EUROPEAN TRADE UNION COMMITTEE FOR EDUCATION – COMITE SYNDICAL EUROPEEN DE L’EDUCATION

ETUCE : Boulevard du Roi Albert II, 5

9ème étage - B-1210 Bruxelles

Tél +32 2 224 06 91 / 92

Fax +32 2 224 06 94 secretariat@csee-etuce.org

EFEE : Rue des deux Eglises, 26

B-1000 Bruxelles

General Secretary: Bianka Stege

bianka.stege@educationemployers.eu

EFEE

THE EUROPEAN

FEDERATION OF

EDUCATION

EMPLOYERS

EUROPEAN SECTORAL SOCIAL DIALOGUE IN EDUCATION

Report from Working Group n°3, Higher Education & Research

November 2012 Background

The Higher Education & Research Group was set up by the Plenary Committee of the European Sectoral Social Dialogue Committee in Education (ESSDE) on 11 June, 2010. The Working Group was assigned to meet two times over the period of the year 2012 and to report to the Plenary Committee on the procedure and content of the European Social Dialogue regarding Higher Education & Research (HE&R) for the period 2012/13.

This paper is being presented to the meeting of ESSDE’s Plenary Committee on 8 November 2012. The paper has two purposes: 1) to provide an overview of the work done in 2012 by the Working Group and 2) to outline the possible follow-up of the Working Group in 2013.

Those who have attended the working group from the unions (ETUCE and EPSU) and from the employers (EFEE) are listed in Appendix 1. Helen Fairfoul (EFEE, UK) has chaired the working group. Meetings of the working group have been facilitated by Stefaan Ceuppens and his team from the Commission’s Directorate for Employment and Social Affairs.

Methodology In 2012, the Working Group met on two occasions: 15 March 2012 and 26 June 2012. During the meeting of 15 March 2012, the Working Group discussed three major topics: Gender Equality, Environment for Early Career Researchers and Mobility. These topics were selected by the employers’ organisations and the trade unions jointly, following discussions in the previous Working Group sessions in 2011. As stated in the report of October 2011: ‘The proposed focus of this social dialogue in 2012/13 will be to deepen our reflections on the issue of what makes up an attractive career in HE&R and to exchange good practices in this field. Whilst not wishing to exclude other topics from its discussions or for future exploration, the group would propose that it undertakes in 2012-13 work to explore up to three particular issues: gender equality, the environment for early career researchers, and mobility.’

2

With the discussion on Gender Equality, the members of Working Group responded to the Council Conclusions on Modernisation of Higher Education (17/11/2011) in which the Council invites the Members States to: “tackle stereotyping and dismantle the barriers still faced by women in reaching the highest levels in post-graduate education and research”1. Members of the Working Group shared national, mainly institutional, examples of practice and policy targeted at taking down barriers that hinder women’s progression and at tackling stereotypes of women in HE&R institutions. Several initiatives that could contribute to improving the situation were identified, including the following2:

Gender sensitive education from early childhood could contribute to tackling gender stereotyping.

Creating female networks and/or fostering the inclusion of women in existing male networks can encourage and support women in aspiring to and applying for higher positions.

Selection criteria for attributing research funding and for recruitment or promotion should of course be gender neutral. Selection criteria can be developed that address the potential devaluing of women’s contributions that can arise from career breaks and/or periods of part time working. In this context, one could envisage revitalising the existing Code of Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers3.

Although it is recognised that only the best can and should attain the highest levels in our institutions of HE&R, there is a need to consider in each national context how contractual status (fixed versus without term contracts), working conditions and social security provisions can impact on the careers and aspirations of women who have the potential and ambition to pursue a career in HE&R.

The dialogue on the Environment for Early Career Researchers was linked to the proposal of the European Commission for a European Research Area4 and supporting measures directed at the quality of doctoral training, attractive employment conditions and gender balance in research careers, as described in the Innovation Union5. A number of issues in this respect were raised in the Working Group’s discussions, including:

In the context of HE&R, where short-term funded research projects are a significant feature, the early career researcher may often find themselves having to balance their personal life choices against managing their career. If the notion of an “attractive career" is that it comprises security of tenure, particularly in the early career phase, then women may be regarding careers in HE&R as neither attractive nor compatible with their personal life choices.

The challenge is not unique to HE&R as many successful careers will be built on individuals’ abilities to be mobile, to take employment opportunities that may not

1Council Conclusions on the Modernisation of Higher Education, 17.11.2011 , p. 11 2 See also: http://www.sofokles.nl/downloads/universiteiten/artikel%20Timmers%20Willemsen%20Tijdens%202010.pdf 3 http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/index.cfm/rights/index 4 By that time the Commission Communication ‘A Reinforced European Research Area Partnership for Excellence and Growth’ (COM(2012) 392) was not published yet 5 COM(2010) 546

3

carry security of tenure and to widen their employment experience, for example with periods in industry. However, HE&R institutions can be proactive in seeking to support individuals in managing their careers, in providing attractive working conditions, both in mainstream academic posts and in more project based functions, and in recognising the skills of individuals who have taken career choices to move out of research.

It is a feature of HE&R institutions that they will often offer fixed-term contracts, particularly at the beginning of a researcher's career, but there remains a need for the institution to justify such contractual status, to provide appropriate support to individuals to manage the instability that comes with such contracts and to encourage all those individuals who have the potential and aspiration to succeed in an academic career.

At a national level, the issue of social security rights (including pensions) should also be appropriately addressed.

A question was raised as to whether researchers who are hosted at a university in another country (notably in the context of Marie Curie exchanges), may have constraints imposed on the nature of their terms and conditions that can be less beneficial than the "home" researchers?

Furthermore a reference was made to the text of ETUCE: “The Bologna process: the case for a supportive environment for academic staff”. Within the discussion on Mobility the Working Group members focused on the question: What examples can we share from our country’s HE&R institutions of open recruitment practices and how are these working? In the Innovation Union Communication (BS check)6 and in the Council Conclusions 2011 on the Modernisation of Higher Education7, the Commission and the Council emphasise the importance of open and transparent recruitment procedures in order to improve mobility of academic staff and researchers. Working Group members commented on the "open recruitment" practices in their respective countries and the progress in this respect. The discussion covered issues such as:

The fact that truly open recruitment procedures tend to be quite lengthy; there were accounts of some "avoidance" behaviour, notably by the recourse to (quicker) recruitments on fixed-term contracts;

The need for selection committees to be composed in a balanced manner (gender, disciplines,…), and be properly trained, notably to avoid all types of bias;

The fact that, compared to the US, linguistic and cultural barriers remain a reality in the EU and limit the potential for staff in HE&R to be internationally mobile;

While the discussion on the impact of autonomy of universities is a complex one, it seems in general to be a feature that can contribute to open and fair recruitment procedures.

In the Working Group of 26 June 2012, the focus of the dialogue was narrowed down to the Gender Equality topic, encompassing also early career and recruitment issues. 6 COM(2010) 546 7 Council Conclusions on the Modernisation of Higher Education, 17.11.2011

4

In order to study this subject in more depth, Professor Liisa Husu of GEXcel International Collegium for Advanced Transdiscipinary Gender Studies (Örebro University, Sweden) was invited to give a presentation on “Gender Equality and Research Funding”. In her presentation, Professor Husu highlighted in particular the work and recommendations of the EU Expert Group on Gender and Excellence on research funding8. Responding to delegates' questions and comments, Professor Husu: agreed that an updated inventory of good practices would be useful; pointed out that more recent data are available in countries that take the issue seriously, including statistics by discipline; acknowledged the problem of "committee overload" with which women academics can be confronted and suggested that it should be put on academic institutions' agendas. Furthermore, Husu referred to the Commission's "She Figures" (Statistics and Indicators on Gender Equality in Science)9 as a useful data source. For a better understanding of where the real issues lie, Working Group members shared national data on trends in gender representation at different levels of seniority in HE&R in the different countries. Data are listed per country in Appendix II. Regarding the data, the following observations were made:

The proportion of women in HE&R decreases as a higher professional level is reached.

There are noticeable differences in female representation among academic staff in SET (science, engineering and technology) departments and non-SET departments.

One can consider a representation of women of 40-60% to be balanced, as a “perfect” 50/50 ratio is not realistic – and not necessarily to be pursued.

Averages can mask important underlying differences, e.g. as regards representation in certain disciplines, levels, age groups, etc.

Even in countries with a relatively good track record of female representation in HE&R, progress towards gender balance is slow, notably at the higher levels (professors, senior researchers) and in certain disciplines.

In the framework of peer learning, Working Group members exchanged best practices that illustrate positive interventions in relation to women in academic careers. Policy measures and programmes directed at the promotion of women, recruitment issues and working arrangements were discussed, including the following: Promotion of Women

Defining equality indicators, on which basis a self-assessment is carried out by university departments, leading to department-specific goals for future action (SE);

A project aiming at increasing the number of female professors, through mentoring schemes, seminars, targeted sabbaticals, etc. (NO).

Mentoring networks for women in science (DE). 8 http://ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/document_library/pdf_06/the-genderchallenge-in-research-funding-report_en.pdf 9 http://ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/document_library/pdf_06/she_figures_2009_en.pdf

5

The Athena SWAN Charter for women in science (UK)10.

he IDAS national leadership programme which aims to get more women in higher academic positions (SE)11.

Network for female university graduates: The Finnish Federation of University Women (FFUW)12.FFUW encourages the members: to the development of their full potential, to the cooperation of different professional fields, to the promotion of international cooperation (FI).

Gender equity is defined in the Portuguese Constitution, and, in this aspect, all laws must apply this principle; there is no special program promoting any "positive discrimination" (PT).

Vinnmer program by Vinnova gives early career support for postdoctoral women researchers. The long term objective of the programme is to help increase the number of female postgraduates that go on to become the leaders of the future at universities/centres, research institutes and companies (SE).

Working Arrangements

A collective agreement for the university sector, which includes recommendations as regards working time for the support of (young) researchers; this agreement does not include direct references to gender equality, as this issue is regulated by general legislation (i.e. all public organisations must have a gender equality plan) (FI).

Full pension contributions are maintained during maternity leave (FI, UK); parental leave (3 years per child) is taken into account for pensions, albeit on the basis of a capped salary (DE).

Child care concepts and particular support of doctoral candidates during pregnancy (DE).

Recruitment Issues

All public and private universities in Cyprus have signed the European Charter for Researchers (CY).

Reporting obligations of all higher education institutions as regards gender balance; a national "equality contest" promoting initiatives fostering gender equality; higher education institutions are to establish an "equality commission" that should, amongst other things, promote recruitment of women in post-doctoral and leading positions and raise awareness of the positive effects of gender balance on research quality (NO).

Commitment of the universities to gender-mainstreaming in “Hochschulpakt”; in particular measures with regard to the appointment of female professors and the improvement of the number of women in MINT-subjects (Mathematics, Information Technology, Natural Science and Technology) are being required (DE).

Recruitment, open advertising and competition for posts. Gender balanced interviewing teams and recruitment committees (SE).

10 www.athenaswan.org.uk 11 http://oru.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2:389729 12 http://www.ifuw.org/finland/

6

Follow up WG3 members have expressed their enthusiasm to continue to meet. The structure of such meetings needs further consideration. One possibility would be to develop a proposal for a joint project in 2013 for further research on practices in HE&R with regard to supporting/enhancing researchers' careers, and their wider dissemination. Another possibility would be continuing our meetings in the current WG setting.

7

Appendix I Higher Education & Research Working Group membership

Country Name Organisation

Cyprus Stelios Christophides

Ministry of Education and Culture

Finland Nina Pärssinen Association of Finish independent Education employers

Germany Gerhard Klassen TdL (Tarifgemeinschaft deutscher Lande)

Rolf Bernhardt KMK

Ireland Gearóid Hodgins Institutes of Technology Ireland

Italy Marina Cavallini CRUI - Responsabile Ufficio Relazioni Internazionali, CRUI - Head of International Relations Office

Latvia Dace Ratniece MoES (Ministry of Education and Science)

Sweden Robert Cloarec Swedish Agency For Government Employers

(Arbetsgivarverket) Eva Öquist

UK Helen Fairfoul (chair)

UCEA (Universities and Colleges Employers Association)

Norway Vidar L. Haanes Virke

Within ETUCE, all EU countries are represented at the level of HE & R. Among them, the following are members of the working group:

Country Name Organisation

Denmark Jens Vraa-Jensen

(chair) DM

Finland Riku Matilainen FUURT

Germany Andreas Keller GEW

Italy Joelle Casa FLC-GIL

Latvia Ilze Trapenciere LIZDA

Lithuania Linas Sumskas FLESTU

Norway Anne-Lise Brox Larsen

UEN

Portugal Manuel Pereira dos Santos

FENPROF

Sweden Ann Fritzell SULF

Ireland Joan Donegan IFUT

France Hélène Hemet UNSA Education

8

Appendix II Data on trends in gender representation at different levels of seniority in HE&R per country (on alphabetical order) CYPRUS Table 1 CYPRUS Gender participation in public and private universities 2011

Data provided by Stelios Christophides – Ministry of Education and Culture

Position

PUBLIC

Number of Male / Female

PRIVATE

Number of Male / Female

M F M F

Rector 2 1 5 0

Vise Rector 5 1 10 0

Professor 93 10 31 15

Associate Professor 76 32 62 20

Assistant Professor 88 44 85 55

Lecturer 109 74 65 55

There is a big gap between the number of male and female academics in the Professors level. However the

age of these academics is reaching an average of 60. This means that they have done their studies about 35

years ago. At that time:

A significant percentage of women in Cyprus were not following HE studies.

From those that had followed HE studies a significant percentage did not follow doctoral studies

A significant percentage of women, through their choice decided not to get into work after their

studies but make a family.

As the years passed, more and more women followed HE and doctoral studies, more and more women were

deciding to get into work soon after their studies together with making a family and more and more women

were deciding to get into the academic profession. As a result the percentage of women in the Associate

Professor’s level is higher than in the Professor’s level, and the average age of this group is lower than the age

of the Professors’ group. The percentage of women participation continues to increase in the Assistant

Professor’s level and increases even more in the lecture’s lever while the average group age level is

reduced.

The trends therefore in Cyprus are that the percentage of female participation in the academic

profession in increasing rapidly. However, it must be taken into account that there is still a percentage of HE

graduate women that are not willing to stay in the university up to age of about 30 to complete a PhD, but stop

their studies to the Master’s level in order to give themselves the opportunity to make family and children. As a

result at the end of the day there are less eligible women applying for academic jobs than men and therefore

there will be more men than women in this job, without, in my opinion, constituting discrimination.

9

FINLAND Table 2 FINLAND Number of women at different levels of seniority

Data provided by Nina Pärssinen - Association of Finish independent Education employers

Share of women 2007 2010 2011

Postgraduates 45,0 % 45,8 % 45,0 %

Researchers 43,8 % 45,6 % 46,2 %

Professors 23,2 % 25,0 % 25,0 %

Table 3 FINLAND Number of women to have doctoral degrees

Data provided by Nina Pärssinen - Association of Finish independent Education employers

Year Doctorcand. Women Doctorcand. Men SUM Women %

2010 798 720 1 518 52,6 %

2009 861 781 1 642 52,4 %

2008 831 696 1 527 54,4 %

2007 772 754 1 526 50,6 %

2006 660 749 1 409 46,8 %

2005 698 724 1 422 49,1 %

Table 4 FINLAND Teaching and research personnel (all universities)

Data provided by Nina Lahtinen – Trade Union of Education Finland

2011, total budget

2010, total budget

2005, state finance

Gender

Gender

Gender

career phase M % F % All

M % F %

All

M % F %

All

Young researchers,

dr. students I level 3 836 53 3 402 47 7 238

3 430 53 3 102 47 6 532

Lecturers, researchers II level 1 691 54 1 453 46 3 144

936 49 957 51 1 893

Senior lectures &

researches

III

level 1 850 54 1 588 46 3 438

1 601 55 1 321 45 2 922

Professors

IV

level 2 027 75 684 25 2 711

2 007 75 669 25 2 676

1735 78 493 22 2225

Others

Others

699 54 568 44 1 296

2 594 59 1 754 40 4 377

In all 10 104 57 7 695 43 17 827

10

567 57 7 804 42 18 400

4572 58 3267 42 7839

Table 2 shows that during the last 5 years the number of women researchers in universities (all levels) has

increased a little from 41 % to 42,4 %.

Table 3 shows that the number of women to have doctoral degrees has increased steadily.

Table 2 and 4 show that the number of women professors has grown a little. The number of women professors

is still low.

10

GERMANY

Figure 1GERMANY Proportion of women in education and research, 2009 - All HE institutions

Data provided by Rolf Bernhardt – KMK; based on report Joint Science Conference

Over the last two decades, the issue of "Equal Opportunities in Science and Research" has been

systematically championed on an ongoing basis at both federal and state level by the BLK, with the GWK

(Joint Science Conference) taking on this mantle in 2008. By persistently pursuing this issue, not only have

improvements been seen in the understanding of the status of women and men in research, but it has

also been possible in some areas to substantially increase the level of representation of women at various

levels of academic qualification, with a particularly positive outcome in terms of the number of women

appointed to leadership positions, both at higher education institutions and non-academic research

establishments.

The currently collected data shows that the academic and economic potential that female academics

represent has not yet been fully realised. Women are still significantly underrepresented in high-level

positions within the academic system. An increase in female representation in the upper echelons of the

academic system depends on increasing the ratio of women at the lower qualification levels within a

family-friendly corporate and academic culture, and therefore cannot be achieved as a single dramatic leap.

As such, it is essential that special attention continues to be paid to supporting women in research and

science, as explicitly stated in the Standards on Gender Equality.

11

Figure 2 GERMANY Percentage of women in universities 1992-2008

Data provided by Maya Schwiegershausen-Güth – Ver.di (Vereinte Dienstleistungs-gewerkschaft)

Although there could be a positive trend identified, the percentage of women in academics still

decreases with the level of degree.

Which means, in 2008, although 50% of all first-year students are female only 24% receive a

Professorship.

Considering the German research area, the picture is even worse. The percentage of women in leading

positions in research facilities1 has increased between 1992 and 2010 from 2% to 11.2%.

12

LATVIA Table 5 LATVIA Academic personnel 2008/2009 (main job)

Data provided by Ilze Trapenciere, LIZDA (Latvian education and science employees’ trade union); based on

Internet sources (Ministry of Education and Science, www.izm.gov.lv )

Year

Acad.

Personnel

Total

female

Among them

Professors Assoc. professors Docents

total women total women total women

I. State Universities

2008/9 4453 2386

(53.6%) 537

166

(30.9%) 535

241

(45%) 848

472

(55.7)

2010/11 3469

1901

(54.8%)

531 179 517 250 714 412

531 179

179 250 714 412

(33.8%) 517

250

(48.4%) 714

412

(57.7)

II. Private universities

2008/9 764 430 46 9 66 25 330 141

2010/11 711 399 99 45 278 166

59

16 99 45 278 166

Table 6 LATVIA Academic personnel with a doctoral degree (main job)

Data provided by Ilze Trapenciere, LIZDA (Latvian education and science employees’ trade union)

Total With a degree Female

I State Universities

Total 2008/9) 4453 2054 (46%)

II private universities

Total 764 343 (44.9%)

Gross total 5217 2397 (46%)

Publicly available data (University statistics, www.izm.gov.lv) do not provide gender disaggregated data on

academic professions before 2008. There are raw data collected by stakeholders, but not available publicly.

Even in 2012, there are no gender disaggregated data publicly available on gender in various Study

programmes. However, those data are available on request.

Data show that the economical crisis has not decreased the number of women in academic positions in

Latvia. The female proportions in academia have even slightly increased. That might be explained by

higher male mobility and female search for security and stability (proved also in other employment sectors).

No female oriented policies have been introduced.

13

NORWAY Table 7 NORWAY Percentage female share 2011

Data provided by Vidar L. Haanes - Virke

Students Total 60,5%

University colleges 65,2%

Universities 57,8%

PH.D Students Total 50,1

University Colleges 49,6%

Universities 50,3%

Share of annual workload Total 44,5%

University Colleges 53,4%

Universities 40,9%

Associate Professors University Colleges 2002 25,7%

2011 40,6%

Universities 2002 23,9%

2011 33,1%

Professors University Colleges 2002 12,1%

2011 23%

Universities 2002 14,7%

2011 23,2%

In Norway we recognise a very high female share among the students. The statistics shows us that this trend

is still remarkable at the PhD level. But the variation between different studies is clear, where the

humaniora will show a higher share of female students than science and technology. That trend is

continuing among associate professors and professors, too.

The female share will decrease proportionally to higher professional level reached. We notice a gap

between associate professors and professors, both at university colleges and universities. We are then

coping with a challenge to lead female associate professors into the next level, becoming the adequate

experience and opportunities to do their scientific works that makes them able to compete with their male

colleagues for the positions as professors.

There will also be a task if becoming a professor is seen as attractive for female professions at that stage in

their careers.

14

SWEDEN Table 8 SWEDEN Share of women and men at different levels of seniority 2011

Data provided by Eva Öquist – University of Dance and Circus, Swedish Agency for Government Employers

(Arbetsgivarverket)

Position women men

Professor 23% 77%

Senior lecture 44% 56%

Lecture 56% 44%

Post-doctoral research fellows 39% 61%

Other research and teaching staff 49% 51%

Visiting and fixed-term / part-time lectures 45% 55%

Technical and administrative staff 47% 53%

Table 9 SWEDEN Share of women at different levels of seniority & number of full time equivalents 2008

Data provided by Karin Åmossa – Swedish Association of University Teachers; based on Quality in Academia

and Life – a joint strategy to improve Work-Life Balance by GEW, UCU and SULF

Position Professor Senior lecturer Post doctoral

fellow Researcher Junior lecturer

Women 794 (19%) 2,592 (40%) 494 (44%) 2,008 (45%) 3,265 (56%)

Men 3,407 (81%) 3,847 (60%) 630 (56%) 2,489 (55%) 2,571 (44%)

Total 4,201 6,439 1,124 4,497 5,836

In 2011 43 % of teaching staff were women and 57 % men (calculated in FTEs). This can be compared

with 37 % women and 63 % men in 2001.

There are, however, major differences between various staff categories.

There are also differences in gender balance between the subject areas.

The teacher position as junior lecturer is the only one which does not require a doctorate and also the

only one where women dominate. Any junior or senior lecturer has the right to be evaluated for promotion

to senior lecturer and professor respectively.

In leading posts, such as vice-chancellor, board chairman and board member, the gender distribution is

acceptable. These posts are practically all, at least formally, appointed by the government. The deans are

elected by the members of faculty and their gender distribution mirrors that of the professors, i.e. only 20 per

cent are women.

There are considerable differences between subject fields, but the majority of teachers and researchers are

men in practically all fields. The male predominance is greatest in technological sciences, where 81 per cent

of researchers are men. The only field where women dominate is health sciences, where 85 per cent are

women.

In 2008 30 per cent of the men and 38 per cent of the women had a fixed term contract.

15

UNITED KINGDOM Table 10 UK Gender representation in HE

Data provided by Helen Fairfoul - UCEA (Universities and Colleges Employers Association); based on report

Futures for Higher Education Analysing Trends by Universities UK

Key facts and figures - 2010/11 (unless noted)

Just over half (53.7%) of staff in the higher education sector were female.

Female staff made up 46.9% of full-time staff and 67.0% of part-time staff.

44.2% of all academic professional staff were female – they made up 38.6% of full-time

academic professional staff and 54.6% of part-time academic professional staff.

Female academic staff (45.9%) were less likely than male academic staff (56.3%) to be

employed on teaching and research contracts in 2009/10.

Only 18.5% of professorial staff were female with similar representation among full-time

professors (18.0%) and part-time professors (21.7%).

Just 6% of full-time female academic staff were professors compared to 17.0% of full-time male

academic staff.

Men comprised 55.7% of academic staff in non-manager roles and 72% of staff in senior

management roles in 2009/10.

In 2009, 14.4% of university vice-chancellors are female.

A lower proportion of female academic staff (63.4%) than male academic staff (68.4%) were on

permanent or open-ended contracts in 2009/10.

The proportion of male academics (31.9%) earning over £50,000 was nearly double that of

women (16.3%) in 2009/10.

There has been a marked increase in the proportion of academics that are female from 40% in

2003/04 to 44.2% in 2010/11. The proportion of professional and support staff that are female has stayed

constant at 62% during this period.

There are noticeable differences in female representation among academic staff in SET (science,

engineering and technology) departments and non-SET departments. 57% of male academic staff

worked in SET departments in 2009/10 compared with 47.6% of female academics. 24.9% of professors in

non-SET departments were female in 2009/10 compared to only 15.1% of professors in SET departments.

The overall HE full-time gender pay gap is 17.7% based on median hourly earnings excluding

overtime and 18.2% based on average earnings. The part-time gender pay gap is 32.2% based on the

median and 17.6% based on the mean. The gender pay gap is relatively lower at the lower end of the wage

distribution

In 2009/10, the professorial gender pay gap was 4.1% (mean 5.4%), less than half that of all HE

teaching professionals. However, this has not changed significantly over the past few years and stood at

3.7% (4.8%) in 2007/08. UCEA’s 2011 senior staff salary survey of over 140 HEIs found a 4.5% gender pay

gap in both basic and total pay for full-time professors.

At 9.9% (mean 15.5%), the gender pay gap between full-time higher education teaching professionals

is higher than all other teaching professional groups. The part-time gap is -25% (mean -14.8%) although

the data for these groups is less reliable. The gap in higher education is up from 2010 but has reduced

significantly from 2008, when it was 16.3%. By comparison the full-time gender pay gap for all professional

occupations in the UK is 4.2% (mean 8.1%) and the part time gap is 3% (mean 11.3%).

The gender pay gap between academic staff varies significantly by subject area from no gap in media

studies to 22% in veterinary science.