skip to primary navigationskip to content
 

14 October 2004

Board of Scrutiny

 

Noon, Thursday 14 October 2004

 

 

Room G26, Faculty of Law

 

Present: Stephen Cowley, Nicholas Holmes, John Little, Timothy Milner, Saskia Murk-Jansen, David Phillipson, Nick Pyper Jennifer Rigby, Roger Salmon, John Spencer (Chairman), Helen Thompson (Secretary)

 

In attendance: Tessa Payne

 

1.      Apologies

Margaret Glendenning

 

2.      Election of Chairman and Secretary

John Spencer was elected nem con as Chairman for the year ending 30 September 2005 (proposed by Stephen Cowley and seconded by David Phillipson).  Helen Thompson was elected nem con as Secretary for the period to 31 December 2004, and Nicholas Holmes for the period to 30 September 2005 (both proposed by Stephen Cowley and seconded by David Phillipson).

 

The Board thanked Roger Salmon for his service, as this would be his last meeting.  It was agreed that the Chair would write to Susan Bowring suggesting that the elections for the Board of Scrutiny vacancy and the Council took place at same time, as a means of saving costs.

 

3.      Minutes of previous meeting

These were agreed subject to checking the vacancy date of the Under-35 position on the Board .

 

4.      Matters arising

There were no matters arising.

 

5.      The Vice-Chancellor’s address

The Board confirmed that the Vice-Chancellor’s address had been well received, although it has raised a slight concern about the future of College supervisions.

 

6.      The Ninth Report - Discussion

It was noted that the Discussion of the Ninth Report will take place on Tuesday 26 October.  It was agreed that the Chairman would give a brief introduction and identify a few key aspects of the Report.  The Chairman confirmed that he would circulate a draft of his speech for comment prior to the Discussion.

      

7.      New Pay and Grading Structure for non-clinical staff - Discussion

It was noted that the response to the proposed New Pay and Grading Structure for non-clinical staff had been generally hostile.  There had been a number of factual criticisms, which included concerns about the impact of the proposal on the remuneration of staff at the lower end of the scale.  The Board noted that the Report did not follow the terminology enshrined in the Statutes and Ordinances, in that they have no reference to academic-related staff, although this category of staff had been referred to in the Report.  Additionally, the Board have a concern about the implications of widening membership of the Regent House.  The Board noted that although there are always concerns when any new system is introduced, it is vital that these concerns are addressed if the system is to be satisfactorily implemented, and that the introduction of the new system should not be rushed, to the potential detriment of staff relations and the University as a whole.

 

It was agreed that the Board would prepare a written submission on the current draft, and that a sub-committee would be convened to do this.  Membership of the sub-committee was confirmed as Stephen Cowley, Nicholas Holmes, Jennifer Rigby and John Spencer.  A first draft will be prepared by Stephen Cowley and Nicholas Holmes for the next meeting of the Board.

 

8.      Personnel Department

The Board agreed that a meeting should be arranged with Peter Deer as soon as possible, to discuss the Review of Personnel and the Report on Pay and Grading.

It was agreed that the Secretary would contact peter Deer requesting a meeting in the first week of November.  Attendees would be the sub-committee and anyone else who wished and was able to attend.

 

9.      Programme for the year

It was that attention would be focussed initially on the Report on Pay and Grading, with consideration being given to publishing a Report following the publication of the next version of the Report from the Personnel Department.  This possibility would be discussed with Peter Deer at the meeting with him.  Additionally the Accounts would be reviewed in detail following their publication in December, with a particular interest in the progress of the RAM, and joined-up budgeting.  A meeting with Andrew Reid would be arranged in due course.  A meeting with the Board of Graduate Studies would be considered in the Lent Term.  Additionally a Report on IPR was expected later this term which the Board would review, along with the issue of delegation.

 

10.  Any other business

There was no further business

 

11.  Date of next meeting

The next meeting will be held on Thursday 28 October.  Venue to be confirmed.