Queen's University Belfast
Incomplete, Original Response Refusal
-- Original Response (18 Nov 2014): QUB1.pdf
-- Review Response (3 Mar 2015): QUB2.pdf
From: JJ Hermes
Sent: 20 October 2014 12:20
To: info.compliance@qub.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, Nov 18, 2014 at 11:18 AM, Jacqueline Cullen (j.cullen@qub.ac.uk) wrote (Freedom of Information Request: FOI/14/234):
Dear Mr Hermes
Please find attached a response, in relation to your recent Freedom of Information request, from Clare Jamison, Head of the Registrar's Office, Queen's University Belfast.
Kind regards
Jacqueline Cullen
Registrar's Office
Lanyon South
Tel: 028 9097 2507
-- Attachment: QUB1.pdf
|
On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 9:06 AM, JJ Hermes wrote (Re: Freedom of Information Request: FOI/14/234):
Dear Clare [sic],
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 18 Nov 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 10:33 AM, JJ Hermes wrote (Re: Freedom of Information Request: FOI/14/234):
To whom it may concern,
On 3 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, Jan 27, 2015 at 11:32 AM, Information Compliance (info.compliance@qub.ac.uk) wrote (RE: Freedom of Information Request: FOI/14/234):
Dear Mr Hermes
I acknowledge receipt of your request for an internal review and will respond in due course.
Information Compliance
|
On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 2:35 PM, Information Compliance (info.compliance@qub.ac.uk) wrote (RE: Freedom of Information Request: FOI/14/234):
Dear Mr Hermes
I acknowledge receipt of your email of 3 December 2014 to Mrs Clare Jamison and your most recent email of 27 January 2015.
You have stated that the University did not respond to part 3 of your original request. The University, however, provided the same response to part 3 of your request as it had to part 1 of the request i.e. that we were not providing information in relation to specific job titles or exact salary of members of staff citing the exemption under Section 40(2) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000.
In view of this, can you please clarify if you are seeking an internal review of the full response provided to you on 18 November 2014?
regards
Amanda Aicken
Information Compliance
|
On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 10:33 AM, JJ Hermes wrote (Re: Freedom of Information Request: FOI/14/234):
Dear Ms. Aicken,
Yes, indeed, I am seeking an internal review regarding the Queen's University Belfast response to my FOI request. Specifically, I request a review regarding the University's use of the exemptions under Section 40(2) of the Data Protection Act, in light of the fact that the ICO and a First-Tier Tribunal have found that this protection is not applicable to senior university management.
As I wrote on 3 December 2014, 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 complete response to my FOI request. Your response is already well delayed from the 20 business days you have under the law to respond to my request for review, so I appreciate your prompt handling of this review.
Sincerely,
JJ Hermes
|
On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 5:14 PM, Jacqueline Cullen (j.cullen@qub.ac.uk) wrote (Freedom of Information Request: FOI/14/234):
Dear Mr Hermes,
We acknowledge receipt of your request for an internal review which was received, by email, on 3 December 2014. In line with University policy, a Pro-Vice-Chancellor will now be appointed to undertake an internal review. We will be in contact with you in due course.
Kind regards
Jacqueline Cullen
Registrar's Office
Lanyon South
Tel: 028 9097 2507
|
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 2:38 PM, Jacqueline Cullen (j.cullen@qub.ac.uk) wrote (Freedom of Information Request: FOI/14/234: Internal Review Request):
Dear Mr Hermes,
Please find attached a response, in relation to your recent Internal Review request, from Professor Tony Gallagher, Pro-Vice Chancellor, Queen's University Belfast.
Kind regards
Jacqueline Cullen
Registrar's Office
Lanyon South
Tel: 028 9097 2507
-- Attachment: QUB2.pdf
|
|