David Cameron called it ‘an idea whose time has come’. Ed Miliband described it as ‘a really important idea’. Boris Johnson claimed it was ‘not only morally right, but makes good business sense too.’ The Student Senate of Cardiff University Student’s Union (the body responsible for choosing the Union’s political direction) voted overwhelmingly for the Union to adopt it. So what is it, and why is Cardiff University so opposed to it?
The Living Wage is a powerful idea predicated on the simple notion that everyone who works for a living should get just that,a living. Academics calculate the minimum amount it costs to live in the UK and release an hourly rate on a yearly basis. The level is currently set at ┬ú7.65 an hour outside of London, and ┬ú8.80 within it. The logic behind it is as simple as the concept itself. If businesses pay their employees enough to live, they will be happier, more motivated, and work harder. Productivity will rise. Taxpayers will also save money, as the UK Government is currently forced to pay in-work benefits to low-paid employees as organisations (such as Cardiff University) don’t pay them enough to live.
The list of registered Living Wage Employers is long and diverse. From Amnesty International, Barclays and the Trade Union Congress to Transport for London, Accenture and the London School of Economics Student’s Union, employers up and down the country are being persuaded by the moral and business arguments in favour of the Living Wage.
Unfortunately, the list does not include Cardiff University, or its Student’s Union. This not only flies in the face of an intuitive sense of fairness and the cold logic of good business practice, but also the democratic processes that are supposed to exist in these organisations. Cardiff University Student’s Union in particular is supposed to be run by students, for students. However, the democratically elected Student Senate that represents the student voice voted overwhelmingly to implement the Living Wage (by 19 votes to 6, with the Conservative Party element in the Senate all voting to reject), yet the Student’s Union is still not a Living Wage Employer. The process is still on going, but unelected officials who run the administrative areas of the Union attended the meeting and (unsuccessfully) attempted to convince Senators against paying employees a Living Wage. A concerted campaign group of lecturers and students also exists within Cardiff University aimed at paying the university’s employees a Living Wage, but so far the University has refused to register as a Living Wage employer.
The refusal of both organisations to register as Living Wage employers becomes even more grating when you look at what they do choose to spend their money on. A report in 2013 found that then-Vice Chancellor of Cardiff University Dr David Grant received a ┬ú264,000 salary. Despite a rise in tuition fees for many students, a refusal to register as a Living Wage employer and hard economic times, this was a rise of 7.32% on the previous year. ┬ú18,000 of the University’s money was also spent on a portrait of Dr Grant. In 2010 Dr Grant earned more than ┬ú110,000 more than the First Minister of Wales, Carwyn Jones. Plans to spend ┬ú675,000 on a house for the new Vice Chancellor Colin Riordan were approved. This spending contrasts darkly with the stories of those who aren’t paid the Living Wage. The official Living Wage website has stories from people who had to work more than one job due to not being paid enough to live, having to get out of bed before their children were awake and getting back after they were asleep again.
To raise the pay of one worker from Minimum to Living Wage costs ┬ú1.34 an hour. Merely the portrait of Dr David Grant could have paid for an increase in the living wage for 13,432 hours worth of work. If Cardiff University has money to burn on ornate portraits, grace-and-favour houses and other vanity projects, why can’t it find the money to give dignity and justice to it’s lowest paid employees, and improve Cardiff University’s brand reputation in the process?
Harry Thompson
Add Comment