Annual salary review and re-banding

1. The process begins with the professor having a normal SRDS meeting with the Head of Department/School (or perhaps a nominated senior substitute in large departments).

• The reviewer knows when the professor last received an increase or a bonus, so not only can achievements in the last 12 months be discussed and reviewed, but also any going further back, since the last award.
• The reviewer makes an assessment of contribution as with every SRDS, and is able to tell the professor whether he or she would support an application for a salary increase or contribution bonus (a one-off lump sum). The reviewer can also advise on which achievements to highlight, and whether a bonus or salary increase would be the better route.
• The reviewer will also identify if there is a potential case for re-banding.

2. The professor writes his or her own case, the Head writes a statement of support (including for those professors reviewed by a nominated senior colleague), and the two are submitted to the Faculty Pro-Vice-Chancellor.

• The case consists of a summary form, an up-to-date CV and a statement from the Head.
• A professor may self-submit if his or her reviewer does not support the case; in this situation the Head is asked to comment on why the case is not supported.

3. Submissions are assessed at Faculty level.

• Cases are either supported and put forward to University level, or declined in which case the Head is able to feed back to the professor on why the case was not successful (feedback that is not present in the current system). An HR Adviser is present at the Faculty meeting to keep records.
• Re-banding cases are also initially assessed at this stage.

4. The cases supported at Faculty level are then considered at University level by the Vice-Chancellor and the eight Pro-VCs. This University panel may also make awards to professors who have not submitted a case, where they know of evidence that particularly justifies an award. All re-banding cases are also considered at this stage.

• The work of this panel ensures consistency in standards between faculties; the University meeting is also supported by an HR Adviser who keeps records.

5. The process is completed by a meeting of the Senior Remuneration Committee to give its approval to the award of salary increases and bonuses, including those to Introductory Zone professors approved by the Faculty Pro-VCs.

6. Professors whose cases progressed beyond the Faculty panel are then informed by HR of the outcome.

7. HR monitors success patterns to check for discrepancies between departments or faculties, or on equality lines.