Previous page
Table of Contents
| Previous page |
Table of Contents |
Next page |
The COUNCIL and the GENERAL BOARD beg leave to report to the University as follows:
1. In this Report, the Council and the General Board bring forward proposals to replace the current scheme of discretionary payments to non-clinical academic and academic-related offices in non-professorial grades by arrangements for awarding additional increments on a permanent basis, following the approval by the Regent House of the proposals of the Report of the General Board on the introduction of the office of University Senior Lecturer into the Cambridge structure of academic offices, and associated matters. (New arrangements for awarding additional pay to Professors and to academic-related staff in the professorial grades have already been introduced following approval of Recommendations II (paragraphs 29-40) and III (paragraphs 41-44) of the General Board's Report on the recruitment, reward, and retention of aca-demic and academic-related offices (Reporter, 1997-98, pp. 808-9).)
2. In bringing forward the proposals contained in this Report, the Council and the Board believe that it is important to draw attention to the different nature of academic and academic-related offices and posts. In the case of the holders of most academic offices and posts, promotion may be justified in terms of performance without any change or increase in duties or responsibilities, for example University Lecturer to University Senior Lecturer or Reader or Professor; this is not, on the whole, the case with academic-related officers and posts. Although outstanding performance may justify progression from one grade of an office to another, for example from Administrative Officer, Grade II, to Grade I, or Computer Officer, Grade IV, to Grade III, in most cases the Council and the Board would expect movement to a more senior office, to involve evidence of a substantial increase in the level of responsibility. The Council and the Board note the need urgently to develop robust promotions procedures for academic-related staff, after appropriate consultation.
3. In the arrangements described in the following paragraphs, additional discretionary increments have been added to the tops of the scales of those offices from which it is not possible to justify a move to the next more senior grade without a substantial increase in responsibility. No discretionary steps have been added to the top of the scales of offices from which it is possible to justify promotion to the next higher grade on the ground of outstanding performance without any substantial increase in responsibility.
4. The Council and the Board wish to emphasize that these arrangements are merely intended to replace the current discretionary payment scheme; they have not been devised to provide a comprehensive solution to the problems of recruiting and retaining staff in areas where the University has to compete with the private sector. The Independent Review of Higher Education, Pay and Conditions ('The Bett Report'), drew attention to sector-wide problems experienced by Universities in attracting and retaining such staff (p. 48 and Appendix E). The Council and the Board acknowledge that current policies do not address these problems satisfactorily and that a different approach is required as a matter of high priority to ensure that the University's recruitment and retention policies enable it to compete more effectively in the recruitment and retention of such staff.
5. The following examples may help to clarify the Council's and the Board's approach in reforming the current discretionary pay scheme:
| (i) | A University Assistant Lecturer who is not at the top of the scale, would be able to apply for additional increments. However, no discretionary increments would be available at the top of the University Assistant Lecturer scale since all University Assistant Lecturers are considered for promotion to University Lecturer. Similarly, a University Lecturer who is not at the top of the scale would be able to apply for additional increments. Whether a University Lecturer is at the top of the scale or not, he or she could apply for promotion to a University Senior Lectureship; no additional steps have therefore been added to the top of the University Lecturer scale. |
| (ii) | A Computer Officer, Grade IV, or an Administrative Officer, Grade II, who is not at the top of the scale would be able to apply for additional increments, but not for discretionary increments above the top of the scale since in their cases promotion to the next higher grade (Computer Officer, Grade III, and Administrative Officer, Grade I) would be considered a more appropriate means of reward. However, an Assistant Registrary/Under-Librarian/Computer Officer, Grade I, would be able to apply for additional increments above the top of the scale since promotion to the next high grade of Senior Assistant Registrary/Senior-Under Librarian/Senior Computer Officer) could not be easily attained as a result of outstanding performance alone. There would normally have to be clear evidence that the performance had led to a significant increase in responsibility. |
6. Part A of Annex 1 lists those offices which, it is proposed, should not have a discretionary range of increments at the top of the scale, promotion to the next higher grade being the appropriate means of reward for outstanding performance; Part B lists those offices from which the step to the next higher grade is a more substantive one and for which promotion to the next higher grade ordinarily depends on evidence of a significant increase in responsibility. In this connection, it should be noted that the national scales for non-clinical academic and academic-related staff, reproduced for reference in Annex 2, do not provide for discretionary points at the top of every scale.
7. The thinking of the General Board and of the Council in devising the proposals contained in this Report has been based on the following principles and considerations:
| (i) | Permanent financial reward for sustained contribution and achievement should be possible for all University officers either through the award of additional pay in their existing office or through promotion. Where promotion is appropriate (these offices are listed in Part A of Annex 1), the case would be considered through the relevant current promotions/temporary upgrading procedure. Where promotion is not ordinarily appropriate (these cases are listed in Part B of Annex 1), a number of additional increments will be added to the tops of scales of the offices concerned. |
| (ii) | In the case of more senior offices, with fixed stipends, for which promotion is not usual on the grounds of performance alone but must be justified also in terms of an increase in responsibility, an additional discretionary step would be added above the stipend to allow for reward for outstanding performance. (These offices are listed in Part B of Annex 1). |
| (iii) | Promotion should always result in a financial reward. In many instances this will happen automatically though progression to a more senior office. However, in the case of promotion from one grade of office to a more senior grade of the office both of which have a scale of stipend, this is not invariably the case because of the current policy on age-linking; promotion should therefore involve an increase in stipend of not less than two increments. |
8. As has been mentioned above, the reform of the University's remuneration policy as it affects academic and academic-related staff at professorial level and above has already been approved and implemented. The primary purpose of this Report is to propose changes in the existing arrangements for rewarding staff in the non-professorial grades, consistent with those outlined in paragraphs 61-65 of the Report of the General Board on the recruitment, reward, and retention of academic and academic-related officers (Reporter, 1997-98, pp. 811-13), and in paragraphs 11-15 of the Report of the General Board on the introduction of a University Senior Lectureship into the Cambridge structure of academic officers, and associated matters (Reporter, 1998-99, pp. 785-6).
9. The current discretionary pay arrangements for University Officers in non-professorial grades were introduced in 1988 (see paragraph 11 of the Joint Report of the Council and the General Board on University stipends, 1988, and paragraph 6 of the Report of the Council on the stipends of University administrative officers and certain other officers (Reporter, 1987-88, p. 465). The award of discretionary payments was restricted initially to University officers who had reached the top of their scale, and to the holders of offices whose scales of stipends had a maximum equal to the maximum of the scale of stipends for University Lecturers. The scheme was subsequently widened to include the holders of all offices below professorial level except Readerships and University offices on step 28 of the general scale of stipends (see Statutes and Ordinances, p. 603). The scheme was at first weighted in favour of those who were at the top of their scale, but it was agreed subsequently that officers who were not at the top of the scale could, exceptionally, be awarded discretionary payments if their contribution was outstanding.
10. In paragraph 65 of the General Board's 1998 Report on the recruitment, reward, and retention of academic and academic-related officers, it was stated that, in the light of the opportunity offered by the proposed introduction of University Senior Lectureships, the present arrangements for staff in non-professorial grades should be discontinued and replaced by arrangements more in line with those at other universities. The Board had in mind the addition of a discretionary range of incremental points at the top of the scales of stipends for certain offices, where that was appropriate, and of discretionary steps above the fixed stipends of University offices, and that progression into the discretionary range should be determined solely by quality of performance with reference to contribution and achievement. The Board also indicated that they would wish to continue to provide an opportunity for rewarding staff who had not reached the top of their scale, the reward to be in the form of additional increments. It was also stated in the same paragraph of the Board's 1998 Report that detailed consideration would be given to the most appropriate and practicable procedure for awarding the additional increments; to the transitional arrangements necessitated by the phasing out of the current scheme; and to the question of when University Assistant Lecturers and University Lecturers should be eligible to apply under the new scheme. Those proposals were approved in principle by Grace 10 of 25 November 1998; the purpose of the present Report is to recommend detailed arrangements for their implementation.
11. The remaining paragraphs of this Report set out in detail the proposals of the Council and of the Board relating to new arrangements for awarding discretionary increments and to the transitional arrangements. (For information the annual circular letter which has launched annual discretionary payment exercises in recent years is reproduced as Annex 3.)
12. The present scheme allows for the award for a period of five years of a single pensionable payment, which is currently £1,867 a year and approximately equivalent to any two increments on the University's salary spine (see below). University officers holding awards must re-apply for them at the end of that period on the same basis as officers who are not in receipt of awards. Those in receipt of awards are informed that there should be no presumption that they will be accorded preferential treatment over officers applying for first-time awards in the same exercise.
13. Under the proposed new arrangements, University officers who qualify would (i) be awarded one or two increments on a permanent basis within the normal scale, or (ii) be promoted to the next higher grade of office if there is no discretionary step or range of increments above the top of the scale. Progression through the discretionary steps added to the top of the scale of offices would not be automatic. Not more than two increments may be applied for in any particular year and it will not be possible for a person who is successful in one year to apply again for additional increments or increments in the following year. Some flexibility and discretion will be necessary in the consideration and approval of applications in the early years of the new scheme when the present scheme is being phased out (see below) to ensure that the treatment of officers already in receipt of discretionary awards is without detriment.
14. At present, the holders of all non-clinical academic and academic-related offices below the level of Reader without exception, are eligible to apply for awards, regardless of their length of service or place on their scale of stipend. Very few awards, in fact, are held by officers who are not at the top of their scale, as the present scheme is weighted in favour of those officers who have reached the top of the scale. Under the new arrangements, it is proposed that a qualifying period of two years' service in the officer's current post should be completed before the holder of an office becomes eligible to apply for an additional increment or increments. The qualifying period should relate to the actual service in office between the date on which the appointment was taken up and the date on which an award would take effect, or the period between the date on which the last award took effect and the date on which any further additional increment or increments would take effect.
15. University officers would be responsible for submitting their own applications for additional increment. This would not preclude Heads of Departments or Chairmen of Faculty Boards and other senior members of staff from encouraging individuals to apply. Potential applicants, however, would be advised to consult their Head of Department or Chairman of Faculty Board, or other similar appropriate person, about the strength of their case for additional pay.
16. The Council and the Board will allocate each year funds to meet the cost of the awards. The scheme will be competitive and University officers should only apply if, following consultation, they believe that their case stands a reasonable chance of success. University officers who apply and are unsuccessful in three consecutive annual exercises will not be permitted to apply in the next annual exercise.
17. Regard should be had not only to the quality of an officer's work in the core area(s) of his or her role, as evidenced by his or her contribution and achievement. There must be a clear indication of 'added value' and evidence of a sustained level of contribution and achievement.
18. Preference should not be given to officers who are at the top of their scale, or near the retirement age.
19. The context in which the criteria are to be applied is the specific role of the officer in question. In the case of academic offices, regard should be had to the primary duties which involve, in the case of University Lecturers and University Assistant Lecturers, both teaching and research and, in the case of Assistant Directors of Research, Senior Research Officers, etc., research, although teaching and general contribution including administration and examining might also be taken into account. In the case of academic-related offices the context in which the criteria are to be applied should be focused on the job description of the officer.
20. The Council and Board would regard the award of one additional increment in any particular exercise as the norm (but see below under transitional arrangements); only in very exceptional cases would they expect two increments to be awarded. Two increments might be awarded in those cases where it is judged that the officer has demonstrated that he or she has the potential to perform successfully at the next senior grade of office in the relevant area of activity but was unable to be promoted.
21. This should consist of:
22. In paragraph 65 of the General Board's 1998 Report on the recruitment, reward, and retention of academic and academic-related officers, the central bodies made it clear that they favoured the involvement of Appointments Committees to assess cases for the award of additional increments, and the continuing involvement of the Councils of the Schools to decide the awards to be made within an annual allocation determined by the Board. The proposed involvement of Appointments Committees is in line with the increased role that has been assigned to them in matters concerned with performance, for example reappointments, temporary upgradings, and promotion to University Senior Lectureships.
23. Annex 4 lists officers which fall within the remit of particular Appointments Committees for the purpose of the proposed new scheme. The list excludes Special Appointments Committees dealing with University Lectureships whose duties cover more than one institution. In these cases, it is proposed that the Faculty Appointments Committee of the Faculty to which the office has been assigned should consider applications for additional increments. Where the Council or the General Board are specified as the appointing authority, it would not be appropriate for the Council or the General Board to be involved in the process of consideration. For example, the Council on the recommendation of the Finance Committee, are the appointing authority for the Director of the University Farm. In such cases, the recommending body should assess applications and forward them to the appropriate awarding committee (see paragraph 24). Similarly, because of their involvement in the process of consideration, the Councils of the Schools should not have a role in considering any particular case at an earlier stage in the procedure. With regard to the membership of Appointments Committees, the same considerations apply as were stated in paragraph 10 of the General Board's Report on the introduction of University Senior Lectureships. University officers who apply for an award should not themselves be mem-bers of the Committees who would consider their application. Members of Committees who are in this position would be expected to resign and be replaced for those meetings at which the Committees consider applications for discretionary increments.
24. Appointments Committees will assess applications, and forward lists, in priority order, to the relevant Council of the Schools, or in the case of Council institutions, to the Discretionary Awards Committee of the Council. The lists will also contain the names of those who have applied but who have not been recommended for an award. The Awarding Committees, as currently constituted, will decide, bearing in mind the level of allocations available to them, which recommendations to approve.
25. The Council and the General Board are very conscious of the increasing burden being placed on Faculties, Departments, and other institutions, and on all persons involved in processes concerned with appointment, reappointment, and promotions. In a scheme of this kind, which does not provide for appointment to a more senior office, the Council and the General Board believe that it is not in the interest of the University to put in place arrangements which are as onerous as those recently introduced for dealing with more substantive recognition of achievement through promotion. The Council and the General Board, therefore, do not, in this scheme, favour the introduction of an appeal mechanism. They are, however, of the view that feedback ought to be available on request from Heads of institutions, though it should be presented orally and with a view to helping the officer to form a view on those aspects of his or her performance and contribution which he or she needs to address if there is to be a reasonable prospect of obtaining an additional increment or increments in a subsequent exercise. Appointments Committees will not know which of those applicants recommended by them will be successful at the stage the awards are made. The feedback should therefore be simply in terms of whether or not the Appointments Committee has judged that the applicant is of a standard to merit an award. A sense of the strength of the competition in that particular annual exercise should also be provided, since those recommended for additional increments may not be successful because of the limit on the funds available to the Awarding Committee. In the case of those not recommended by the Appointments Committees, a brief indication of the main reason or reasons why the applicant has not satisfied the criteria should be forwarded to the Awarding Committees. The Awarding Committees should provide Heads of institutions with a report in these terms, covering all applicants, which will provide them with an informed basis for providing feedback to unsuccessful applicants in their institutions, if feedback is requested.
26. All awards will be strictly confidential, as is currently the case with awards made to Professors under the supplementary payments scheme and with increases in stipend made to the holders of academic-related offices under the discretionary pay arrangements recently introduced for such staff (Reporter, 1997-98, p. 809)
27. Awards made under the current discretionary payments scheme are pensionable and are awarded for five years. In the final year of the period of the award, officers must apply for the award to be continued. It is made clear to officers who apply for renewal that their applications are considered on the same basis as those officers who are applying for the first time and that there must be no presumption that they will be awarded preference over those officers.
28. Under the proposed new arrangements, officers currently in receipt of discretionary awards received under the present scheme would continue to receive them for the remaining period of the award; at the end of that period the payment would cease. Applications from these officers should be for two increments to ensure no detriment, and should be treated on a par with applications for single increments, which will be the norm under the new scheme, and not assessed against the same criteria which will apply under the new scheme to the award of two increments (see paragraph 20). Officers currently in receipt of awards may apply in any annual exercise prior to the date on which their discretionary payment ends, and not just the annual exercise immediately prior to that date.
29. With regard to the position of University Lecturers, as there will not be a discretionary range of increments above the current top of the University Lecturer scale, University Lecturers currently in receipt of payments would be expected to apply for promotion to University Senior Lecturer in any annual promotions exercise before the date on which their discretionary payments end, with the intention of maintaining (and increasing) their current overall level of remuneration on a permanent basis through progression to the higher grade of University Senior Lecturer. In the case of those University officers whose payments will come to an end on 30 September 2000, the Council and the General Board have agreed that they should be given three opportunities to apply for a Senior Lectureship (in the case of University Lecturers) or permanent additional increments (in the case of other offices) without any reduction in their current level of remuneration of both stipend and discretionary payment. If an officer is unsuccessful at the first attempt, he or she will have his current discretionary payment continued for a maximum of two further years to allow a further opportunity to obtain promotion or a permanent award, as appropriate, before the discretionary payment ceases.
30. In the case of academic-related officers in grades equivalent to and above the University Lecturer grade, who are currently in receipt of awards, a successful application will result in progression to the first step in the discretionary range, which has a value equivalent to the current discretionary award. However, thereafter, progression will not be automatic and it will be necessary for the officer to apply for further increments in subsequent annual exercises.
31. At several points on the University salary spine there are instances where there is a moderate shortfall between the value of the discretionary payment and the award of two increments. Notwithstanding this, the Council and the General Board take the view that such a shortfall, where it occurs, should be regarded as being more than compensated by the permanence of the award of additional increments, and by the possibility of accelerated movement up the scales of stipends. It should also be noted that, in the case of University officers whose stipend is at step 26 (Statutes and Ordinances, p. 603) (proposed new steps 28 and 28A), although the new discretionary step is less than the value of a current discretionary payment, the combined value of the stipend and the discretionary step (step 28A) will result in an increase over the current combined value of the present level of stipend and discretionary payment.
32. There are currently seven holders of University academic-related offices in receipt of awards whose offices will not, under the proposed new arrangements, have discretionary points. The offices are those of Administrative Officer, Grade II, Assistant Under-Librarian, Assistant Keeper in the Fitzwilliam Museum, Technical Officer, and Computer Officer, Grade III. The Council and the General Board, as appropriate, will keep these cases under review in order to ensure that the transitional arrangements do not result in detrimental treatment of the officers concerned.
33. The Council and the Board wish to emphasize that replacing the current arrangements by the arrangements described in this Report will be a complicated process. They recognize that it is most likely that adjustments will be necessary in the course of the implementation of the new arrangements, and it may be the case that some revision of the offices assigned to Parts A and B in Annex I may be necessary.
34. The Council and the General Board accordingly propose that, if the recommendations in this Report are approved, they are given the authority to make such appropriate changes and adjustments to the scheme, and to take such action as they deem to be necessary in the first and subsequent exercises, to ensure the proper management and efficient operation of the scheme.
35. The Council and the General Board will determine each year the overall sum to be made available for expenditure on additional increments and will allocate the funds in proportion to the number of eligible offices in institutions within each Council of School and under the supervision of the Council. The Council and the General Board will attempt to ensure that the amount of funds allocated will not result in eligible University officers having less of a prospect of success than under the present arrangements. To provide flexibility, the Council and the General Board will permit the carrying over of any unspent balance from one year's allocation to the next, or mortgaging up to 25 per cent of the following year's allocation within a five-year cycle.
36. The Council and the General Board would expect the cost of additional increments awarded to the holders of such offices to be met in the same proportions as the funds supporting the office. Where the office is partly funded from a non-UEF source and partly from the UEF, the contribution should be not less than the proportion of the cost met from the non-UEF source.
37. The holders of these posts would be eligible for consideration under the same scheme and on the same basis as University officers. In the case of contract research workers, whose appointments can be of a short-term nature, the Board do not at present propose any change in the current scheme for awarding discretionary increments. They intend, however, to monitor the new arrangements, if approved, and will review them together with the current scheme for contract research staff in the light of experience.
38. The Council and the Board have undertaken some consultation on these proposals. The consultation has not been comprehensive as they have taken the view that it is desirable to proceed with these proposals rapidly and as far as possible in step with the proposals contained in the Report on the introduction of University Senior Lectureships, to which they are linked. They have sought the views of the Head of the Unified Administrative Service in respect of administrative staff, the Director of the University Computing Service in respect of computing staff, the University Librarian in respect of Library staff, and the Cambridge Association of University Teachers. The Council and the Board draw attention to the opportunity that will be afforded to Heads of institutions and to individual members of staff for making comments at the Discussion of the Report. The Council and Board will review their proposals in the light of those comments.
39. The Report of the Review Committee has recently been published and the central bodies are considering its implications for the University and its staff. The Report is concerned with the establishment of broad frameworks for the determination of pay and conditions of service which will apply to all the HE Institutions, but which will allow freedom for individual institutions to adapt the detail. It proposes the setting up of a National Council, with members from all the main organizations representing employers and staff throughout UK higher education, to have substantial negotiating, consultative, and advisory functions on an agreed range of matters; and also proposes that there should be two Sub-Councils, one for academic and the other for non-academic staff. It is also envisaged that the National Council with its Sub-Councils will develop over the next few years much of the detail relating to the broad recommendations contained in the Report. The Bett Report acknowledges that the response of the Government will be very significant in determining whether the recommendations can be taken forward successfully. The Council and the General Board see little merit in postponing reforms outlined in their Report until it becomes clear what is likely to emerge from the new national arrangements over the next few years, if they are implemented. The Council and the General Board have agreed to keep these matters under review and to assess the implications for Cambridge of any proposals for changes in pay structure and conditions of service as they emerge at national level.
40. The Council and the General Board accordingly recommend:
I. That the current discretionary payments scheme be abolished and replaced by the arrangements described in this Report including the revised stipends and scales of stipends set out in Annex 1, the first awards under the new arrangements to take effect from 1 October 2000, or earlier if possible.
II. That the General Board and the Council be given authority to make such changes in the arrangements of the scheme as they consider necessary from time to time for the good management and efficient operation of the scheme.
13 December 1999
| ALEC N. BROERS, Vice-Chancellor | JOHN A. LEAKE | ONORA O'NEILL |
| TONY BADGER | A. M. LONSDALE | JEREMY SANDERS |
| DAVID HARRISON | M. D. MACLEOD | M. SARDY |
| BRIAN F. G. JOHNSON | R. E. THORNTON | M. SCHOFIELD |
| GORDON JOHNSON |
1 December 1999
| ALEC N. BROERS, Vice-Chancellor | BRIAN F. G. JOHNSON | N. J. MACKINTOSH |
| P. J. BAYLEY | JOHN A. LEAKE | ADRIAN POOLE |
| K. GLOVER | PETER LIPTON | KATE PRETTY |
| MALCOLM GRANT |
A. Discretionary steps have not been added above the top of the scales of the offices listed below, promotion to the next higher grade being the more usual means of reward.
| Reader | Step 29 |
| University Senior Lecturer | Step 25 to 27 |
| University Lecturer | Step 11 to 22 |
| University Assistant Lecturer | Step 7 to 13 |
| Senior Assistant in Research | Step 8 to 13 |
| Assistant in Research | Step 6 to 8 |
| Administrative Officer: | |
| Grade II | Step 9 to 15 |
| Grade III | Step 6 to 9 |
| Computer Officer: | |
| Grade II | Step 14 to 18 |
| Grade III | Step 9 to 15 |
| Grade IV | Step 6 to 9 |
| Junior Assistant Secretary in the Board of Continuing Education: | |
| Grade II | Step 9 to 15 |
| Grade III | Step 6 to 9 |
| Assistant Tutor, Board of Continuing Education | Step 6 to 10 |
| Assistant to the Careers Adviser: | |
| Grade II | Step 9 to 15 |
| Grade III | Step 6 to 9 |
| Advisory Officer, EMBS: | |
| Grade II | Step 10 to 12 |
| Grade III | Step 6 to 8 |
| Assistant Keeper in the Fitzwilliam Museum | Step 7 to 13 |
| Museum Assistant in Research in the Fitzwilliam Museum | Step 6 to 8 |
| Assistant to the Secretaries, Local Examinations Syndicate: | |
| Grade II | Step 9 to 15 |
| Grade III | Step 6 to 9 |
| Counsellor, Grade II, in the University Health Services | Step 8 to 13 |
| Resident in the Department of Clinical Veterinary Medicine | Step 11 to 15 |
| House Officer in the Faculty of Clinical Veterinary Medicine | Step 7 to 9 |
| Technical Officer | Step 8 to 13 |
| Assistant Technical Officer | Step 6 to 10 |
| Research Officer in the Department of Applied Economics | Step 8 to 15 |
| Junior Research Officer in the Department of Applied Economics | Step 6 to 8 |
| Junior Assistant Observer | Step 8 to 13 |
| Language Teaching Officer | Step 6 to 8 |
| Language Adviser | Step 6 to 13 |
| Lector in Language | Step 3 to 6 |
| Graduate Staff in the Centres of Latin American Studies and South Asian Studies | Step 6 to 8 |
| Assistant Under-Librarian in the University Library | Step 9 to 15 |
| Assistant Library Officer in the University Library | Step 6 to 10 |
| Graduate Trainee in the University Library | Step 1 to 3 |
B. Discretionary steps as indicated in brackets have been added to the top of the scales or above the stipends of the offices listed below. In the case of these offices, promotion to the next higher grade would depend on a significant increase in responsibility as well as on outstanding performance.
| Principal Assistant Registrary, Principal Assistant Treasurer | Step 30 (and 30A) |
| Senior Assistant Registrary, Senior Assistant Treasurer | Step 28 (and 28A) |
| Assistant Registrary, Assistant Treasurer | Step 11 to 22 (and 25, 26, and 27) |
| Administrative Officer, Grade I | Step 13 to 18 (and 19 and 20) |
| Senior Computer Officer | Step 28 (and 28A) |
| Computer Officer, Grade I | Step 10 to 22 (and 25, 26, and 27) |
| ADC Theatre | |
| Manager | Step 2 to 6 or 6 to 10 (and 11 and 12) |
| Assistant Staff Office | |
| Personnel Officer | Step 30 (and 30A) |
| Job Analyst | Step 6 to 9 (and 10 and 11) |
| Board of Continuing Education | |
| Senior Assistant Secretary | Step 28 (and 28A) |
| Assistant Secretary | Step 12 to 22 (and 25, 26, and 27) |
| Junior Assistant Secretary, Grade I | Step 13 to 18 (and 19 and 20) |
| Senior Staff Tutor | Step 28 (and 28A) |
| Tutor | Step 11 to 22 (and 25, 26, and 27) |
| Catering Manager | Step 13 to 20 (and 21 and 22) |
| Careers Service Syndicate | |
| Careers Adviser | Step 12 to 22 (and 25, 26, and 27) |
| Assistant to the Careers Advisers, Grade I | Step 13 to 18 (and 19 and 20) |
| Estate Management and Building Service | |
| Deputy Director | Step 30 (and 30A) |
| Assistant Director | Step 28 (and 28A) |
| Senior Advisory Officer | Step 19 to 22 (and 25, 26, and 27) |
| Advisory Officer, Grade I | Step 13 to 18 (and 19 and 20) |
| Joint Telecommunications Management Committee | |
| Telecommunications Manager | Step 11 to 22 (and 25, 26, and 27) |
| Fitzwilliam Museum | |
| Senior Keeper | Step 28 (and 28A) |
| Keeper | Step 12 to 22 (and 25, 26, and 27) |
| Senior Assistant Keeper | Step 12 to 18 (and 19 and 20) |
| Hamilton Kerr Institute | |
| Assistant to the Director | Step 11 to 20A (and 21 and 22) |
| Kettle's Yard | |
| Director | Step 12 to 22 (and 25, 26, and 27) |
| Assistant to the Director | Step 1 to 3 (and 4 and 5) |
| Local Examinations Syndicate | |
| Principal Assistant Secretary | Step 30 (and 30A) |
| Senior Assistant Secretary | Step 28 (and 28A) |
| Assistant Secretary | Step 12 to 22 (and 25, 26, and 27) |
| Assistant to the Secretaries, Grade I | Step 13 to 18 (and 19 and 20) |
| Accommodation Syndicate | |
| Secretary | Step 13 to 18 (and 19 and 20) |
| University Centre | |
| General Manager designated University Catering Adviser | Step 28 (and 28A) |
| University Health Services | |
| Counsellor, Grade I | Step 11 to 22 (and 25, 26, and 27) |
| Director of Physical Education | Step 28 (and 28A) |
| Physical Education Officer | Step 9 to 15 (and 16 and 17) |
| Superintendent of the Engineering Workshops | Step 28 (and 28A) |
| Director of the Scott Polar Research Institute | Step 28 (and 28A) |
| University Pathologist in the Department of Clinical Veterinary Medicine | Step 28 (and 28A) |
| Assistant Director of Development Studies | Step 11 to 22 (and 25, 26, and 27) |
| Assistant Director of Studies in International Relations | Step 11 to 22 (and 25, 26, and 27) |
| Assistant Director of Research | Step 11 to 20A (and 21 and 22) |
| Deputy Directors of the University Computing Service, and of the Department of Applied Economics | Step 30 (and 30A) |
| Director of PET Scientific Services | Step 30 (and 30A) |
| Secretary of the School of Physical Sciences | Step 28 (and 28A) |
| Secretary of the School of Technology | Step 28 (and 28A) |
| Consultant Occupational Physician | Step 28 (and 28A) |
| Secretary of the Clinical School | Step 28 (and 28A) |
| Directors of the Agricultural Economics Unit, of the Property Research Unit, and of the University Farm | Step 28 (and 28A) |
| Director of the Language Centre | Step 28 (and 28A) |
| Director of Research (Administration and Development), Department of Engineering | Step 28 (and 28A) |
| University Physician and University Surgeon in the Faculty of Clinical Veterinary Medicine | Step 28 (and 28A) |
| University Clinical Anatomist and University Clinical Veterinary Anatomist | Step 28 (and 28A) |
| Deputy Director of University Biomedical Support Services | Step 28 (and 28A) |
| University Laboratory Animals Adviser | Step 18 to 22 (and 25, 26, and 27) |
| Special Appointment in the Department of Applied Economics | Step 14 to 21 (and 22) |
| Senior Design Engineer | Step 13 to 23 (and 25, 26, and 27) |
| Curator of the Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology | Step 13 to 23 (and 25, 26, and 27) |
| Senior Assistant Curators of the Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, the Museum of Zoology, the Sedgwick Museum, and the Herbarium | Step 12 to 18 (and 19 and 20) |
| Secretary-Librarian of the Centre of South Asian Studies | Step 12 to 22 (and 25, 26, and 27) |
| Curator of the Whipple Museum of the History of Science | Step 11 to 22 (and 25, 26, and 27) |
| Deputy Director of the McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research | Step 11 to 22 (and 25, 26, and 27) |
| Superintendents of the Biochemical Laboratory and of the Department of Pathology | Step 11 to 22 (and 25, 26, and 27) |
| Curator of the Sedgwick Museum | Step 11 to 20A (and 21 and 22) |
| Senior Language Teaching Officer | Step 11 to 20A (and 21 and 22) |
| Senior Technical Officer | Step 11 to 20A (and 21 and 22) |
| Senior Research Officer in the Department of Applied Economics | Step 10 to 20A (and 21 and 22) |
| Design Engineer and Electronic Design Engineer in the Department of Engineering | Step 10 to 20A (and 21 and 22) |
| Deputy Superintendent of the Engineering Workshops | Step 10 to 20A (and 21 and 22) |
| Senior Assistant Observer | Step 10 to 20A (and 21 and 22) |
| Curator in Aerial Photography | Step 10 to 20A (and 21 and 22) |
| Senior Language Adviser | Step 10 to 20A (and 21 and 22) |
| Assistant Curator in Malacology (Watson) | Step 8 to 13 (and 14 and 15) |
| Assistant Curators of the Museum of Zoology, of the Sedgwick Museum, and of the Herbarium | Step 8 to 13 (and 14 and 15) |
| Assistant Curator of the Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology | Step 6 to 13 (and 14 and 15) |
| Secretaries of Faculties, Departments, and other institutions | |
| Grade A | |
| Secretaries of the Departments of Chemistry, Physics, and the Faculty of Clinical Veterinary Medicine | Step 13 to 24 (and 26, 27, and 27A) |
| Grade B | |
| Secretaries of the Departments of Anatomy, Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics, Earth Sciences, Education, Materials Science and Metallurgy, Physiology, Zoology, and of the Institute of Astronomy | Step 11 to 22 (and 25, 26, and 27) |
| Grade C | |
| Secretaries of the Judge Institute of Management Studies, the Institute of Biotechnology, and the Computer Laboratory | Step 10 to 15 (and 16 and 17) |
| Secretaries of the Faculties of Architecture and History of Art, Economics and Politics, Law, and Oriental Studies, and of the Departments of Applied Economics, Archaeology, Chemical Engineering, Education, Engineering, Experimental Psychology, Genetics, Geography, History and Philosophy of Science, Land Economy, Pharmacology, Plant Sciences, and Pure Mathematics and Mathematical Statistics | Step 10 to 15 (and 16 and 17) |
| Assistant Secretaries of the Faculty of Clinical Veterinary Medicine, and of the Departments of Education, Engineering, and Physics | Step 10 to 15 (and 16 and 17) |
| Assistant Superintendent of the Department of Pathology | Step 10 to 15 (and 16 and 17) |
| University Library | |
| Deputy Librarian | Step 30 (and 30A |
| Senior Under-Librarian | Step 28 (and 28A) |
| Under-Librarian | Step 12 to 22 (and 25, 26, and 27) |
| Librarians of Faculties, Departments, and other institutions | |
| Grade A | |
| Librarians of the Faculty of Modern and Medieval Languages and of the Department of Engineering | Step 12 to 22 (and 25, 26, and 27) |
| Grade B | |
| Librarians of the Faculties of Architecture and History of Art, Classics, Economics, and Politics, English, History, and Social and Political Sciences | Step 8 to 15 (and 16 and 17) |
| Librarians of the Pendlebury Library of Music, the Scott Polar Research Institute, the School of Education, the Judge Institute of Management Studies, and the Language Centre | Step 8 to 15 (and 16 and 17) |
| Grade C | |
| Librarians of the Faculties of Archaeology and Anthropology, Divinity, and Oriental Studies, and of the Department of History and Philosophy of Science and the Institute of Criminology | Step 6 to 10 (and 11 and 12) |
The University's general scale of stipend
|
|
[This annex is not available in the online issue of the Reporter]
The Report of the General Board on recruitment, reward, and retention of academic and academic-related offices contained a recommendation that the current discretionary payment scheme be replaced by new arrangements as described in paragraph 65 of the Report, the details of the changes, including transitional arrangements, to be brought forward for approval by the Regent House in due course. The Grace containing this proposal was recently approved by the Regent House. The General Board and Council hope to formulate detailed proposals in the near future. In the meantime it will be necessary for the current discretionary payment scheme to continue in operation.
Under the present arrangements University officers who have been awarded payments in earlier exercises must reapply if their payments are to be continued. Those officers who were awarded payments in the 1 October 1994 exercise and who must now reapply for their awards to be continued from 1 October 1999 have been informed of this and a copy of the standard letter sent to each is attached for your information.1 The Council and the Board have agreed that as the scheme is competitive and linked to performance each application should be considered on its merits and that officers applying for renewal of awards should not be accorded preferential treatment. However, as regards officers applying for the continuation of their awards, the Council and the Board accept that it would be relevant to the consideration of a particular case to ask whether that officer's level of performance has been sustained at the level at which it had been at the time the award had been made or whether there has been some decline in the level of his or her performance.
The following timetable has been agreed for the 1 October 1999 exercise and future exercises:
| (a) | Faculty Board and similar authorities to issue invitations to all eligible officers to submit applications not later than 1 May 1999. |
| (b) | The short-listing Committees of Faculty Boards and other authorities complete their consideration of the applications and submit their priority lists to the appropriate Awarding Committees by 29 May 1999. |
| (c) | The Awarding Committees aim to make their decisions before the end of June 1999. |
Attached to this letter is a paper which sets out the guidance on criteria agreed by the Council and the Board. You are asked to ensure that each eligible officer receives a copy of the criteria when you invite him or her to apply for an award in the forthcoming exercise and that the members of shortlisting committees of Faculty Boards and comparable bodies receive copies of this letter and its attachments. The Secretaries of the Awarding Committees of the Councils of the Schools etc. are also requested to ensure that copies of this letter and attachments are circulated to members of those committees.
List of officers eligible to apply for an award.
The holders of all University offices in non-professorial grades with stipends and scales of stipend below the level Reader are eligible to apply for an award. [All Readers benefited from a phased increase in their stipends equivalent to the level of a discretionary payment at the time discretionary pay was introduced in the University; that increase has been consolidated as part of the present Readership stipend. Similarly, the holders of other offices with a level of stipend between that of a Reader and a Professor all benefited from a phased increase of an additional six per cent in their stipends on the 1985 basis as was recommended in the Joint Report of the Council of the Senate and the General Board on University stipends, 1988 (Reporter, 1987-88, p. 457, para. 21) and the Report of the Council of the Senate on the stipends of University administrative offices and certain other offices (Reporter, 1987-88, p. 464, para. 7).]
The Council and the General Board believe that, as the substantial majority of University officers are at the top of their scale of stipend, most of the available awards should be made to such officers. They wish to add, however, that they would also expect those officers who are not at the top of their scale and whose performance is outstanding should have a reasonable expectation of obtaining an award.
Attached to this letter is a list of all those persons within the institution or institutions within the scope of the Board, Syndicate or other authority of which you are the Secretary who are eligible to apply for awards with effect from 1 October 1999. The list is arranged in three columns: those who are currently or who will have reached the top of a scale before or on 30 September 1999; those who on 30 September 1999 will not have reached the top of a scale; and those officers whose payments were awarded in the 1 October 1994 exercise and will come to an end on 30 September 1999, unless they are successful in applying for an award in the 1 October 1999 exercise. (University officers awarded payments in the 1 October 1994 exercise have recently been reminded that they must reapply for the continuation of their awards and that they will be invited in the near future to do so. Copies of that letter are attached for information.1)
The list does not include the names of University officers who are in receipt of discretionary payments other than those who must reapply if their awards are to be continued from 1 October 1999, or the names of officers who are known to be leaving the service of the University whether as a result of retirement or resignation. Nor does it include the names of the University Lecturers holding honorary NHS Consultant Contracts as these officers ceased to be eligible for discretionary awards with effect from 1 January 1991 (see para. 5 of the General Board's Notice of 7 November 1990 on the remuneration of University Lecturers holding honorary Consultant Contracts in the National Health Service (Reporter, 1990-91, p. 170).
The columns of names in the list are arranged in alphabetical order. Each University institution has previously been sent an explanatory list of the computer codes used to designate each University office.
The Council and the Board try to ensure as far as possible that the number of awards available for each annual exercise is kept to a constant level. The number of awards available for each annual exercise will be fifty plus the number of awards released by University officers who must reapply in that exercise for the continuation of their awards. The total number of awards available for the 1 October 1999 exercise is 112. The number of awards available for each group will be notified in due course to the Secretaries of the Awarding Committees.
The value of the discretionary payment, which is pensionable and awarded for a fixed period of five years, is currently £1,804 p.a.
You are reminded that the following institutions which do not fall within the scope of the Councils of the Schools have been assigned as follows to those authorities for the purposes of the discretionary awards exercise:
| Centre of South Asian Studies Research Centre for English and Applied Linguistics The Language Centre |
CSAH |
| Centre of International Studies Centre of Latin American Studies ESRC Centre for Business Research |
CSHSS |
| Aerial Photography | CSPS |
| Institute of Biotechnology Central Biomedical Services |
CSBS |
| Industrial Liaison and Technology Transfer The University Computing Service |
CST |
| The University Library |
The General Board and the Council, following consultation with the University Library Syndicate, have agreed that applications from eligible officers shall be considered by the awarding committee of the Council.
The lists of eligible officers indicate the gender of each officer. For monitoring purposes the Secretaries of the Awarding Committees of the Councils of the Schools are requested to provide the following statistical information when they notify The Old Schools of the names of the successful candidates:
| (i) | numbers of applicants by gender. (Those Councils of the Schools who deem each officer to be eligible unless he or she opts out of the exercise will need to delete the names of officers who have opted out of the current year's exercise from the lists of eligible officers to establish the number of male and female 'applicants'.) Please ensure that this information is included in your return of statistical information; |
| (ii) | number of successful applicants by gender. |
Attached to this letter are copies of tables taken from Reporter showing the numbers and percentages of women and men receiving awards from 1 October 1998 and percentages of awards made to women from 1993-98 (Table 2).1
The Council and the Board again wish to reiterate the particular importance they attach to the following features of the scheme:
| (a) | that each eligible officer be asked to submit each year a curriculum vitae to the Committee established by the Faculty Board or other authorities, if he or she wishes to be considered for the award of a discretionary payment: |
| (b) | that the Faculty Board Committee or equivalent seek at least one reference from an appropriate person in relation to each application. |
If you have any queries about the discretionary awards scheme please do not hesitate to contact me. Any queries in relation to the attached lists should be addressed in the first instance to Alistair Cameron in the General Board Office (extension 32287).
Yours sincerely
M J Horne
Work and Stipends and Staff Development Section
General Board Division
University Offices
1 Not attached to this Annex.
The current published guidance is scattered over several documents (see footnote) and the central bodies believe that it would be helpful, and would assist in encouraging greater uniformity in the operation of the scheme, if the criteria were to be set down in a single document which could be circulated to all committees involved in the consideration of applications for awards and could easily be made available to all eligible University officers.
Paragraph 13 of the Joint Report of the Council of the Senate and the General Board on University stipends, 1988 (Reporter, 1987-88, p. 457) and Section 6 of the Report of the Council of the Senate on the stipends of University administrative officers and certain other officers (ibid., p. 464) provided general guidance on criteria. The Council and the General Board agreed several years ago to advise committees involved in the consideration of applications for awards that the published guidance did not preclude consideration being given to activities not explicitly mentioned in the Report (see below) and that the Councils of the Schools, and other awarding bodies concerned could refine the published criteria provided that any such refinement was not inconsistent with the published guidance. The central authorities have considered whether more specific criteria would be helpful and they have concluded that, while some clarification of the existing criteria might be desirable, little would be gained by issuing detailed guidance because of the importance they attach to the awarding authorities having scope to apply the present criteria (and to develop their own criteria within the basic guidelines) in their own local circumstances.
Regard should be had not only to the quality of an officer's work in the primary areas of his or her duties but also to the extent or the amount of the officer's contribution in those areas. As the substantial majority of University officers are at the top of their scales of stipend, the Council and the Board would expect most of the available awards to be made to such officers. They wish to point out, however, that they would expect those officers not at the top of their scale whose performance was outstanding to have a reasonable expectation of obtaining an award.
Regard should also be had to the extent to which University officers make a contribution to their institutions, and/or to the University (excluding Colleges) over and above what might be regarded as the normal requirements of the office they hold.
As stated in the 1988 Joint Report, account should be taken of the officer's performance in teaching and research and also of contributions, both past and present, to administration.
The Council and the Board believe that an applicant for an award should be regarded as having a strong claim for an award only if he or she can demonstrate outstanding contribution in at least two of these areas. As far as teaching is concerned the Council and the Board believe that both the quality of teaching and the level of contribution to the teaching programme of a Faculty should be taken into account in the assessment of applications. The following outline definition of teaching effectiveness was recently agreed by the Board and circulated widely within the University:
'Teaching may be defined as effective when it:
As far as research is concerned consideration should be given to the excellence of the officer's recent and ongoing research and its national and international standing.
The Council and the Board acknowledge that the question of what weight should be given to an officer's performance in undertaking a substantial Faculty/Departmental administrative responsibility is a difficult one. Some Faculty/Departmental administrative duties carry some remuneration, though the Council and the Board are aware that there is a widespread opinion that the level of remuneration is often inappropriate. While not wishing to comment on that opinion, the Council and the Board are of the view that some regard should be had to whether an officer receives payment for undertaking such work. The Council and the Board also wish to emphasize that administrative duties which are temporary should not be given disproportionate weight in the assessment of an officer's application: it is contrary to national guidelines for Awarding Committees to award payments primarily as a means of providing extra financial remuneration to officers who have been willing to undertake responsibility for which University officers in general are reluctant to volunteer. Discretionary awards are made for periods of five years and because of the competitive nature of the discretionary award scheme decisions made with disproportionate regard to such responsibilities might place the officer in a comparatively weaker position when he or she applies for the renewal of the award.
Regard may also be had to activities such as membership of University committees, inter- collegiate committees, membership of national and international academic committees, representing the University on outside bodies, and academic-related work outside the University.
What is said in Section 2 above applies also to the holders of research offices except that performance in teaching and contribution to the teaching programme of a Faculty or Department should be given less weight. Obviously, any teaching undertaken by a research officer may be regarded as a contribution that the officer makes over and above what is strictly required as a holder of a research office; first and foremost, however, there should be evidence of excellence of performance in research.
The basis on which applications from the holders of academic-related and administrative offices should be considered will on the whole be more straightforward in that such offices involve a single field of activity, e.g. administration, librarianship, museum curatorship, technical, and computer support. Section 6 of the Report of the Council of the Senate on the stipends of University administrative officers and certain other officers (Reporter, 1987-88, p. 457) specified special ability or outstanding performance as the criteria for deciding awards to eligible administrative and similar staff in Council institutions. The Council and the Board have considered whether more specific guidance should be given for such staff, referring, for example, to the unusual nature of an officer's work, the rarity value of skill involved or the output of work achieved. They have agreed that the guidance which has been published in the Report is sufficiently broad to allow the Awarding Committees involved in the procedure to develop their own criteria, provided that these are not inconsistent with the published guidance.
As a guiding principle, in the interest of equity, the Council and the Board believe that in assessing applications Awarding Committees should aim in any given exercise for a similar ratio between the numbers of successful applicants and eligible officers in the academic-related categories of office as between the numbers of successful applicants and eligible holders of academic offices.
Guidance on procedure and criteria has been published in the following:
| (i) | the Joint Report of the Council and the General Board on University stipends, 1988 (Reporter, 1987-88, p. 457). This Report dealt with academic and academic-related staff in institutions under the supervision of the General Board. See specifically Sections 1-14, and 22-26, together with Appendix B and the Schedule; |
| (ii) | the Report of the Council on the stipends of University administrative officers and certain other officers (ibid., p. 464). This Report was concerned with staff in institutions which were not under the supervision of the General Board. See specifically Section 6 and the Schedule. |
| (iii) | the circular letter dated 20 October 1988 to Chairmen of Faculty Boards and other authorities from the then Registrary and Secretary General which concerned the arrangements for the first annual exercise (Reporter, 1988-89, p. 111). |
| (iv) | the circular letter dated 22 May 1989 from the then Registrary and Secretary General (GB.895.479) to Secretaries of Boards, Syndicates, and similar authorities which concerned the arrangements for the second annual exercise and additional guidance on the operation of the scheme (Reporter, 1988-89, p. 675). |
University officers eligible for discretionary awards, excluding academic and academic-related offices in non-professorial grades, listed by Appointments Committee.
University Lecturer, University Assistant Lecturer
Assistant Director of Research, Senior Assistant in Research
Superintendent of Engineering Workshops
Directors of the Agricultural Economics Unit and Property Research Unit
Deputy Directors of the University Computing Service
University Pathologist, Physician, Surgeon in the Department of Clinical Veterinary Medicine
University Clinical Anatomist
University Clinical Veterinary Anatomist (or Special Committee if duties concern two Departments)
Senior Language Teaching Officers
Senior Design Engineers, Design Engineers, Electronics Design Engineers
Curator, Senior Assistant Curator, Assistant Curator of the Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology
Curator, Senior Assistant Curator, Assistant Curator of the Museum of Zoology
Assistant Curator in Malacology
Curator, Senior Assistant Curator, Assistant Curator of the Sedgwick Museum
Curator, Senior Assistant Curator, Assistant Curator of the Herbarium
Resident in the Department of Clinical Veterinary Medicine
Senior Assistant Observer in the Institute of Astronomy
Deputy Director and Senior Research Officers in the Department of Applied Economics
Deputy Librarian
Senior Under-Librarian
Under-Librarian
Assistant Under-Librarian
Assistant Library Officer
Graduate Trainee
Grade A
Librarians of the Faculty of Modern and Medieval Languages and of the Department of Engineering
Grade B
Librarians of the Faculties of Architecture and History of Art, Classics, Economics and Politics, English, History, and Social and Political Sciences; Librarians of the Pendlebury Library of Music, the Scott Polar Research Institute, the School of Education, the Judge Institute of Management Studies, and the Language Centre
Grade C
Librarians of the Faculties of Archaeology and Anthropology, Divinity, and Oriental Studies, and of the Department of History and Philosophy of Science and the Institute of Criminology
Grade A
Secretaries of the Departments of Chemistry, Physics, and Clinical Veterinary Medicine
Grade B
Secretaries of the Departments of Anatomy, Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics, Earth Sciences, Education, Materials Science and Metallurgy, Physiology, Zoology, and of the Institute of Astronomy
Superintendents of the Biochemical Laboratory and the Department of Pathology
Grade C
Secretaries of the Judge Institute of Management Studies, the Institute of Biotechnology, and the Computer Laboratory
Secretaries of the Faculties of Architecture and History of Art, Economics and Politics, Law, Oriental Studies, and of the Departments of Applied Economics, Archaeology, Chemical Engineering, Education, Engineering, Experimental Psychology, Genetics, Geography, History and Philosophy of Science, Land Economy, Pharmacology, Plant Sciences, and Pure Mathematics and Mathematical Statistics
Assistant Secretaries of the Faculty of Clinical Veterinary Medicine, and of the Departments of Education, Engineering, and Physics
Assistant Superintendent of the Department of Pathology
Senior Technical Officer, Technical Officer
Senior Computer Officer
Computer Officer:
Grade I
Grade II
Grade III
Grade IV
Assistant Director of Development Studies
Assistant Director of Studies in International Relations
Assistant in Research (on recommendation of Head of Department, subject to General Board approval)
Assistant Technical Officer (on recommendation of Head of Department, subject to General Board approval)
Language Teaching Officer
Lector (if a Faculty is not organized in Departments, otherwise Head of Department)
Junior Assistant Observer in the Institute of Astronomy (on recommendation of Head of Department, subject to General Board approval)
Director and Deputy Director of the Scott Polar Research Institute
Research Officer
Junior Research Officer
Special Appointment
Director of the Language Centre
Deputy Director of the Centre
Senior Language Adviser
Language Adviser
Members of the Graduate Staff, subject to General Board approval
Secretary/Librarian of the Centre of South Asian Studies
Deputy Director, subject to General Board approval
Deputy Director
Director
Deputy Director
Assistant Director
Director of PET Scientific Service
Secretaries of the School of Biological Sciences, the School of Physical Sciences, the School of Technology, and the School of Clinical Medicine
Principal, Senior, Assistant Registrary/Treasurer, Administrative Officers, Grades I, II, III
Deputy Director, Assistant Director, Senior Advisory Officer, Advisory Officer, Grades I, II, III - EMBS
Head of the Accommodation Syndicate
Senior Staff Tutor
Tutor
Assistant Tutor
Senior Assistant Secretary
Assistant Secretary
Junior Assistant Secretary
Catering Manager
Careers Adviser
Assistant to the Careers Adviser, Grades I, II, III
Senior Keeper
Senior Assistant Keeper
Museum Assistant in Research, Assistant to the Director of the Hamilton Kerr Institute
Director
Assistant to the Director
Counsellor, Grades I and II
Director of Physical Education
Physical Education Officer
General Manager, designated University Catering Adviser
Telecommunications Manager
Manager of the ADC Theatre
Director of the University Farm
Job Analyst
| Previous page |
Table of Contents |
Next page |
Cambridge University Reporter, 15 December 1999
Copyright © 1999 The Chancellor, Masters and Scholars of the University of Cambridge.