Summary notes of the Executive Committee held on
13 June 2007
-
Notes of the Faculty of Science Executive: 1 May 2007 - Academic Staff Committee
The Dean of the Faculty of Science asked for this item to be brought forward. In light of some cases that were thought to be strong in the Faculty not being approved subsequently by the ASC, some concerns had been raised about whether the promotions criteria had been changed and if the procedures were sufficiently flexible to retain staff. Some comments had also been made about the mode of operation of the ASC.
The Vice-Chancellor said that the criteria had not changed, but were currently subject to a major review. It was expected that the conclusions of this review would be presented to Senate at its first meeting in the new academic year. The key message to take to HoDs was the importance of preparing for meetings of the ASC, and of debriefing their staff afterwards. The membership of the ASC had been increased with a view to improving representation, following the Effectiveness Review of Senate.
- Notes of the Student Experience and Strategy Committee: 14 May 2007 - Review of the Work of the Committee
The Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Learning and Teaching) asked for this item to be brought forward. Following a review of its work, the Committee had concluded that most issues of concern to it were being dealt with satisfactorily by other bodies, such as the Student Experience Strategy Group (which comprised the senior managers with relevant functional responsibilities). Accordingly, the Committee did not believe that it was adding sufficient value and therefore recommended that it be disestablished with effect from the new academic year. The student representatives were content with this recommendation if reports on student services were to be made to the Council/Senate/Students' Union Committee.
- Estimates 2007/08
The Director of Finance summarised the 2007/08 draft estimates. These had been derived from information provided by departments, mainly during the Annual Planning Cycle.
A small surplus of £124K (effectively a break-even position) was projected, after making provision for all known commitments and some additional non-pay expenditure for long-term maintenance and utility costs. The estimates did, however, include £1.8M of pay expenditure resulting from the strategic investment in new posts made in 2005/06. These posts were funded from existing surpluses and were not expected to be immediately covered by recurrent income. Although some of the posts had been filled for long enough to start making a contribution to income, approximately £750K of the budgeted expenditure was earmarked for posts still unfilled or filled by staff appointed too late to make a contribution in 2007/08. Discounting this sum when considering the scope for further strategic investment was therefore viewed as sensible, so long as a break-even position was maintained for core activities. Any further investment would still be conditional on 2007/08 student recruitment targets being attained.
The surplus was attributed to a number of factors: good budgetary discipline on the part of departments, a gradual increase in research income, and the opportunistic acquisition of ASNs. Work was also underway to reduce energy costs, a significant item of expenditure, even though these were not under the direct control of the University.
- Operational plan for implementation of a pilot Sabbatical Leave scheme
The Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Research) summarised the main elements of a four-year pilot scheme that had been formulated following discussion of the Report of the Sabbatical Leave Working Group by the Deans/Head of School and the VCG.
The starting point was that there were significant misconceptions about whether sabbatical leave, especially on full pay, was readily available to all staff. Under the pilot scheme, it was therefore proposed that staff would have a right to apply for a six-month period of sabbatical leave on full pay after three years' of service, or for a one-year period after six years' of service (i.e., an entitlement of one in seven). In parallel, a sum of £5K would be granted to a department for each member of its staff on leave to provide for teaching cover. 25 sabbatical leave awards per annum would be offered, at a total cost of £125K. A single University committee would assess applications twice a year, and then make recommendations to the Vice-Chancellor. Departments with an academic staff FTE of 25 or less would not be awarded more than two six-month leave periods in any single year; departments with more than 25 would not be awarded more than three leave periods. These limits were aimed at helping HoDs to manage the impact on workloads. A formal report on the activities and outputs of a period of leave would be required within two months of its completion, with a follow-up report after twelve months.
- Renewal of Masterplan 2007/08: Briefing document for designers
The Director of Estates said that this draft document had been prepared to inform the work of the Steering Group and provide a brief for the design work to be undertaken by the ACE students. Specification of requirements was the key issue. Supporting strategies would be needed for landscaping, transport, ecology and archaeology.
- Council: Proposals for delegation of authority
The University Secretary said that these preliminary proposals had been formulated with the aim of both ensuring effective governance and agility of decision-making. These twin objectives need not be in tension if a single, authoritative body was seen to have responsibility for a specific area. Delegated authority was sought in four such areas: authorisation of funding for major capital projects; commercialisation of intellectual property; urgent business; and HR policies.
- Draft Annual Monitoring Statement 2007
Following consideration of the Corporate Planning Statement at the last meeting, the Executive Assistant introduced the draft Annual Monitoring Statement. This required a report 'by exception' on whether the University had met the objectives specified in areas for which earmarked funding had been granted, and whether this funding had been spent according to the agreed timeframe.
The following items were received without comment:
Notes of the School of Management Executive Board:
21 March, 4 April and 17 April 2007
Notes of the School for Health Executive:
6 March and 3 April 2007
Notes of the Faculty of Science Executive: 3 April 2007
Notes of the Division of Lifelong Learning Executive:
14 March and 25 April 2007
Notes of the Management Information Processes Review Group: 19 February 2007
Notes of the VFM Steering Group: 13 February 2007
|
VC's
Office | University | Search
| News | A-Z
Index | Contact VC's Office 
