THE CHAIRMAN OF AN INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL TODAY (WED)

THE CHAIRMAN OF AN INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL TODAY (WED) CRITICISED A

LONDON COLLEGE FOR THEIR METHOD OF ALLOCATING PROFESSORS’ SALARIES.

ACADEMICS AT LONDON UNIVERSITY’S BIRKBECK COLLEGE WERE ALLOCATED

WAGES ACCORDING TO A FIXED BUDGET, THEIR NTRIBUTION TO THE COLLEGE

AND THE SIZE OF DEPARTMENTS, THE CHELSEA TRIBUNAL HEARD.

BUT CHAIRMAN MR FERDERICK MOSTYN SAID THE SYSTEM COULD EASILY

CAUSE GRIEVANCES.

‘IF YOU WANTED TO CHOOSE A SYSTEM FRAUGHT WITH DIFFICULTIES YOU

WOULD CHOOSE THIS ONE’, HE TOLD THE COLLEGE’S MASTER PROFESSOR, WHO

IS RESPONSIBLE FOR SALARIES.

‘I’M SURPRISED YOU DON’T HAVE PROFESSORS RUNNING TO YOUR DOOR

LIKE WILD DERVISHES DEMANDING MORE PAY.

‘

HE SAID THE MASTER FACED A DIFFICULT TASK BUT ONCE HE MADE HIS

DECISION THERE WAS NO NEED TO GIVE ANY JUSTIFICATION FOR IT.

INDIAN-BORN MATHS PROFESSOR CHANDRA SHARMA, WHO HOLDS A #21,000

A YEAR POST, CLAIMS HE WAS RACIALLY DISCRIMINATED AGAINST WHEN HIS

SALARY WAS KEPT LOWER THAN COLLEAGUES.

THE 52 YEAR OLD PROFESSOR, OF BRUNSWICK ROAD, EALING, IS

CLAIMING COMPENSATION AND AN INCREASE IN PAY FOR BEING NEAR THE

BOTTOM OF THE COLLEGE’S WAGES SCALE.

AND PROFESSOR SHARMA, A PROFESSOR FOR SEVEN YEARS, PRODUCED

STATISTICS WHICH HE CLAIMS ILLUSTRATE HOW ACADEMICS FROM ETHNIC

MINORITIES WERE PAID LESS THAN THE AVERAGE FOR THE COLLEGE’S 28

PROFESSORS.

BUT MR MOSTYN SAID THE FIGURES DID NOT SHOW HOW ALL THE STAFFS’

SALARIES WERE DETERMINED AND SO HAD A NEUTRAL EFFECT ON THE HEARING.

HE TOLD THE PROFESSOR: ‘YOU HAVE DONE WHAT MOST SCIENTISTS SEEM

TO DO – YOU THINK OF A THEORY AND THEN CHOOSE EVIDENCE WHICH SUPPORTS

IT.

‘

BUT HE SAID THE COLLEGE WAS ‘ECONOMIC’ WITH INFORMATION WHICH

COULD HAVE AVOIDED THE CONFRONTATION, AND HAD NOT MADE IT CLEAR THERE

WAS AN INTERNAL GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE.

PROFESSOR GEORGE OVEREND, MASTER AT BIRKBECK, TOLD THE TRIBUNAL

SALARIES WERE BASED ON A PROFESSOR’S RESPONSIBILITY, THE SIZE OF HIS

DEPARTMENT, AND ON THE ‘NEED’ FOR ANY ACADEMIC AT THE COLLEGE.

HE SAID PROFESSOR SHARMA WAS NOT IN A VERY SUCCESSFUL DEPARTMENT

BUT CARRIED OUT SATISFACTORY RESEARCH.

HE TOLD THE HEARING THAT IN 1979 THE PROFESSOR WAS THE LOWEST

PAID OF HIS COLLEAGUES BUT AS WELL AS PAY REVIEWS RECIEVED A #250

INCREMENT IN 1980, AND ANOTHER #750 IN 1983.

HE CURRENTLY EARNED

#20,900.

‘IN THE CURRENT YEAR, 16 OF OUR PROFESSORS FALL BELOW THE

NATIONAL AVERAGE SALARY AND 12 ABOVE IT.

PROFESSOR SHARMA IS FOUR OR

FIVE PLACES OFF THE LOWEST FIGURE,’ HE SAID.

‘BUT I AM THE PRISONER OF DECISIONS MADE BY MY PREDECESSORS AND

CAN ONLY MAKE ANYONE UP, IF I WISH TO DO SO, BY THE SMALL AMOUNT OF

FLEXABILITY I HAVE.

‘

BUT HE ADMITTED IF A FORMER MASTER HAD BEEN A RACIALIST HE

HIMSELF WOULD BE CONSTRAINED BY EARLIER DECISIONS.

‘I COULD BE ACCUSED OF CONDONING IT – IF IT WERE TRUE,’ HE SAID.

PROFESSOR OVEREND ADDED: ‘I HAVE NEVER HAD ANYONE COMPLAIN ABOUT

THE LEVEL OF THEIR SALARIES APART FROM PROFESSOR SHARMA.

‘

MR COLIN MACKAY, FOR THE COLLEGE, SAID THE ISSUE WAS NOT WHETHER

BIRKBECK USED THE BEST METHOD TO DETERMINE PAY OR WHETHER PROFESSOR

SHARMA’S PAY WAS ADEQUATE ‘BUT WHETHER THE MASTER PROFESSOR, IN

DETERMINING SALARY, WAS INFLUENCED BY RACIAL OR ETHNIC GROUNDS.

‘

HE ADDED: ‘THESE ARE GRADINGS OF HIGHLY INDIVIDUAL PEOPLE,

UNIVERSITY PROFESSORS RATHER THAN EASILY GRADED PEOPLE LIKE FACTORY

WORKERS.

THE MASTERS TASK IS TO TAKE AN OVERALL VIEW.

THERE ARE 27

OTHER PROFESSORS TO DISTRIBUTE A PURSE OF PUBLIC MONEY TOO.

‘

THE TRIBUNAL PANEL WILL GIVE THEIR DECISION ON FRIDAY MORNING.

ENDS