1 | P a g e

Human Resources Division Imperial College London Level 3, Faculty Building South Kensington Campus London SW7 2AZ Tel: +44 (0)207 594 4457 Fax: +44 (0) 207 594 8609 audrey.fraser@imperial.ac.uk www.imperial.ac.uk

Audrey Fraser Head of HR Services

26 May 2016

To Joint Trades Unions’ Local Pay Representatives

Dear Colleagues

Without prejudice – Confidential to local pay bargaining members

Thank you for submitting the Joint Trades Unions’ pay claim for 2016/17. As discussed during our pay

bargaining meeting held on Friday 6 May, I am writing with the College’s formal response to the claim.

Inflation

Thank you for explaining the methodology used to produce table 1 and supplying the supporting

calculations which we have now had the opportunity to review and have spoken to Cinzia Rienzo, the

author of the NIESR reports cited.

We note that you are using a derived (or blended) calculation of London CPI/CPIH based on the London

private rental market only, where for the years 2005 to 2010 the data is taken from the Association for

Residential Letting Agents and from 2011 to 2014 is from the Valuation Office Agency. An inflation figure

based on data from the Department for Communities and Local Government (included in the NIESR data

available) is more comprehensive, as in addition to covering the private rental market it also includes data

from local authorities rentals and social landlords.

Please see the below table taken from the NIESR reports for national CPI and London CPI based on the

Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG).

Release year Measure Increase Range (Years)

Equivalent 10 year rate

2016 National CPI Increase 28.0% 9 31.6%

London CPI Increase (DCLG) 27.0% 9 30.5%

2015 National CPIH Increase 24.1% 8 31.0%

London CPIH Increase (DCLG) 23.7% 8 30.4%

2014 National CPIH Increase 21.2% 7 31.6%

London CPIH Increase (DCLG) 20.3% 7 30.2%

2 | P a g e

With regard to the pay increase at imperial, as shown by comparing the 2005 pay scales to 2015 pay scales,

these have been in the range of 27.4% to 37.7% with the higher increases going to the lower paid. When

compared against the more robust London CPI (DCLG) it is observed that the lower paid employees have

benefitted significantly from our underpinning.

Source: Imperial spinal values, NIESR London CPIH, IDS Pay Chart national HE increase. Normalisation 2005

=100)

Contrasting to the claim that average salaries are 12% behind London inflation, spine 1 is actually 5.6%

ahead and spine 52 is 2.3% behind. It is important to note that that salary at level 52 is £66,350 which is

93% greater than the London median Salary (Source: Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings 2015: Section 7

Regional earnings).

Benchmark data

We note that your pay claim for this year is based on data produced in the Times Higher Education

Supplement as opposed to the jointly agreed data set. As we reminded you at our last meeting the position

regarding this data had not changed since 2012 when you last used this data.

For clarification purposes; I would like to advise you that the College does not use the Times Higher

Education Supplement’s data as we are concerned about its robustness/accuracy. In view of the fact that

HESA does not quality check returns or ask for supporting evidence to confirm that what has been returned

is correct, i.e. contracts/job descriptions etc., information is largely accepted as is and may not accurately

reflect matters in this regard.

95

100

105

110

115

120

125

130

135

140

2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015

Highest pay increase (Spine 1)

Lowest Pay increase (Spine 52)

National HE pay increases

London CPI (DCLG)

Pay increases against London CPI

3 | P a g e

For the non-professorial academics, the data is compiled using a combination of the HESA academic

employment function (Teaching and Research, Teaching only and Research only) and HESA contract

levels. As grades are not standard across all institutions, coding and categorisation are subject to each

institution’s interpretation. Variances will also occur due to the workforce composition.

You accepted that figure 2 (manual staff) may not be robust and asked that we source further benchmark

information, please see below:

XpertHR/UCEA 2016 salary survey – Basic Pay

Figure 1

The benchmark data at figure 1 shows that the average Imperial College salaries exceed both the London

general and London Russell Group averages with the exception of Research Assistants. This is in line with

previous data supplied over the years that showed the same trend.

You believed that figure 3 (non-professorial academic staff) was more accurate however we do not agree.

The Russell Group Senior Lecturers/Readers and Professors benchmark data sent to you in April shows that

the College exceeds the average in all subject areas, see figure 2i-ii below:

Russell Group Senior Lecturers/Readers – Basic Pay

Senior Lecturers / Readers (Base Salary)

Russell Group 2015-2016 Imperial College 2015-2016

Imperial/Russell 2015-2016

Subject Areas LQ Mean UQ LQ Mean UQ LQ Mean UQ

Clinical Medicine 55,431 56,833 57,949 57,020 62,363 65,925 3% 10% 14%

Biosciences 54,947 56,234 57,031 58,142 61,668 65,155 6% 10% 14%

Chemistry 55,058 56,178 57,380 62,333 65,010 67,515 13% 16% 18%

Physics 54,818 55,934 56,501 57,020 59,880 60,233 4% 7% 7%

Earth, Marine and Environmental Sciences

54,233 55,622 57,044 61,170 64,518 67,723 13% 16% 19%

Chemical Engineering - 56,556 - 62,620 64,391 66,000 - 14% -

Mineral, Metallurgy, Materials Engineering

55,376 57,155 58,754 60,400 63,659 66,740 9% 11% 14%

Civil Engineering 54,219 56,845 58,958 57,520 61,430 65,050 6% 8% 10%

£

difference %

difference £ difference

% difference

Role Grade Imperial Average

London Average

RG London

ICL to London

Ave

ICL to London

Ave

ICL to London RG

ICL to London

RG

Research Assistants A £33,134 £35,619 £35,223 -£ 2,485 93.0% -£2,088 94.1%

Research Associates B £38,297 £37,150 £37,809 £ 1,147 103.1% £488 101.3%

Catering Assistants 1A £18,943 £16,818 £18,291 £ 2,125 112.6% £652 103.6%

Administrators 2B £27,952 £23,944 £24,931 £ 4,009 116.7% £3,022 112.1%

Administrators 3A £32,523 £27,319 £28,342 £ 5,203 119.0% £4,181 114.8%

Adviser / Coordinator

3B £39,821 £35,466 £33,690 £ 4,356 112.3% £6,132 118.2%

Technician 3A £32,361 £28,339 £28,565 £ 4,022 114.2% £3,796 113.3%

Technician 3B £41,347 £37,709 £38,915 £ 3,637 109.6% £2,432 106.2%

Manager 4 £51,217 £47,670 £49,042 £ 3,547 107.4% £2,174 104.4%

Manager 5 £60,494 £57,685 £59,174 £ 2,809 104.9% £1,320 102.2%

4 | P a g e

Electrical, Electronic and Computer Engineering

55,668 56,724 57,522 62,050 67,260 72,730 11% 19% 26%

IT and System Sciences, Computer Software Engineering

55,339 56,166 56,399 60,820 66,955 72,617 10% 19% 29%

Mechanical, Aero and Production Engineering

55,036 56,809 58,170 58,655 64,039 69,220 7% 13% 19%

Mathematics (excluding Statistics) 54,877 56,483 58,375 59,020 62,484 64,350 8% 11% 10%

Business and Management Studies 54,778 56,863 58,029 90,380 100,833 105,110 65% 77% 81%

Figure 2i

Russell Group Professors – Basic Salary

Russell Group 2015-2016 Imperial College 2015-2016 Imperial/Russell 2015-2016

Subject Areas LQ Mean UQ LQ Mean UQ LQ Mean UQ

Clinical Medicine 79,842 88,150 91,896 78,850 105,314 127,303 -1% 19% 39%

Biosciences 79,142 84,399 86,577 79,700 97,702 107,305 1% 16% 24%

Chemistry 78,795 85,211 91,061 80,880 97,260 110,418 3% 14% 21%

Physics 76,511 82,081 82,809 75,525 86,960 96,383 -1% 6% 16%

Earth, Marine and Environmental Sciences

76,084 79,397 81,568 77,007 95,019 102,818 1% 20% 26%

Chemical Engineering 79,509 80,894 82,152 84,138 95,973 105,222 6% 19% 28%

Mineral, Metallurgy, Materials Engineering

77,468 87,973 87,993 84,320 99,357 104,833 9% 13% 19%

Civil Engineering 76,717 80,995 82,303 78,515 90,867 105,905 2% 12% 29%

Electrical, Electronic and Computer Engineering

76,837 82,645 86,608 84,425 101,275 115,943 10% 23% 34%

IT and System Sciences, Computer Software Engineering

77,675 82,722 84,173 81,312 97,619 115,670 5% 18% 37%

Mechanical, Aero and Production Engineering

77,990 82,542 86,329 85,326 94,223 103,838 9% 14% 20%

Mathematics (excluding Statistics) 73,889 82,089 85,685 82,360 98,478 112,377 11% 20% 31%

Business and Management Studies 89,890 110,215 112,843 130,778 162,446 176,682 45% 47% 57%

Figure 2ii

Since our meeting we have asked our 1London Russell Group peers to confidentially share the average

salaries for their Lecturers, Senior Lecturers/Readers and Professors, please see tables 3i-iii below:

London Russell Group peers – Basic Salary

Figure 3i

1 LSE, Queen Mary and UCL

£40,000

£45,000

£50,000

£55,000

£60,000

Imperial CollegeLondon

London RG UniversityA

London RG UniversityB

London RG UniversityC

Lecturer

5 | P a g e

Figure 3ii

Figure 3iii

The confidential benchmark data shows we offer highly competitive salaries across “London Russell group

institutions”, bearing in mind that one of the institutions is a Business School and that the level of salaries

paid to Business School academics is a different benchmark market.

The College accept that the “…relatively lower paid, whether academic or support staff, are less well

insulated from the rising cost of living in London”, but we have been very mindful of the lower paid staff

and those ‘squeezed in the middle’ when constructing the proposal for distribution of the annual awards in

previous years.

The College’s strategic position of paying median to upper quartile pay rates allows the College to both

recruit and retain staff as reflected in the voluntary turnover figures below:

£50,000

£52,000

£54,000

£56,000

£58,000

£60,000

£62,000

£64,000

£66,000

£68,000

Imperial CollegeLondon

London RGUniversity A

London RGUniversity B

London RGUniversity C

Senior Lecturer / Reader

£75,000

£80,000

£85,000

£90,000

£95,000

£100,000

£105,000

£110,000

Imperial CollegeLondon

London RGUniversity A

London RGUniversity B

London RGUniversity C

Professor

6 | P a g e

Voluntary turnover table by job family

Leavers Headcount Turnover

Academic 47 1,086 4.3%

Research 355 2,394 14.8%

Professional Services 372 3,247 11.5%

Technical Services 49 510 9.6%

Total 823 7,237 11.4%

Figure 4

Equal pay

Annually the College undertakes an Equal Pay audit and the findings are reported to both the Provost’s

Board and Remuneration Committee to inform their understanding of where, if any, the gaps may be and

the actions being taken by the College to address these gaps. The audit is also shared with the Faculties

and Support Services leads as part of the annual pay relativity exercise to review roles/grades and address

any findings as appropriate.

In your pay claim you have made statements regarding female academics at Imperial based on the Times

Higher Education Supplement data. These have no bearing on the reality at Imperial as reflected in the

equal pay audit attached at Appendix A. This also further highlights our concerns with the data you have

used to support your claim and the conclusions you have drawn from the data. It is vitally important that a

single data source is used by both staff side and management side in order for meaningful discussions going

forward. We have made our case above regarding the flaws and inaccuracies in the THE supplement data.

Pension and NI changes

Recognising the impact that the above would have on staff from April this year, the negotiating

management side representatives explored with you last year the possibility of a two year deal with the

award becoming payable in April 2016 rather than August to offset the change. You chose not to proceed

with this option.

The impact of the change also affects the College with a 3.2% increase to the pay bill, £11.7m per annum.

The percentages you have quoted in your pay claim are not quite correct; increased NI contributions are in

fact up to 1.2% which, along with the maximum USS contribution change, is an overall percentage of 2.7%.

Affordability

As agreed at our last meeting, please find attached at Appendix B a summary of the College’s current

financial position.

7 | P a g e

THE COLLEGE’S PAY OFFER

Staff side claim - 5% across the board and 7% increase to all Imperial pay scales

The College strongly disagrees with the data and supporting statements in the pay claim. The benchmark

data you were supplied with and the updated data in this letter will be shared with the Provost’s Board (27

May 2016) and shows that the majority of the College’s average salaries are above both the London and

London Russell Group benchmark. It was noted that the rate of pay for Researchers which is, in the main,

determined by external funders remains either at the benchmark or just below. It is acknowledged that

you believe the Times Higher Education Supplement data is correct however the new benchmark data

supplied within the content of this letter and the agreed data set sent to you during March and April to

inform your pay claim demonstrate that our assessment of the data you have used in your pay claim is

neither robust or accurate and conflicts and contradicts the reality which is that the current rates of pay

continue to allow the College to recruit and retain the calibre of staff needed to deliver its mission.

Your headline pay claim of 12%, excluding additional incremental rises and other elements of the pay claim,

would be £40.7m per annum.

The College also notes inflation remains low, see figure 5 below:

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

RPI as published on 1 February 2.4 4.6 4.1 0.0 3.7 5.5 3.7 3.2

CPI as published on 1 February 2.0 2.8 2.5 3.2 3 4.4 3.4 2.8 1.7 0 0.3

CPIH as published on 1 February 1.6 0.3 0.6

London Inflation (NIESR 2016) 2.9 3.6 1.6 3.9 5 3.4 -0.8 4.1 0.8 Figure 5

The College notes that 58% of staff will receive incremental increases in October with an average 2.7%

increase at a cost of £4.3m.

There will also be targeted adjustments to salaries to address gender and equity pay issues as part of the

pay relativity exercise.

The College has considered the information presented by you both in writing and orally. In view of the

salary position relative to the sector, including London, low inflation, above National rises in the past we

propose that an across the board increase of 0.8% be made to all spine points and fixed salaries with effect

from 1 August 2016. This would incur a total net cost £2.1m.

Staff side claim – action to close the gender pay gap by 2020, with action concentrated on the lower paid

The College is committed to closing the pay gap at all levels and has been working with individual

faculties/support services for a number of years to achieve this as part of the annual pay relativity exercise

as well as through its Athena Swan work. The College also recognises that the introduction of a new salary

framework with greater structure is key to this objective.

8 | P a g e

Staff side claim – minimum College Worker Rate that exceeds the London Fairness Commission minimum

rate of £9.70 per hour

The College reviews all relevant benchmarks when looking at pay for all categories of staff/workers, along

with recruitment, retention and affordability to determine the appropriate rate of pay. Last year the

College implemented a significant increase to its worker hourly rate and agreed to review this annually as

part of local pay negotiations.

Staff side claim – pay structure working group

As updated at the meeting, discussions have continued with the Hay Group, based on the May 2014 joint

paper outlining the principles for a future pay structure, as approved by the Provost’s Board. The draft

structure presented in June 2015 was rejected by the joint working group.

Work has continued with the Hay Group based on the agreed principles and has included identification of

London Industrial and Services’ market benchmark data, attached at Appendix D.

Meeting invitations will be circulated for further joint meetings.

Staff side claim – Casualisation working group on the use of fixed term contracts

The College is clear in its guidance to managers that full consideration should be given prior to employing

staff on fixed term contracts and that they should only be used when an open-ended appointment is not

appropriate and where there are transparent and objective reasons for doing so. The College also ensures

that all staff on such contracts are treated in the same manner and have the same terms and conditions as

their colleagues on open-ended contracts. At the last Joint Committee meeting UCU were tasked with

providing information on alternative models. We are due to meet again on 2 June 2016 and will review our

position following that meeting.

Local verses National

We strongly disagree that our annual awards have produced little more than the national settlement,

please see figure 5.

Local verses national

Spine 2005 Salary 2015 Salary Imperial College

Increase 2005-2015 Equivalent national

increase 2005 - 2015 Difference

52 £52,070 £66,350 27.4% 23.3% 4.1%

51 £50,560 £64,450 27.5% 23.3% 4.2%

43 £40,430 £51,720 27.9% 23.3% 4.6%

33 £30,710 £39,550 28.8% 23.3% 5.5%

26 £25,430 £32,970 29.7% 23.3% 6.4%

17 £20,070 £26,330 31.2% 23.3% 7.9%

12 £17,650 £23,460 32.9% 23.3% 9.6%

5 £14,860 £20,160 35.7% 23.3% 12.4%

9 | P a g e

4 £14,510 £19,770 36.3% 23.3% 13.0%

3 £14,220 £19,430 36.6% 23.3% 13.3%

2 £13,890 £19,060 37.2% 23.3% 13.9%

1 £13,570 £18,690 37.7% 23.5% 14.2%

The table shows that all staff have been better off under local pay bargaining especially the lower paid. The

range is 4.1% higher than National for the top of the pay spine and 14.2% above National increases for

those on the bottom of the spine.

Finally, as agreed, please find details of the number of staff employed against each spine point at Appendix

D.

Please let me know if you have any queries relating to the information provided in this letter.

Yours sincerely

Audrey Fraser Cc: Amy Austin – Note taker (HR)

Neil Alford – Associate Provost (Academic Planning) Louise Lindsay – Director of HR Tony Lawrence – Director of Financial Management Jon Tucker – Faculty Operating Officer, Business School Lynne Cox – Director of Research Office Andrew Hardy – Reward Adviser

10 | P a g e

Appendix A

Equal Pay – Gender Statistics January 2016 (Basic Pay)

N/A* No gender pay comparisons can be made at these grades because there were solely male or solely female employees within this grade during this

time period.

Staff Group Grade/band

No. of

Females Female

No. of

Males Male

Total No.

of Staff Overall

%

Difference

in pay

No. of

Females Female

No. of

Males Male

Total No.

of Staff Overall

%

Difference

in pay

Academic & Research Lecturer - Level C 66 £53,725 181 £53,912 247 £53,862 0% 54 £55,990 157 £55,775 211 £55,830 0%

Senior Lecturer - Level D 30 £59,767 137 £58,836 167 £59,004 2% 43 £62,877 150 £60,622 193 £61,124 4%

Reader - Level D 39 £70,080 146 £67,739 185 £68,232 3% 38 £70,616 146 £68,861 184 £69,224 3%

Professor - Level E 74 £98,415 416 £100,235 490 £99,960 -2% 75 £99,705 420 £102,893 495 £102,410 -3%

Research - Level A 204 £31,315 284 £32,288 488 £31,881 -3% 205 £32,387 293 £33,544 498 £33,068 -3%

Research - Level B 592 £36,992 990 £36,648 1582 £36,776 1% 579 £37,675 1003 £38,389 1582 £38,128 -2%

Research - Level C 85 £48,304 167 £48,803 252 £48,635 -1% 89 £49,336 177 £49,538 266 £49,470 0%

Research - Level D 8 £53,426 16 £66,815 24 £62,352 -20% 11 £56,067 26 £68,275 37 £64,645 -18%

Research - Level E 1 - 5 - 6 £80,606 N/A* 1 - 8 - 9 £83,474 N/A*

Level 2b 1 - 1 - 2 - N/A* 1 - 1 - N/A*

Level 3a 1 - 1 - 2 - N/A* 3 - 1 - 4 - N/A*

Level 3b 30 £37,380 35 £39,213 65 £38,367 -5% 27 £39,380 29 £41,072 56 £40,256 -4%

Level 4 21 £44,408 24 £49,251 45 £46,991 -10% 25 £47,794 33 £49,643 58 £48,846 -4%

Level 5 11 £63,902 16 £66,964 27 £65,717 -5% 12 £64,350 14 £68,814 26 £66,754 -6%

Level 6 11 £79,811 16 £75,913 27 £77,501 5% 10 £81,158 14 £77,137 24 £78,812 5%

Operational Services Level 1a 107 £17,190 179 £18,453 286 £17,981 -7% 96 £18,734 162 £19,046 258 £18,930 -2%

Level 1b 25 £21,093 37 £20,648 62 £20,827 2% 23 £21,593 40 £21,481 63 £21,522 1%

Level 2a 22 £24,715 32 £25,037 54 £24,906 -1% 22 £25,075 39 £25,376 61 £25,268 -1%

Level 2b 30 £26,641 30 £27,600 60 £27,121 -3% 27 £28,313 25 £27,992 52 £28,158 1%

Level 3a 21 £30,018 23 £32,218 44 £31,168 -7% 21 £31,784 24 £31,661 45 £31,718 0%

Level 3b 7 £39,837 7 £38,516 14 £39,176 3% 6 £39,702 6 £40,053 12 £39,878 -1%

Level 4 3 - 5 - 8 £49,771 N/A* 4 - 6 - 10 £45,114 N/A*

Professional Services Level 1a 4 - 5 - 9 £18,569 N/A* 8 £18,510 6 £17,902 14 £18,250 3%

Level 1b 7 £18,157 6 £20,655 13 £19,310 -12% 6 £21,740 5 £21,308 11 £21,544 2%

Level 2a 36 £24,528 13 £24,881 49 £24,621 -1% 36 £25,294 15 £25,264 51 £25,285 0%

Level 2b 148 £27,049 56 £27,068 204 £27,054 0% 153 £27,733 53 £28,112 206 £27,831 -1%

Level 3a 445 £31,673 137 £31,331 582 £31,593 1% 490 £32,217 173 £32,015 663 £32,164 1%

Level 3b 461 £38,783 257 £38,407 718 £38,649 1% 470 £38,564 268 £39,579 738 £38,933 -3%

Level 4 310 £49,756 277 £50,763 587 £50,232 -2% 336 £49,526 293 £50,928 629 £50,179 -3%

Level 5 96 £59,264 138 £58,650 234 £58,902 1% 111 £57,074 143 £60,947 254 £59,255 -6%

Level 6 55 £78,067 65 £84,325 120 £81,457 -7% 65 £78,276 81 £87,351 146 £83,311 -10%

Level 7 7 £107,539 23 £126,906 30 £122,387 -15% 8 £136,349 20 £135,189 28 £135,521 1%

Technical Services Level 1a 3 - 5 - 8 £17,594 N/A* 2 - 6 - 8 £17,914 N/A*

Level 1b 9 £21,375 10 £20,966 19 £21,160 2% 12 £21,889 8 £21,743 20 £21,830 1%

Level 2a 23 £24,907 21 £24,750 44 £24,832 1% 27 £25,176 15 £23,744 42 £24,664 6%

Level 2b 44 £27,197 39 £26,596 83 £26,915 2% 33 £27,892 35 £28,541 68 £28,226 -2%

Level 3a 98 £31,780 107 £30,520 205 £31,122 4% 94 £32,307 91 £32,822 185 £32,560 -2%

Level 3b 42 £39,608 113 £39,996 155 £39,891 -1% 40 £39,889 102 £41,679 142 £41,175 -4%

Level 4 5 £48,582 36 £51,040 41 £50,740 -5% 8 £49,065 36 £51,380 44 £50,959 -5%

2015 2016

Learning & Teaching

11 | P a g e

Appendix B

Finance Review of 2014/15

The figure for surplus in the Union’s pay claim has been calculated as the difference between operating

income and operating expenditure as supplied in the data pack issued to support the salary negotiations.

Further items need to be factored in before getting to the surplus, especially the tax liability of £13 million.

The College’s financial statements contain full details and these are available on the web

(http://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/administration-and-support-

services/finance/public/Annual-Report-2014-15.pdf).

At headline level the College’s surplus rose to £130 million in 2014/15, up £44 million from the prior year or

around 50%. The College became entitled to claim a Research and Development Expenditure Credit

(RDEC) last year based on the level of its industrial sponsored research activity. The College only became

aware of this relatively late during the year and will not be able to claim in respect of any expenditure

incurred after July 2015 following a change in government policy. The accounting rules required the

income reported last year to cover the whole period from 2013-2015. This added £60 million to income

with an associated tax liability of £13 million, resulting in a net impact on the surplus of £47 million; this

item alone was more than the size of the increase over the prior year. None of this income had been

received as cash by the end of the year and the amount is still subject to audit by HMRC.

Whereas it is true that other operating income grew, the majority of this was offset by corresponding

expenditure; it is only the net of the two that is relevant for the surplus.

Cash from operations fell last year to £88 million, down £32 million on the prior year. This apparent

mismatch between the surplus rising and the cash falling is due to the fact that there were certain large

one-off items that had a positive impact on the surplus but no impact on cash in the year (RDEC was one,

others were a change of accounting policy on investment properties and a part reversal of an earlier

provision related to the decommissioning of the specialist engineering facility). The new accounting

standard that College has to apply from this current year onwards will lead to more volatility in the

reported surplus going forwards and in many ways the cash generated is a better number to focus on in the

context of affordability.

12 | P a g e

Appendix C

Hay Group Benchmark data

Hay proposal grade midpoints A & R Grade Academic and

Research market

244 1 33061

287 2 41635

338 3 44612

- 4 50808

400 Soft zone 1 64432

471 Soft zone 2 77694

559 Soft zone 3 93083

682 Soft zone 4 114516

835 Soft zone 5 132654

920 Soft zone 6 160160

Hay proposal grade midpoints PTO GradeAll London I&S Hay

Market data

<73 A n/a

86 B n/a

107 C 22250

123 D 25049

141 E 26478

170 F 29332

209 G 32391

244 H 35922

287 J 40999

338 K 46637

400 Soft zone 1 64432

471 Soft zone 2 77694

559 Soft zone 3 93083

682 Soft zone 4 114516

835 Soft zone 5 132654

920 Soft zone 6 160160

13 | P a g e

Appendix D

Number of staff against each spine point

Spinal Point Headcount

1 29

2 114

3 136

4 0

5 31

6 12

7 5

8 5

9 5

10 4

11 29

12 2

13 30

14 24

15 24

16 68

17 61

18 57

19 54

20 56

21 88

22 171

23 152

24 172

25 107

26 366

27 393

28 344

29 368

30 269

31 239

32 221

33 176

34 173

35 152

36 441

37 144

38 121

39 122

40 75

41 88

42 101

43 162

44 261

45 96

46 73

47 85

48 22

49 90

50 31

51 19

52 16