How much money do you need?

It is not a very good look for the University of Otago. Neither is it a great ending to what has been a fraught year for the institution.

In the lead-up to Christmas, dozens of general staff at the university will be worrying about their finances and their futures as a major programme of redundancies starts kicking into gear. At much the same time it has become known that vice-chancellor Prof Harlene Hayne's pay packet rose by about $30,000 last year, to somewhere between $620,000 and $630,000.

The reason for this pay rise remains a mystery, other than a vapid justification from the State Services Commission that it was for ''job re-sizing''. It is difficult to know what this actually means - possibly that is the idea - but this is information which the public and other keen observers of Otago University have a right to know.

''Re-sizing'' does seem a surprising choice of words for an explanation. Prof Hayne has actually been presiding over a university in which there has been some shrinkage of faculties and academic departments in the past year or so. With redundancies about to begin as a consequence of the drawn-out general staff review, that diminution will continue into next year.

The salaries of New Zealand's vice-chancellors and other highly paid public sector bosses were released last week by the commission as part of its annual reporting requirement.

Prof Hayne is still paid less than University of Auckland vice-chancellor Prof Stuart McCutcheon, on $710,000-
$720,000, and the University of Canterbury's Dr Rod Carr, on $630,000- $640,000.

The University of Otago says Prof Hayne's salary is independently determined and in line with similar roles elsewhere in New Zealand. And Universities New Zealand executive director Chris Whelan says there are tough challenges for vice-chancellors here, working in a more complicated environment than a decade ago.

Nobody could argue these are not big jobs to take on. Vice-chancellors are in charge of sprawling, highly complex organisations - businesses, really - and have a large number of employees, and millions of dollars, to oversee. But they are not doing all this work themselves. While they have to bear the ultimate responsibility, they have plenty of managers below them, and below them, and so on.

Interestingly, a commission spokesman says vice-chancellor salaries here are not benchmarked against those overseas. Given our university bosses are paid more than their British counterparts, it is no wonder those in the United Kingdom want to follow step and use salaries here to back their claims.

There is nothing new in cliques of chief executives getting together to talk up the need for higher salaries and demand inflated pay packets. They can then use the, ''it's what the market is paying'' argument.

Money, of course, does not guarantee happiness. Plenty of working people - the majority in fact - enjoy a perfectly fulfilling life, support a family, save for the future and do their bit for their community on a fraction of the salary of a vice-chancellor and other chief executives.

Not all those on huge salaries keep it to themselves. Many are strong supporters of the arts, charities and sport, openly or behind the scenes. A large number of community initiatives would never have made it off the ground without wealthy patrons.

Fortunately, in the UK there are moves afoot to make universities lay out the reasons why somebody should be paid more than 150,000 ($NZ288,000). This close, public scrutiny should be welcomed and should be introduced here.

Of all large organisations, one reasonably expects a university to have a social conscience and to act transparently, always within the gaze of the public. The dearth of detail about Prof Hayne's payrise is a good example of how not to do it.

Add a Comment