Gender Pay Gap

The University has made good progress in reducing our average gender pay gap from 14.7% in 2020 to 12.8% in 2022 as illustrated in Table 1.  This represents a reduction of 11.2% points from 24.0% since the University first reported its average gender pay gap in 2013.  The median pay gap has fallen from 13.7% in 2020 to 8.4% in 2022, having reduced by almost 50% from 16.2% in 2018.  A similar pattern is observed across average and median allowance gaps.

 

Table 1: A table providing the statistics for the UofG average and median gender pay and allowance gaps. The table highlights that from 2018 to 2022 the average pay gap has decreased 5.1% points, median pay gap has reduced 7.8% points, average allowance gap has decreased 6.3% points and the median allowance gap has reduced 7.8% points.

Table 1. UofG Average and Median Gender Pay and Allowance Gaps 2018 – 2022

The University’s average and median pay gaps of 12.8% and 8.4% respectively, compare extremely favourably to the equivalent pay gaps reported across the Russell Group and the HE Sector as a whole in AY 2020-21[1] as illustrated in Table 2.

Table 2: A table providing the UofG average and median gender pay gaps in comparison with Russel Group and HE Sector. The table highlights that UofG average pay gap is 5.6% points less than the Russell group and 2.7% points less than the HE Sector. The UofG median pay gap is 5% points less than the Russel group and 3.9% points less than the HE Sector.

Table 2. UofG Average and Median Gender Pay Gaps with Russell Group & HE Sector Benchmark

 

Despite this positive trajectory, a gender pay gap remains. Gender pay gaps at the University are largely driven by forms of gendered occupational segregation. 

Occupational Segregation

Occupational segregation is the distribution of the staff population across and within particular occupations and jobs based upon specific demographic characteristics, such as gender.  While some occupations have become increasingly integrated over time, occupational gender segregation has resulted in others remaining highly dominated by either men or women. This remains a prevalent feature in parts of academia i.e. women tend to be under-represented in executive leadership, professorial and high-paying professional occupations and are often over-represented in support and some operational roles.  Gender pay gaps at the University are driven by both vertical and horizontal occupational segregation.

Vertical Occupational Segregation

Figure 1 shows that women are overrepresented in roles across lower grades and under-represented across senior roles, particularly amongst the Professoriate, leading to a higher average salary for men.

Graph showing UofG colleague population by grade and gender as at 31st August 2022. It shows that we have higher representation of females than males at our lower grades particularly grade 1. Grades 2, 4 to 6 and 10 are relatively balanced slightly in favour of female representation. Professor has highest representation of males to females. And grade 9, SMG and clinical have a slight male majori

Figure 1: UofG Colleague Population by Grade and Gender (31 August 2022)

 

Women’s representation on the Senior Management Group (SMG) was 46.7% on the census date for this exercise but has since reverted to a 50:50 gender balance. Women’s representation within the Professoriate increased to 33.1% in 2020 but has dropped slightly to 31.1% in 2023 while the proportion of women at Zones 2, 3 and 4 has increased as outlined in Table 3 below.

The increase in the proportion of women professors at Zone 4 from 4.0% in 2020 to 15.4% in 2022 is a positive change and should be considered against the challenges in talent attraction at this level, irrespective of gender. 

 

Table 3: A table providing the UofG professorial zones by gender as at 31 August 2022. The table highlights that the proportion of males far exceed the proportion of females across all professorial zones, with the difference increasing as the zones increase. For Female to Male: Zone 1 33.2% to 66.8%; Zone 2 36.2% to 63.8%; Zone 3 20.9% to 79.1%; Zone 4 15.4% to 84.6%.

Table 3. UofG Professorial Zones by Gender (31 August 2022)

Horizontal Occupational Segregation

Women are disproportionately represented across MPA roles, when compared to R&T and Clinical roles, which typically provide higher earning potential, as highlighted in Figure 2 overleaf. Moreover, women are more likely to work less than full-time across all of our job families[2] than their male counterparts. These factors have a substantial impact on our overall gender pay gap.

Bar chart presenting the breakdown of staff across all job families by their sex and FTE Status. It shows women are more likely than men to work less than full-time across all job families.

Figure 2: UofG Colleague Population by Job Family, FTE Status, and Gender (31 August 2022)

Figure 3 below outlines the distribution of our female and male populations by job family. This highlights that men are markedly more likely to be engaged in R&T related roles compared to women with 61.4% of our male colleagues working in R&T roles in comparison to 47.4% of our female colleagues.  This illustrates the significance and impact of horizontal occupational segregation on our overall average and median gender pay gaps.

Two Donut Charts depicting job families male and female colleagues are most likely to be employed in at UofG. They show women more likely than men to be in MPA roles and men most likely to be in RT roles.

Figure 3: UofG Job Family Distribution across Female/Male Colleague Populations (31 August 2022)

Equal Pay

Table 4: A table providing the average and median equal pay gap figures by gender across grades 1-9 as at 31 August 2022. The table shows relative pay gaps with regards to basic salary for grades 1-9 fall within the permitted variance of +/-5% as defined by the EHRC. Average and median pay gaps favour women up to grade 8 with the exception of grade 3.

Table 4[3]: Average and Median Equal Pay Gaps by Gender across Grades 1-9 (31 August 2022)

 

The relative pay gaps with regards to basic salary for our staff population on Grades 1-9 fall within the permitted variance of +/-5% as defined by the EHRC as outlined in Table 4 above.  Further, average and median pay gaps favour women up to Grade 8 (excluding Grade 3) which correlates with the prevalence of men (54.8%) in Grade 3 roles, as outlined in Figure 1 on p.4. 

Gaps exceeding 3%, notably Allowance and Bonus Gaps at Grades 4 and 5 in favour of women, should be considered in the context of the overall gender pay gap in favour of men.

Table 5: A table providing the average and median pay gap figures by gender across grade 10, professoriate and clinical academics as at 31 August 2022. The data at grade 10 highlights a higher average gender pay gap in favour of men at 11.3% and median of 10.5%. Professorial zones 1 to 3 pay gaps are lower at an average of Zone 1: 3%, Zone 2: 1.8% and Zone 3: 3.7%.

Table 5[4]: Average and Median Pay Gaps by Gender across Grades 10, Professoriate and Clinical Academics (31 August 2022)

Data relating to Grade 10 (Professional Services) highlight a consistently high gender pay gap in favour of men. The average pay gap shows a slight decrease to 11.3% from 12.6% in 2020, with the median pay gap lower than the average at 10.5%. The level of the gap coincides with the increase in the representation of women (52%) and their proportionate representation within this grade.  This clearly warrants further investigation and the identification of potential actions with a view to addressing the gap.

Zones 1 and 3 report a decrease in their respective pay gaps between 2020-2022 with the Zone 1 average pay gap having reduced from 3.4% to 3.0% and the median pay gap having reduced from 4.6% to 1.5% to within permitted variance levels.  The Zone 3 average pay gap has reduced from 4.0% to 3.7% and the median pay gap has reduced from 2.1% to 0.2%. The narrow gap in median pay suggests that there are individual outlying men impacting the average pay gap. Encouragingly, the almost negligible median pay gap implies greater pay equity across this zone.

Zone 2 reports a 1.0% increase in the average pay gap yet a slight decrease in the median pay gap, although these largely remain within the permitted levels of variance.  This should however remain under review in relation to bonus and allowance gaps. Encouragingly, the median values for these gaps are markedly lower and tend to be within permitted ranges.

An extremely small number of Professors, denoted as ‘Professor – other’ in Table 5, have yet to complete the zoning process and this creates large variations in the average and median pay gaps for this group. Similarly, for those categorised as ‘Others’, and for whom the University does not determine the relevant pay scales, the average pay gaps are strikingly high. It is worth noting however that the median values are markedly lower, and this points to specific men who are skewing the distribution.

We are unable to disclose the pay gap at Zone 4 while maintaining colleague confidentiality due to the low numbers of men and women professors within this zone.

 

 

[1] UCEA, 2023. Intersectional Pay Gaps in Higher Education 2020-21

[2] The University has four main job families – Research and Teaching (RT), Operational (OPS), Management, Professional and Administration (MPA) and Technical and Specialist (TECH); Clinical (CLIN) colleagues hold joint contracts with the NHS.

[3] (-) denotes a pay gap in favour of women.

[4] ‘Professor - Other’ inc. low number of professors yet to be zoned.

‘Others’ – inc. MRC, Marie Curie Fellows and those not on UofG pay structures/grades.