See also email exchange below. ----- At the Maths "School Board" meeting on 24 Sep, Trevor Hambley the Dean of Science said that our (USyd) staff wage costs were 58% of income, whereas Go8 average was 52%. The wages/income ratio is not an "official" Go8 indicator: http://www.go8.edu.au/__documents/about-go8/go8_indicators_final2013.pdf Looking up the data: $M $M $M % % Wages Revenue Income Wage/Rvnu Wage/Incm ANU 502 981 995 51.2 50.5 Monash 894 ? 1634 ? 54.7 Adelaide 405 ? 790 ? 51.3 Melbourne 922 1787 1847 51.6 49.9 UNSW 792 1463 1479 54.1 53.5 USyd 943 1601 1737 58.9 <<< 54.3 Queensland 843 1551 1583 54.4 53.3 UWA 509 875 916 58.2 55.6 Average (weighted) 54.6 52.9 <<< It would seem that the Dean was comparing apples with oranges. Sources: http://about.anu.edu.au/__documents/annual-reports/annual_report_2012.pdf#93 http://www.monash.edu.au/pubs/ar/annual-report-2012.pdf#48 http://www.adelaide.edu.au/publications/pdfs/a-report-12.pdf#67 http://www.unimelb.edu.au/publications/docs/2012-financial-statement.pdf#3 http://www.fin.unsw.edu.au/files/cfoann/UNSW_2012_Financial_Report.pdf#12 http://sydney.edu.au/about/publications/annual_report/2012/annual_report_2012_volume_1.pdf#82 http://www.uq.edu.au/about/docs/annualreport/annual-report12/UQ-Annual-Financial-Statements-2012.pdf#4 http://year2012.annualreport.publishing.uwa.edu.au/welcome/disclosures_and_legal_compliance/financial_statements?f=306330#2 ---------- Record of email exchange, below. Is my perception of reality distorted in some way? ----- From psz Tue Sep 24 20:30:03 2013 To: dean.science@sydney.edu.au Subject: Staff wage cost USyd 58%, Go8 52% Dear Trevor, At the Maths "School Board" meeting today, you said that our (USyd) staff wage costs were 58% of income, whereas Go8 average was 52%. Looking at our and UNSW annual reports http://sydney.edu.au/about/publications/annual_report/2012/annual_report_2012_volume_1.pdf#82 http://www.fin.unsw.edu.au/files/cfoann/UNSW_2012_Financial_Report.pdf#12 seems that our costs are 58% as you said, and UNSW is 54%. Would you have data about other Go8 universities? The 52% you mentioned seems too low; or would USyd and UNSW be so much higher than most others? Thanks, Paul ----- From dean.science@sydney.edu.au Tue Sep 24 22:17:46 2013 To: Paul Szabo <paul.szabo@sydney.edu.au> Subject: RE: Staff wage cost USyd 58%, Go8 52% Hi Paul, I would expect UNSW is next highest since their salaries are close to ours, though it depends on number of staff as well as salaries. Melbourne Level E is $162 K (at the same time as our last pay rise and now offering 2.5% pa I believe) Monash $156 K (similar timing), UQ $155 K from Jan 1 this year, Adelaide went to $159 K on the same date, and UWA went to $166 K two weeks ago. It is much more difficult to compare professional and general staff salaries because the levels have different meanings. Regards, Trevor TREVOR HAMBLEY FAA | Dean of Science Faculty of Science ----- From psz Wed Sep 25 07:01:54 2013 To: dean.science@sydney.edu.au Subject: RE: Staff wage cost USyd 58%, Go8 52% Dear Trevor, Thanks for that reply... but that seems to answer some entirely different question! Your data is somewhat wrong: Melbourne LevelE is now $165922. --- Related to your reply: how many LevelE do we, and other Universities have? I believe you once said we have half. --- At the meeting, you said that the last EBA was negotiated when the effects of the GFC were not yet known. That seems to be all wrong: the GFC started in 2007, its effect on our finances were evident in 2008, and the last EBA was at the end of 2009. Could you please explain. Apologies for the many questions. Thanks, Paul ----- From dean.science@sydney.edu.au Wed Sep 25 09:18:35 2013 To: Paul Szabo <paul.szabo@sydney.edu.au> Subject: RE: Staff wage cost USyd 58%, Go8 52% Hi Paul, I was using the Level E salary as a proxy for the positioning of the salary scales in each of the universities to show that most of the other Go8s have substantially lower levels than ours and therefore are likely to be spending a lower proportion of their income on salaries. I don’t know the proportion of Level E relevant to this issue - it is quite difficult to extract because many of our level E staff are on partly or fully funded research contracts. However, I believe that among T&R staff, the proportion in most schools is now substantially below 50%. The largest (by far) impact on our finances was international student numbers which peaked in 2009 and dropped from then on. Most but not all of this was GFC related and second order consequences such as the entry of the US universities into the market in new ways - which has impacted particularly badly on Science. Regards, Trevor TREVOR HAMBLEY FAA | Dean of Science Faculty of Science ----- From psz Wed Sep 25 09:44:49 2013 To: dean.science@sydney.edu.au Subject: RE: Staff wage cost USyd 58%, Go8 52% Dear Trevor, Thanks for your further reply. You had mentioned specific ratios of wages/income. Could you please explain where those figures came from? Were they only a figure of speech? --- You also wrote: > The largest (by far) impact on our finances was international student > numbers which peaked in 2009 and dropped from then on. Most but not all > of this was GFC related ... Do you mean to say that the GFC itself is a "red herring", that the deficit reported in 2008 is not of the essence? Thanks, Paul ----- From psz Fri Sep 27 19:00:26 2013 To: dean.science@sydney.edu.au Subject: RE: Staff wage cost USyd 58%, Go8 52% Dear Trevor, You do not seem to have replied to my questions. I looked up the data for wages/income ratios for the Go8 universities, results below. It seems that the figures you mentioned, are in fact unrelated and should not be compared. Could you please also reply to the question of relevance of any deficit reported. Thanks, Paul --- The wages/income ratio is not an "official" Go8 indicator: http://www.go8.edu.au/__documents/about-go8/go8_indicators_final2013.pdf $M $M $M % % Wages Revenue Income Wage/Rvnu Wage/Incm ANU 502 981 995 51.2 50.5 Monash 894 ? 1634 ? 54.7 Adelaide 405 ? 790 ? 51.3 Melbourne 922 1787 1847 51.6 49.9 UNSW 792 1463 1479 54.1 53.5 USyd 943 1601 1737 58.9 <<< 54.3 Queensland 843 1551 1583 54.4 53.3 UWA 509 875 916 58.2 55.6 Average (weighted) 54.6 52.9 <<< It would seem that the Dean was comparing apples with oranges. Sources: http://about.anu.edu.au/__documents/annual-reports/annual_report_2012.pdf#93 http://www.monash.edu.au/pubs/ar/annual-report-2012.pdf#48 http://www.adelaide.edu.au/publications/pdfs/a-report-12.pdf#67 http://www.unimelb.edu.au/publications/docs/2012-financial-statement.pdf#3 http://www.fin.unsw.edu.au/files/cfoann/UNSW_2012_Financial_Report.pdf#12 http://sydney.edu.au/about/publications/annual_report/2012/annual_report_2012_volume_1.pdf#82 http://www.uq.edu.au/about/docs/annualreport/annual-report12/UQ-Annual-Financial-Statements-2012.pdf#4 http://year2012.annualreport.publishing.uwa.edu.au/welcome/disclosures_and_legal_compliance/financial_statements?f=306330#2 ----- From psz Sun Sep 29 06:52:15 2013 To: dean.science@sydney.edu.au Subject: RE: Staff wage cost USyd 58%, Go8 52% Dear Trevor, You wrote: > ... > The largest (by far) impact on our finances was international student > numbers which peaked in 2009 and dropped from then on. ... Looking at the data below, I cannot see the trend you mention. Could you please explain. Thanks, Paul --- International enrolments --------- Science --------- --------- AllUni --------- Year PGRes PGCwk UG Tot PGRes PGCwk UG Tot 2008 93 182 381 656 590 4326 5001 9917 2009 125 97 424 646 678 4498 5305 10481 2010 147 104 502 753 757 4254 5821 10832 2011 151 101 548 800 778 3807 6059 10644 2012 135 85 530 750 799 3449 5844 10092 2013 125 78 481 684 799 4031 5758 10588 Sources: http://sydney.edu.au/staff/planning/statistics/enrol/intnl_fac.php http://sydney.edu.au/staff/planning/statistics/enrol/intnl_fac.php?yr=2012 ----- dean.science@sydney.edu.au Mon Sep 30 08:04:52 2013 To: Paul Szabo <paul.szabo@sydney.edu.au> Subject: RE: Staff wage cost USyd 58%, Go8 52% Dear Paul, It is certainly not the case that I was selectively using data in the way you have suggested, and indeed, I did not extract them myself. The wages/income ratio is not the most appropriate since income evidently includes donations, capital grants, etc. The wages/revenue data (USyd 58.9, average 54.6) are not greatly different to the data I quoted, particularly given that two of the three lowest paying Go8s (using my albeit crude proxy) are not included in your average. Also, I am not sure whether the numbers I quoted come from the same data sets as you have sourced. I don’t understand your question regarding the 2008 deficit - I don’t recollect referring to the deficit that year. Regards, Trevor TREVOR HAMBLEY FAA | Dean of Science Faculty of Science ----- psz Mon Sep 30 08:28:50 2013 To: dean.science@sydney.edu.au Subject: RE: Staff wage cost USyd 58%, Go8 52% Dear Trevor, Could you please find out where the figures you quoted came from? Your figures seem wrong. The question about deficit relates to the following exchange: >>>> At the meeting, you said that the last EBA was negotiated when the >>>> effects of the GFC were not yet known. That seems to be all wrong: the >>>> GFC started in 2007, its effect on our finances were evident in 2008, >>>> and the last EBA was at the end of 2009. Could you please explain. >>> >>> The largest (by far) impact on our finances was international student >>> numbers which peaked in 2009 and dropped from then on. Most but not all >>> of this was GFC related and second order consequences such as the entry >>> of the US universities into the market in new ways - which has impacted >>> particularly badly on Science. >> >> Do you mean to say that the GFC itself is a "red herring", that the >> deficit reported in 2008 is not of the essence? Thanks, Paul ----- dean.science@sydney.edu.au Mon Sep 30 08:07:28 2013 To: Paul Szabo <paul.szabo@sydney.edu.au> Subject: RE: Staff wage cost USyd 58%, Go8 52% Dear Paul, I was referring to new international enrolments since the point under discussion was when did this impact of the GFC first become evident. The numbers you have sourced are total enrolments which lag the time of first impact because of pipeline effects. This lag effect is greater for Science because a higher proportion of our international students are enrolled in 3-4 year UG programs vs 1-2 year PGCwk programs than the University average. Regards, Trevor TREVOR HAMBLEY FAA | Dean of Science Faculty of Science ----- psz Mon Sep 30 08:41:58 2013 To: dean.science@sydney.edu.au Subject: RE: Staff wage cost USyd 58%, Go8 52% Dear Trevor, Could you please provide (or point me to) data for new enrolments and completions or terminations? I understood that students pay a yearly (or per-semester) fee, generating ongoing income while enrolled. Is not that so? Thanks, Paul ----- From psz Tue Oct 1 12:43:50 2013 To: dean.science@sydney.edu.au Subject: RE: Staff wage cost USyd 58%, Go8 52% Dear Trevor, Thank you again for the chat today. Following up: --- Our executives get paid a lot more than UNSW, seems unlikely that USyd executive pay would be 75% of "industry average". Would you please be able to find that average: without it the statement is vacuous. http://sydney.edu.au/about/publications/annual_report/2012/annual_report_2012_volume_1.pdf#48 Remuneration Bonus Spence VC 744143 155000 Garton Provost 540799 83200 Armstrong Education 456300 39000 Hearn International 523106 44051 Trewhella Research 456300 70200 Brewer Strategic 443728 60681 Houston Indigenous 400000 50000 http://www.fin.unsw.edu.au/files/cfoann/UNSW_2012_Financial_Report.pdf#104 Base Super Bonus Hilmer VC 884057 27501 N/A Henry Academic 391885 59001 N/A (1Jan-4Nov) Martin Academic 86411 7777 N/A (15Oct-31Dec) Field Research 378874 62159 84347 Blakeman Finance&Ops 386699 68334 86528 Morris Services 304513 36762 64896 --- The VC wrote: http://sydney.edu.au/news/staff/2576.html?newscategoryid=222&newsstoryid=11738 The percentage of casual academic staff at Sydney [was] 19.9 percent last year, and casual academics make up no more than five percent of the total academic staffing of any faculty. Can you explain or re-phrase that so it makes sense? The Provost wrote: http://sydney.edu.au/news/84.html?newscategoryid=11&newsstoryid=12185 ... proportion of casual academics ... [is] 19.9 percent. The proportion of well-trained casual staff seeking a continuing academic position constitute less than 5 percent of our academic staff. Does that say that 75% of casuals are untrained? --- Thanks, for helping me restore faith in management. ----- From psz Wed Oct 2 13:50:44 2013 To: dean.science@sydney.edu.au Subject: RE: Staff wage cost USyd 58%, Go8 52% Dear Trevor, >>> ... international student numbers peaked in 2009 and dropped from >>> then on. ... >> Looking at [total enrolment] data below, I cannot see the trend you >> mention. Could you please explain. > > I was referring to new international enrolments ... The best I could locate so far was data for "all Australia", see below. That still does not show the trend you mention. Could you please provide data for USyd. And anyway, do not students pay a yearly fee, generating ongoing income during their enrolment? Thanks, Paul --- Higher Education international student commencements: Year Number 2007 72603 2008 78070 2009 89435 2010 102538 2011 96526 2012 89326 Sources: https://aei.gov.au/research/International-Student-Data/Pages/InternationalStudentData2007.aspx https://aei.gov.au/research/International-Student-Data/Pages/InternationalStudentData2008.aspx https://aei.gov.au/research/International-Student-Data/Pages/InternationalStudentData2009.aspx https://aei.gov.au/research/International-Student-Data/Documents/INTERNATIONAL%20STUDENT%20DATA/2010/2010Dec_0712.pdf https://aei.gov.au/research/International-Student-Data/Documents/INTERNATIONAL%20STUDENT%20DATA/2011/2011Dec_0712.pdf https://aei.gov.au/research/International-Student-Data/Documents/INTERNATIONAL%20STUDENT%20DATA/2012/2012Dec_0712.pdf -----