University of Leeds
Incomplete, Original Response Total Refusal
-- Original Response (3 Dec 2014)
From: JJ Hermes
Sent: 20 October 2014 12:18
To: foi@leeds.ac.uk
Subject: FOI request
To whom it may concern,
I respectfully request the following information under the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act:
1. The names and titles of all senior staff members making more than £150,000 in total emoluments for the year ended 31 July 2014. These individuals are considered "higher-paid staff" by the Higher Education Funding Council (HEFCE).
2. Please identify the number of individuals identified in the first request who are (a) tenured faculty, (b) clinical staff, or (c) serve in a non-classroom capacity, such as administrative staff.
3. The total emoluments for the past five (5) years for each of the senior staff identified in the first request.
There is wide precedent across publicly funded entities in the UK of regularly disclosing this type of information. The Accounts and Audit (Amendment no 2) Regulations of 2009 require local authorities to publish the actual salaries, allowances, bonuses, compensation and employer's pension contributions paid to each employee who earned over £50,000, and in addition to publish the names of those staff who earned over £150,000 (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2009/3322/made). It is not necessary to disclose the exact salary of the employees earning more than £150,000, but rather to quote that amount in bands of £10,000, as directed by the HEFCE.
The request holds significant public interest, given that the university is a publicly funded institution of higher education that derives a significant portion of funding from public taxation. In addition, openness is, in itself, something in the public interest in promoting accountability and transparency in the spending of public money. As suggested by the Information Commissioner's Office, "It is reasonable to expect that a
public authority would disclose more information relating to senior employees than more junior ones. Senior employees should expect their posts to carry a greater level of accountability." Employees earning more than £150,000 annually can be considered senior employees, since this compensation is more than twice the highest grade on the human resources salary scale.
I look forward to hearing back from you regarding this request. Please do not hesitate to contact me with any follow-up questions. I would prefer all correspondence be sent digitally through this e-mail address, including the response to this request. Thank you for your time in addressing this query.
Sincerely,
JJ Hermes
|
On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 11:06 AM, Tracey Crombie (t.crombie@adm.leeds.ac.uk) wrote (FW: FOI request):
Dear Mr Hermes
I can confirm receipt of the request below, and you should expect to hear from the University in response by 17 November 2014, if, in the meantime, you have any queries about the request, please don't hesitate to Contact Jenny Foggin (j.y.foggin@adm.leeds.ac.uk).
Many thanks.
Tracey Crombie
PA to the Legal Adviser
University of Leeds
LS2 9JT
Tel: 0113 343 4078
Fax: 0113 343 3925
|
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 12:16 PM, JJ Hermes wrote (RE: FWD: FOI request):
To whom it may concern,
On 20 Oct 2014, I submitted a request for information from the University under the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act regarding emoluments for senior members of staff for the year ended 31 July 2014.
Your response should have been provided by 17 Nov 2014, as 20 business days have now passed since my initial request. Please let me know when you will be able to reply to my FOI request.
I look forward to hearing back from you.
Sincerely,
JJ Hermes
|
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 6:35 PM, Jenny Foggin (j.y.foggin@adm.leeds.ac.uk) wrote (RE: FWD: FOI request):
Dear Mr Hermes,
I apologise for the delay in responding. The annual accounts are still being compiled and I have not had access to all the information required. They are being finalised and I will respond as soon as possible -- I will endeavour to get something to you this week.
Best wishes,
Jenny
***************************************************
Jenny Foggin
Senior Governance and Corporate Affairs Officer
University of Leeds
Secretariat
(0113) 343 1155
**************************************
|
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 9:11 AM, JJ Hermes wrote (RE: FWD: FOI request):
Hi Jenny,
Any update on when I can expect a response from you? Thanks.
Cheers,
JJ
|
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 9:22 AM, Jenny Foggin (j.y.foggin@adm.leeds.ac.uk) wrote (RE: FWD: FOI request):
I'm so sorry. I am off sick and this is the first day since Monday that I have been able to check email. I will try to chase up what is happening for you.
Best wishes,
Jenny
|
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 9:24 AM, JJ Hermes wrote (RE: FWD: FOI request):
Thank you, Jenny, I appreciate you checking on this for me.
Cheers,
JJ
|
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 10:16 AM, Jenny Foggin (j.y.foggin@adm.leeds.ac.uk) wrote (RE: FWD: FOI request):
I appreciate your patience, too. It sounds as though there's some confusion about it at work, but I will definitely be back in on Monday and will get to the bottom of things by then.
Best wishes,
Jenny
|
On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 9:01 AM, JJ Hermes wrote (RE: FWD: FOI request):
Hi Jenny,
Any information on when I can expect a response from Leeds regarding this FOI request? Thank you.
Sincerely,
JJ Hermes
|
On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 2:55 PM, Jenny Foggin (j.y.foggin@adm.leeds.ac.uk) wrote (RE: FWD: FOI request):
Dear Mr Hermes,
I apologise for the delay in responding to your request. The University publishes, in the annual report and accounts, information about how many staff earn £100k plus, and how many of these are clinical staff (please see http://www.leeds.ac.uk/downloads/download/249/corporate_publications). I can confirm that during 2013-14 (the most recent year for which figures are currently available), 60 staff were paid £150k or more, including 5 professional and managerial staff and 42 clinical staff (the remainder being academic staff).
I am not able to release the individual salaries and job titles of these senior staff. I note that, as you set out, local authorities publish the salaries and other emoluments of staff earning over £50k and publish the names of staff earning over £150k. However, the Accounts and Audit Regulations do not apply to universities, which unlike public authorities are not wholly publicly funded, and there is no such practice in the sector of publishing salary information, beyond that provided in the annual report and accounts.
The information requested is the personal data of the employees in question. Each has a strong and reasonable expectation of confidentiality regarding their salaries. Although Vice-Chancellor's salaries are published, it is not the practice within the sector, as I have noted, to publish the salaries of senior staff. Neither are specific salaries quoted when roles are advertised; the remuneration of senior staff is a matter of private and personal negotiation. Salary slips are delivered fully sealed, and marked as 'personal', strongly implying that there is an understanding that this is not information that individual members of staff would wish to be shared with others.
The University believes that release of the data would breach the Data Protection Act, because it is not the case that 'processing is necessary for the purposes of legitimate interests pursued by the data controller or by the third party or parties to whom the data are disclosed, except where the processing is unwarranted in any particular case by reason of prejudice to the rights and freedoms or legitimate interests of the data subject' (Schedule 2, condition 6). The University believes that the public interest lies in the University being able to satisfy the public that, insofar as it is disbursing public money (and it is worth noting that a very significant proportion of the University's income is derived from other sources), it is doing so in a responsible, prudent and appropriate manner. This can be done through demonstrating that proper procedures are in place to assess the appropriate remuneration of all employees. General information about pay at the University is available on the HR pages of our website, and I would be happy to answer specific questions or to provide further information. In the case of staff earning over £100k, additional scrutiny and evaluation is provided by the Remuneration Committee (http://www.leeds.ac.uk/secretariat/other_committees.html#remuneration). The Remuneration Committee is directly accountable to the governing body of the University, the Council (which has a majority of lay members). The University's financial management is also rigorously audited by external companies, through which it is held to account for expenditure. It is not necessary for the privacy of those higher paid individuals to be breached for the broader public interest -- in responsible fiscal administration and HR policies -- to be satisfied.
The University therefore believes that the salary information requested is exempt under Section 40(2) of the FoI Act.
The information requested could, if released, cause commercial detriment to the University in several ways. Universities are, despite being public authorities for the purposes of the FoI Act, very much commercial entities who compete vigorously in an international market for staff, students and funds.
Firstly, the release of salaries could have a chilling effect upon recruitment. It is not common practice in other HE markets, eg the USA or Australasia, for senior salaries to be included in job advertisements or to be published. Universities regularly recruit for senior academic staff, in particular and, increasingly for senior professional and managerial staff, in international markets. If it were to become the practice within the UK HE market, there is a real risk that this loss of privacy regarding remuneration would cause excellent potential job candidates to think again, and to apply instead for roles to which that confidentiality could still be assumed to be attached. This would be to the commercial detriment of the University, which would lose the ability to cast its net as wide as it might like to do so.
Secondly, as noted, salary information is normally kept confidential. If staff within the institution became aware of each other's salaries, it could lead to upward pressure upon salaries (which would not be conducive to disbursing public funds with restraint) and to ill feeling or difficulties between staff. Either is a realistic risk, and each, jointly or separately, would cause detriment to the financial running of the institution and to its smooth running more broadly. Upwards pressure upon senior salaries across any staff category would be very problematic. In recent years, the University has engaged in a significant economies exercise. The organisation's financial health is much improved, but would be threatened by precipitate salary inflation. Money that has not been budgeted for would have to be found from other areas, potentially affecting the core mission of the institution. Pressure upon salaries at Leeds could have a knock-on effect to the detriment of other institutions in the sector as pressure upon salaries spread. Dissatisfaction with salaries could lead to staff leaving the institution, which would be destabilising, and a perception of lower salaries could lead to recruitment difficulties, particularly internationally. It is essential to the vitality and effectiveness of the organisation that it maintains its ability to attract the best talent from a range of backgrounds, to bring fresh perspectives, experiences and knowledge.
The University therefore believes that the information requested is exempt from release under Section 43 of the FoI Act (information which, if released, would cause commercial detriment to the organisation).
This exemption is subject to a public interest test. I have considered the public interest very carefully, including the arguments that you put forward in your request. As I have set out above, however, I believe that the public interest lies in the University being able to satisfy the public that, insofar as it is disbursing public money, it is doing so in a responsible, prudent and appropriate manner. I have set out above why I believe that the University can already meet this public interest. Taken together with the risk that the release of the information would destabilise a public authority which provides not only a valuable education service, but which also engages in world-class research and the creation of new knowledge, to the broader public good, I am persuaded that the balance of the public interest lies in the University being able to protect its commercial interests so that it can continue to pursue its teaching and research mission to the best of its ability.
If you are unhappy with the service you have received in relation to your request and wish to make a complaint or request a review of our decision, you should write to or email directly Mr D Wardle, The University Complaints Officer, The University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT (D.Wardle@adm.leeds.ac.uk). Further information about how the University manages Freedom of Information requests and about our complaints procedure is also available on our website (www.leeds.ac.uk).
If you are not content with the outcome of the internal review, you have the right to apply directly to the Information Commissioner for a decision. Generally, the ICO cannot make a decision unless you have exhausted the review/complaints procedure provided by the University. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at: Information Commissioner's Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire, SK9 5AF.
Best wishes,
Jenny
Jenny Foggin
Senior Governance and Freedom of Information Officer
Legal Adviser's Office
The University of Leeds
0113 3431155
|
On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 3:22 PM, JJ Hermes wrote (RE: FWD: FOI request):
Dear Jenny,
I write to respectfully dispute your response to my 20 Oct 2014 FOI request for information about senior staff members making more than £150,000 in total emoluments for the year ended 31 July 2014. As a reminder, that request comprised three parts:
1. The names and titles of all senior staff members making more than £150,000 in total emoluments for the year ended 31 July 2014. These individuals are considered "higher-paid staff" by the Higher Education Funding Council (HEFCE).
2. Please identify the number of individuals identified in the first request who are (a) tenured faculty, (b) clinical staff, or (c) serve in a non-classroom capacity, such as administrative staff.
3. The total emoluments for the past five (5) years for each of the senior staff identified in the first request.
I understand from your 3 Dec 2014 response that the University reserves the right to withhold public disclosure of individual staff and their salaries, which was part (1) of this request. However, the University has completely ignored part (3) of my original request. Thus, I request the University respond to this original request in full:
Please identify all senior staff members making more than £150,000 in total emoluments for the year ended 31 July 2014. Please categorize them as one of the following, as per part (2) of this request: (a) academic staff, (b) clinical staff, or (c) senior management. Then, please provide the annual emoluments for the past five (5) years for each of the senior staff making more than £150,000 in total emoluments identified in the first part of this request. Please identify by name and title all members of the University's senior administrative team and management (e.g., staff in the Vice-Chancellor's Office such as pro-vice-chancellors, chief financial officer, chief operating officer, directors of institutes, etc.).
I have submitted this identical request to each of the 24 members of the Russell Group of universities, and a response from the University of Exeter (attached) exemplifies what I consider a complete fulfillment of my request. Note that it protects the personal data of all senior staff with the exception of the senior management team, and provides salary information in bands of £10,000 annually for the past five years. This information is not accessible from the University by any other means than a FOI request.
Moreover, a First-Tier Tribunal has ruled in a very similar case that universities must disclose the names/titles and salaries of all members of the PSS (Professional Services staff; ie, the senior management team) making more than £100,000 in total emoluments. The Information Commissioner's Office found in case FS50513117 dated 17 Feb 2014 that King's College London must release the names/titles and salaries of *all* staff making more than £100,000 in total emoluments (http://ico.org.uk/~/media/documents/decisionnotices/2014/fs_50513117.pdf). However, the First-Tier Tribunal ruled on 2 Oct 2014 in Case No. EA/2014/0054, an appeal from King's College, that only the names and salaries of members of the PSS (Professional Services staff; ie, the senior management team) making more than £100,000 in total emoluments are subject to disclosure (http://www.informationtribunal.gov.uk/DBFiles/Decision/i1390/Kings%20College%20London%20EA.2014.0054%20(30.09.14).pdf).
I appreciate your response in full to this request under the Freedom of Information Act of 2000. I look forward to hearing back from you regarding this request. Please do not hesitate to contact me with any follow-up questions. I would prefer all correspondence be sent digitally through this e-mail address, including the response to this request. Thank you for your time in addressing this query.
Sincerely,
JJ Hermes
|
On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 10:30 AM, JJ Hermes wrote (RE: FWD: FOI request):
To whom it may concern,
On 9 Dec 2014, I requested a review of your response to a FOI request I submitted on 20 Oct 2014 for information about senior staff members making more than £150,000 in total emoluments for the year ended 31 July 2014. It has been well more than 20 working days since I last heard from you regarding a review of my FOI request. Could you please let me know where that now stands?
Sincerely,
JJ Hermes
|
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 8:44 AM, JJ Hermes wrote (RE: FWD: FOI request):
To whom it may concern,
On 9 Dec 2014, I requested a review of your response to a FOI request I submitted on 20 Oct 2014 for information about senior staff members making more than £150,000 in total emoluments for the year ended 31 July 2014. It has been well more than 20 working days since I last heard from you regarding a review of my FOI request. Could you please let me know where that now stands?
Sincerely,
JJ Hermes
|
|