeham and Wheeler, does it!
Can we please stop this petty squabbling and keep to the point. The University's finances have obviously been totally mis-man
