Annual Workforce Information Report 2014

Transcription

1 Total Staff Costs To Total Income FTE Disability 4.7% 12.1% Total Turnover 7,243 Staff 5.8% Voluntary Turnover Annual Workforce Information Report % Gender Split 49% 51% Female Professors Staff Breakdown Age Breakdown Part-Time Staff 23% Academic Recruitment 3,592 Applications 163 Appointments Research Recruitment 5,357 Applications 439 Appointments Teaching Recruitment 1,495 Applications 128 Appointments MEO 11% Non-UK Staff 17.5% Page 1

2 1. Talent Attraction and Attrition 1.1. Staff Numbers 1.2. Faculty Growth 1.3. Fixed-Term Contracts 1.4. Starters and Leavers 1.5. International Recruitment 1.6. Male/Female Recruitment 1.7. Turnover 1.8. Retirement 2. KPI: Percentage of Professorial Staff who are Female 2.1. Female Professors 2.2. Academic, Research & Teaching Staff Growth, Attrition and Promotions by Gender 3. KPI: Percentage Ratio of Total Staff Costs to Total Income 3.1. Staff Costs as a Percentage of Income 3.2. Spend on Reward 3.3. Sickness Absence Cost of Sickness Absence 4. KPI: Percentage of Staff who are Proud to Work for the University 4.1. We are Proud Sector Comparisons Within this report, reference has been made to benchmarking data against HESA and the DLA Piper Workforce Performance Indicators survey HESA refers to the Higher Education Statistics Agency and is a statutory return for all Higher Education Institutions. The DLA Piper survey covers some 400 organisations, including 72 Higher Education Institutions. Page 2

3 1.1 Staff Numbers 8000 Staff Headcount by Category ( ) GTA Academic Research Teaching Professional The number of staff has increased by 12.9% in the last 12 months and has exceeded the 7,000 mark for the first time, standing at 7, Graduate Teaching Assistants (GTAs) are now on University staff contracts (GTAs are recorded as 0 FTE but have guaranteed minimum hours). Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) has increased by 5.4% (6,038.7 FTE). In 2013/14 there was an increase across all staff groups: 2% 9% 10% 5% Academics Researchers Teachers Professional Staff Page 3

4 1.2 Faculty Growth 40.4% 11.9% 24.3% 24.4% Faculty Growth 2013/ % 16.5% 15.3% 5.6% 3.9% Headcount FTE 3.4% 3.9% 2.2% 1.4% -3.1% Engineering AMRC Social Sciences Science Arts & Humanities Professional Services Medicine Dentistry & Health The AMRC percentage increase in headcount is broadly consistent with the increase in FTE suggesting that appointments have been full-time. Other Faculties have a significantly smaller increase in FTE when compared to headcount, which can be attributed to the introduction of Graduate Teaching Assistant contracts Engineering has appointed 47% of the 481 GTAs. Professional Services has experienced a larger FTE increase compared to headcount. This suggests that part-time working is becoming less popular. 1.3 Fixed-Term Contracts 35.0% Percentage of Staff on Fixed-Term Contracts % % 5.0% The introduction of contracts for Graduate Teaching Assistants has contributed to a reversal of the downward trend of fixed-term contracts. Excluding GTAs from the figures results in a slight increase in fixed-term contract usage, up from 26.1% as at 31 July 2013 to 26.8% as at 31 July The average percentage of staff on fixed-term contracts within the Russell Group is 25.3%, ranging from University College London with just 1.7% to the University of Oxford with 48.9% (HESA Staff Data, 2012/13). Page 4

5 Total Cost of Annual Salary Cost of Annual Salary per Starter/Leaver 1.4 Starters and Leavers Total Annual Salary Cost of Leavers 21.4m Total Annual Salary Cost of New Starters 27.9m 12,000,000 10,000,000 8,000,000 6,000,000 4,000,000 2,000,000 - Cost of Starters and Leavers 2013/14 Professional Teaching Research Lecturer SL/Reader Professor 80,000 70,000 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 - Cost of Starters Cost of Leavers Ave cost per Starter Ave cost per Leaver The average annual salary of a new Lecturer is c. 7k less than that of a leaver, which is the difference between the top and bottom points of Grade 8. The average annual salary per starter (all categories) is 24.7k compared with 25.9k per leaver. For Senior Lecturers/Readers and Professors, the average annual salary per starter is c. 10k higher than the average annual salary of those leaving. Page 5

6 1.5 Recruitment of Non-UK Nationals In this section, Non-UK refers to applicants with overseas nationality (including the EU). It does not refer to their domicile. Recruitment of Non-UK Nationals by Category (2013/14) Applied Interviewed Appointed Staff in Post Academic Research Teaching 16.0% 14.0% 12.0% 8.0% 6.0% 4.0% 2.0% Conversion Rates from Application to Appointment by Nationality (2013/14) UK Non-UK Academic Research Teaching In every staff category, UK nationals are more than twice as likely to be appointed as non-uk nationals. For Academic, Research and Teaching vacancies, the highest number of non-uk applicants were Indian (1,267), Chinese (1055) and Italian (614). The conversion rate of non-uk applicants is higher for Teaching vacancies than for Research, the opposite applies for UK applicants. There is a less than 3% conversion rate from application to appointment for non-uk candidates applying for Academic posts. With our aspiration to be an international University, this is an area to investigate. Page 6

7 1.6 Male/Female Recruitment Female Recruitment by Category (2013/14) Applied Interviewed Appointed Staff in Post Academic Research Teaching Conversion Rates from Application to Appointment by Gender (2013/14) 9.0% 8.0% 7.0% 6.0% 5.0% 4.0% 3.0% 2.0% 1.0% Male Female Academic Research Teaching In 2013/14, the University received 13,836 applications from male candidates and 14,004 from female candidates. Of these, 685 male appointments and 758 female appointments were made. This gives a conversion of 1:20.2 male applications resulting in appointment and 1:18.5 applications for female. For Academic vacancies, the proportion of female candidates interviewed was higher than the proportion that applied, and a higher proportion of female candidates were appointed. A female applicant is 1.6 times more likely to be appointed to an Academic position than a male applicant. Page 7

8 1.7 Turnover Figures in this section exclude Graduate Teaching Assistants. Total turnover refers to all leavers and includes resignations. Turnover is calculated by dividing the number of leavers during the period by the average headcount. Percentage Staff Turnover by Staff Category 2013/ % 2 Total Turnover Resignations 15.0% 5.0% Academic Research Teaching Professional Professional Services Starters & Leavers by Faculty 2013/14 Medicine Dentistry & Health Engineering Science Social Sciences Arts & Humanities Starters Leavers Starters Leavers Difference AMRC Total voluntary turnover (resignations) for the University was 5.8%, this compares with the sector average of 6.7%. Turnover for Academic, Research and Teaching staff at the University was 6.3%, compared with a sector average of 5.7% (DLA Piper Workforce Performance Indicators survey 2013). As at 31 July 2014 all areas of the University, except Arts & Humanities and Medicine, Dentistry & Health, had turned over a greater number of starters than leavers during the previous 12 months. Page 8

9 1.8 Retirement 3 Percentage of Leavers who Retired ( ) 25.0% % 5.0% Academic Research Teaching Professional 2009/ / / / /14 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% Age Profile by Staff Category - 31 July 2014 Academic Research Teaching Professional Age Profile at 31 July Sector Comparison HE Average Uni of Sheffield 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% The default retirement age was removed from legislation on 1 st October 2011, despite this the average retirement age has remained constant at c.63 for Academic staff and c.62 for Professional staff. Figures for Teaching and Research are too low to take a meaningful average. Without the default retirement age, there has been a steady increase in staff who are aged 65 and over, from 0.4% of the workforce in 2010 to the current level of 1.3%. Comparison with the HE sector average shows that overall the University has a younger workforce profile ( DLA Piper Workforce Performance Indicators survey 2013). Page 9

10 % Growth, Attrion, Promotion % Staff in Post 2.1 Female Professors Number and % of Female Professors % % 5.0% Headcount Percentage The number of female Professors has increased by 48% over the last 5 years, from 75 to 111. As at 31 July 2014, the percentage of Professorial staff who are female was 23%, the target set in the Strategic Plan Academic, Research & Teaching staff Growth, Attrition and Promotions by Gender % Growth, Attrition and Promotion of Academic, Research and Teaching Staff ( ) 65.0% 55.0% % 15.0% 5.0% 35.0% 25.0% 15.0% 5.0% -5.0% Teaching Research Lecturer SL/Reader Professor -5.0% Growth Female Growth Male Attrition Female Attrition Male Promotions Female Promotions Male In Post Female Page 10

11 Headcount 31 July July 2014 Female Male Female Male Research Teaching Lecturer SL/Reader Professor* The percentage growth of female staff is greater than that for male growth in all categories bar Research, whilst female staff are in the majority as Teachers. The male staff growth rate was negative at Lecturer level and continued to fall at Senior Lecturer/Reader level. There was growth at Professorial level but at a rate that half that of female growth. A greater proportion of female Researchers, Lecturers and Senior Lecturers/Readers leave the University. Female Lecturers and Professors are less likely to leave the University than their male peers. Despite the increased growth rate for female Academic staff, the overall picture is of a declining number as females move up the pipeline from Lecturer to Professor. The opposite is true for males. Although we are promoting a greater proportion of female Academic staff, we are losing female talent at critical points in the pipeline (Research, Lecturer and Senior Lecturer/Reader). A dual strategy of recruiting female talent into Professorial positions and supporting, retaining and promoting women internally, is required to meet this KPI. * Refers to Academic Professors there are three additional Teaching/Research Professors who are counted within the Teaching/Research category. Page 11

12 3.1 Staff Costs as a Percentage of Income The above chart has been taken from the Annual Report and Financial Statement 2012/13 Staff costs as a percentage of total income fell slightly in 2012/13 from 51.8% to 51.6%. In this period total income rose by 7.4% ( 446.9m to 479.8m), and staff costs rose by 7% ( 231.3m to 247.5m). A similar trend is seen in both the Russell Group and the wider HE sector. Pay costs have been kept under review, including pay awards in line with the HE sector and wider public sector and there has been no significant increased pay costs associated with promotions and exceptional contribution awards. Fee income from the UK and EU undergraduate market is growing significantly and research income increased by 5.1% in 2012/13, which impacts on this KPI. Page 12

13 Total Spend Ave Spend per Employee 3.2 Spend on Reward Spend referred to in this section is the annualised increase in salary following the award of the increment/promotion, or lump sum where applicable. This spend is over and above base pay. Spend on Reward 2013/14 2,500,000 4,500 2,000,000 4,000 3,500 1,500,000 3,000 2,500 1,000,000 2,000 1, ,000 1, Incremental Progression Exceptional Contribution Awards Annual Professorial Salary Promotions Round Review - Total Spend Ave Spend per Employee Total Spend Ave Spend per Employee Incremental Progression 2,276, Exceptional Contribution Awards 371,009 1, Annual Promotions Round 536,484 2, Professorial & Equivalent Salary Review No of Employees 971,770 3, Incremental progression accounted for 55% of the reward spend. During 2013/14 there has been a fundamental review of the University s reward and recognition strategy. Proposals being developed include the offer of more flexible solutions to how additional contribution and excellent performance is recognised and rewarded, including the timeliness of reward. Page 13

14 3.3 Sickness Absence Academic All HE Ave UoS HE Ave UoS Average Working Days Lost Per Employee pa Average Length of Absence Percentage of Absence which is Long-Term 58.2% 69.9% 48.7% 53.9% HE Ave is the Higher Education Average taken from the DLA Piper Workforce Performance Indicators survey The Higher Education sector has difficulties in capturing sickness absence for Academic staff, and the Average Working Days Lost Per Employee pa figures in the table above highlight that our data capture for this group is poor compared with the sector average, although we seem to have reasonable data capture for other staff categories. There is a greater proportion of long-term sickness absence amongst academics and the average length of absence is also high, a likely result of a lack of recording of short-term absences. Work is ongoing to identify priority areas experiencing higher levels of sickness absence and working with line managers to resolve sickness absence cases as speedily as possible and implement preventative measures for the future. This work is supported by a new case management process and implementation of streamlined pathways to manage sickness cases. Through Talent First, HR staff are engaging with managers to promote the health and wellbeing of their staff, and the proactive management of sickness absence. The focus has also been on encouraging staff to take responsibility for their own health and wellbeing and make healthy changes to their lifestyles. The Juice Everyday Health and Wellbeing offer includes a full program of activities, advice and health campaigns including Positive Mental Health and Healthy Heart. An enhanced counselling provision and employee assistance programme for all staff has been introduced, provided by Health Assured. Page 14

15 3.3.1 Cost of Sickness Absence Cost of sickness absence is based on an individual s annual salary as at the start date of the absence (or as at 1 August 2013 if absence commenced prior to this), plus 28% (reflecting average employers NI and pension contributions). Cost of Sickness Absence 2011/ /14 4,955,051 4,772,396 4,323, / / /14 Breakdown of Cost of Sickness Absence 2013/14 3,789,099 2,670,869 2,101,528 2,710,889 2,061, ,298 Long-Term Short-Term Mental Health Physical Health Faculties Professional & Support Services Length Reason Area It is recognised that the cost of sickness absence is significant. In addition to the costs above, in some instances there is the cost of cover, and the impact on the individual, department and productivity. A more preventative approach is key to reducing sickness absence and the associated costs. Page 15

16 4.1 We are Proud % 86% 94% This KPI is a key measure of staff engagement and the improvement target for 2014 was set at 86% by the University s Council. The response in 2014 exceeded this target and was a significant increase on the response of 78% in 2008, a cause for celebration. Staff Survey 2014: Perceptions I plan to be working here in 12 months time I feel inspired to do my best work every day I am committed to the University s goals I feel a strong sense of belonging to the University of Sheffield I would recommend the University as an excellent place to study I would recommend the University as an excellent place to work 84% 90% 76% 83% 72% 87% 66% 80% 83% 96% 75% 87% The above table shows the responses of staff to a group of key questions which demonstrate commitment to the values and direction of the University. 87% of staff would recommend the University as an excellent place to work and 83% of staff feel inspired to do their best work every day. It is a reflection of the quality of the service provided to students that 94% of staff would recommend the University as an excellent place to study. These results are being discussed and taken forward across the institution to ensure full engagement and communication to all staff. Page 16

17 Staff Survey 2014: Engagement I would recommend the University as an excellent place to work I am proud to work for the University I feel fairly paid for the work I do Have you had a Staff Review and Development Scheme (SRDS) discussion [or annual review/appraisal for clinical staff] with your line manager/reviewer within the last I feel the University delivers a good quality service to students 75% 86% 87% 86% 86% 94% 61% 66% 71% 86% 82% 89% 76% 87% 93% The University Leaders lead and manage the University well Overall, my manager/supervisor does a good job of managing me My immediate manager/supervisor keeps me informed about things I should know about I feel valued by the University 71% 78% 70% 80% 81% 64% 76% 79% 55% 54% 65% University of Sheffield 2012 Positive % HEI norm Positive % University of Sheffield 2014 Positive % The above table compares some of the results from key questions in the staff survey which measure employee engagement for the University in relation to other Higher Education institutions supported by Capita, our survey provider. Positive responses to these questions demonstrate high levels of employee satisfaction, which in turn impact on the University providing a high quality service to students. Making comparisons with other HEIs is helpful in placing employee engagement results into context and highlighting our strengths and areas for improvement. Page 17