The Remuneration Committee agrees annually the performance criteria against which the performance of the Vice-Chancellor will be reviewed. These criteria will typically include a series of objectives related to the strategic performance of the University. It may also include a number of personal objectives. The Remuneration Committee may attach differential weightings to objectives at a later meeting, dependent on views about relative priorities.

The Vice-Chancellor reports to the Chair of Council who assesses how these criteria have been met (taking into account the available evidence and the views of all Council members) and makes a recommendation annually to the Remuneration Committee.

In considering the Chair’s recommendation the Remuneration Committee will also take into account:

• any guidance on Vice-Chancellor’s pay issued by the Committee of University Chairs or /the Office for Students;
• through informal consultation, the views of all members of Council, including student members, about the Vice-Chancellor’s performance and pay.
• the current remuneration of the Vice-Chancellor in universities of similar size and standing, as determined through the annual benchmarking review of remuneration of Vice-Chancellors undertaken by the Committee of University Chairs;
• the relationship between the Vice-Chancellor’s salary and that of pay elsewhere in the University; including the recommendation in the Hutton report that senior pay in an institution should be a multiple of no more than twenty times the pay of the lowest paid employee;
• guidance from the Office for Students Accounts Direction, which requires the calculation of the pay multiple. The pay multiple must be expressed as the full-time equivalent of the Vice-Chancellor’s remuneration divided by the median pay of all employees of the University (also calculated on a full-time equivalent basis).

Having received and approved a recommendation from the Chair of Council about overall performance, the Committee will recommend how that should be rewarded. Any performance-related award will be recognised through payment of a cash lump sum rather than through consolidation into base salary. The only exception to this approach will be when competitor benchmarking information reveals that the salary paid to the Vice-Chancellor at the University of Warwick has fallen behind the desired comparator.

3. Remuneration of other senior staff covered by the Remuneration Committee

In deciding the remuneration of those senior staff within its remit, the quantum available for performance related reward will, as far as practicable and appropriate, mirror the University’s arrangements for those senior professorial and senior administrative staff below the Remuneration Committee level who are covered by the University Executive Board - Remuneration.

The Committee will consider annually the performance review recommendations made by the Vice-Chancellor in respect of those members of the Remuneration Committee population reporting directly to them and the recommendations made by other leaders in respect of those who report to other members of the Executive team. In reaching its final decisions, the Committee will take into account:

• performance against objectives (those objectives will generally be linked to those approved by the Remuneration Committee for the Vice-Chancellor);
• external benchmarks and comparators (for senior academic leaders this will, where appropriate, be external Russell Group benchmarks; for senior professional and commercial staff wider benchmarks from other sectors and other parts of the economy may also be used);
• and affordability.

The Remuneration Committee will review and approve the salary range for vacancies within the Remuneration Committee population prior to recruitment. Where the proposed salary falls outside the approved salary range for new hires the Remuneration Committee will be required to approve the recommended overall remuneration package taking into consideration any market benchmarks. Thereafter, any performance related award will be paid as a cash lump sum. The only exception to this approach will be when competitor benchmarking information reveals that the salary paid to a senior member of staff under the remit of the Committee has fallen behind the desired comparator. The Committee will review all appropriate pay benchmarks regularly to ensure that remuneration at senior levels remains competitive.

4. National Pay Award

There is no contractual entitlement for any member of staff covered by the Remuneration Committee to receive the national pay uplift in Higher Education, but the Remuneration Committee has in the past normally applied the general salary uplift to the group. This decision will remain subject to annual review.

5. Bonus Payments

The Remuneration Committee will not generally award one-off bonuses other than the performance-related cash lump sums outlined above, but may do so in very rare cases, for example:

• where it wishes to recognise an exceptional and outstanding achievement which has enhanced the reputation and standing of the university and in such case this will be no greater than 10% of base salary; or
• where bonus or other incentive arrangements are a core element of remuneration for direct comparator roles (e.g. for commercial or project management roles).

6. Equality Adjustments