The 21 Group has extracted some statistics from the University of Cambridge’s End of Year Financial Reports. They make interesting reading.
- From 2019–2025, central administration spending more than doubled (£195m → £395m), while funding for academic departments fell by 8%, as shown here. In 2019, £2.33 went to teaching and research for every £1 on admin. Today, it’s just £1.04.
- The number of six-figure earners in Cambridge University tripled between 2019 and 2025.
- The total amount paid to senior figures earning in excess of £150,000 has increased from £7 million in 2019 to £37 million in 2025.
- Average (mean) pay for all staff has been static at ~ £49k for a decade. This figure is corrected for inflation.
- When pay increases are concentrated at the top of the wage distribution, they drive the mean upward. If the average wage has nonetheless remained flat, this can only be because pay for the majority of staff has fallen relative to those gains. The implication is unavoidable: the median wage has declined. Career and salary progression have stalled across much of the institution and have actively deteriorated for those in the middle and lower parts of the wage distribution (Hat tip to poster @Bimodal below for pointing this out).
- A growing gap in pay is emerging in the university with an elite of high earners and the rest of us.
- Some of those earning more than £100,000 are academics. This stark rise in pay for senior academics alongside flat salaries for early-career staff shows a distortion of priorities. The rewards should be shared out more equally.
- The most inflated and exorbitant salaries are reserved for the senior managers and executives (the Registrary, the HR Director, the Academic Secretary, the Pro Vice Chancellors and the Heads of School)
- All this is exemplified by a Vice Chancellor who is the highest paid in the United Kingdom, yet spends a lot of time telling the rest of us that pay is not important.
Given this background, we highlight again the interesting contribution made on the previous thread by Autophagy here
The corruption has advanced in several phases
1. In the first phase, senior administrators awarded themselves outsized salaries and benefits, as well as outsourcing contracts and favours
2. This generated resentment from other senior stakeholders, notably senior professors. The first solution was to add more senior executive roles in the administration and tell these professors that if they were “good” they too could join the golden club
3. This bought off some people (heads of school etc) but there weren’t enough positions to go around, leaving resentment among research professors
4. This resulted in any number of abusive practices as departments sought to pass down workload to junior academics, admin, postdocs while coercing them to give cuts of grants, publications and credit to senior profs
5. So then they raised salaries for senior professors, we ended up with a massive inflation of high (150k+) pay deals but nothing for basic admin staff or postdocs or lecturers
6. But the people at the bottom (programme admins, lecturers, postdoc team members) were the ones doing all the work and they’ve had enough, and no amount of short-term hires will fill the gap
7. So now the whole system is falling apart- the best scholars have left, the grants aren’t coming in, students are upset, and yet the nomenklatura still continues to expand
8. The legal cases pile up, the costs augment, and the university is failing as research output declines and the rankings finally catch up with reality
9. VC wants austerity but the cuts fall on the people doing all the work while the nomenklatura continues to drain resources
10. All the skeletons are coming out of the closet and no-one has a clue what to do. We need a total rebuild from scratch but it cannot be done because the people who birthed this mess are still running the show and running circles to keep the skeletons hidden
This is a summary with which the 21 Group is in complete agreement.
As teaching and research are squeezed ever tighter, bureaucracy expands with remarkable ease and consumes more and more of the resources. The institution increasingly views its academic purpose not as something to advance, but as something to contain. Until this contradiction is confronted, no narrative of excellence can succeed. The present management look unsuited to the task of fixing things because they are “the people who birthed this mess”.
31 Comments
TheResearcher · 27 January 2026 at 16:22
“All the skeletons are coming out of the closet and no-one has a clue what to do.”
Of course they do! The strategy remains exactly the same, one based on secrecy and cover-ups of misconduct. This culture is engrained in all the senior leadership that makes the decisions as if they did not know an alternative approach. You would think that because they know that the cases are piling up, that an increasing number of people external to the University—including MPs and journalists—are increasingly aware of the multiple scandals running in parallel, the senior leadership would at least slowdown on the malpractices. Is that true, 21 Group? Clearly not! Should we expect a reduction or stasis of malpractices with this leadership? Clearly not. Why am I sure?
Yesterday I was given more precautionary measures because I refuse to engage with dishonest people and to be silent when an 800-years institution burns around me. What were the new precautionary measures you may wonder? I was informed that my emails “will now be redirected for separate review.” Unfortunately for them, they cannot control my other email accounts, as they soon realized when I used another account to forward the news to the MPs ccing the leadership of UCam. Note that these new measures build on a surreal number of other measures made against me, including prohibiting me from contacting hundreds of people, limiting my use of my @cam account, ignoring my complaints and questions, sending me incorrect and misleading information on a regular basis, namely about my rights in the University, conducting a sham investigation against me after I reported serious malpractices by senior members, ignoring the fact that the people who apply the measures against me have conflicts of interest, dismissing, without any investigation, the whistleblowing disclosures and safeguarding referrals that third-parties have done about how University staff have treated me and have affected my health as given by detailed medical letters from my GP or even trying to frighten me with the idea that my “crimes” could be communicated to the police. This may well be a record of abuses against a single person but it is not enough for them!
The number of senior members aware of these malpractices is simply mind-blowing. Instead of addressing the problems, the University now wants to prevent that these members become further aware so that they cannot be implicated in the future so my emails “will now be redirected for separate review.” The real problem of UCam is not financial, but a complete loss of dignity and humanity by those who should manage this institution. While they remain, things will get worse and worse.
Eileen Nugent · 27 January 2026 at 17:55
“even trying to frighten me with the idea that my “crimes” could be communicated to the police” – communicating with the police i.e. piling additional pressure on a person will not change the facts of the original case, pilling additional pressure on a person will only serve to clarify the facts of the original case & the original case will then become even clearer. If a university has no real case to begin with then by the time it ends up with the police it will be extremely clear that the university had no real case to begin and that unnecessary work has been generated for the police. The most important thing to establish in any situation is whether the university has a clear case in the situation or whether what the university has is an individual in a particular role in the university who is generating situations that they are subsequently unable to remedy themselves and/or contribute to the remedy of by working with others in the university.
Raven · 28 January 2026 at 08:39
@TheResearcher
So, on 23 and 24 January you wrote posts on this blog about “the most discussed Lead HR Business Partner in the 21 Group”. On 26 January you were “given more precautionary measures”, noting that 24 and 25 January were a weekend.
One cannot help but notice a repeat of a previous escalation, which was “live” on the 21 Group blog in the year of the Snake, at the time of one or two relevant blogs.
Perhaps you should document the connections. Perhaps you can even share this information with the 21 Group, inclusive of any email setting out these ever escalating precautionary measures. If your emails “will now be redirected for separate review” there is no reason why theirs shouldn’t?
Let’s hope our HR (and Senior Management) colleagues will be doing the mandatory training on freedom of speech and academic freedom soon, because it does seem that their understanding of their rights to limit someone else’s liberties may not be entirely up to date. Regardless (or perhaps because) of their inflated salaries and sense of importance.
TheResearcher · 28 January 2026 at 10:22
@Raven,
On August 14 I was told by the Head of Student Administration who has been giving me these “precautionary measures” for months that “I have very recently been made aware of a specific blogpost and comments yesterday: A Sum of Adders – 21percent.org, this website, blog and comments will be added to the relevant information to take into consideration when reviewing the precautionary action in the future.”
I would encourage you all to read the story “A Sum of Adders” that she is referring to (https://21percent.org/?p=2478) and see by yourself what exactly is the problem of this person. Why is she so concerned with this particular tale? But rest assured, the MPs already know about this tale, the Consigliere University (https://21percent.org/?p=3097) and all these “precautionary measures” to silence me. Of course, there is no freedom of speech in UCam, we all know that, but this case is getting to completely new heights of nonsense and dishonesty because of the way I respond to their measures. And for some unknown reason, these managers did not realize yet that the only guarantee they have is that I will keep exposing their behaviour regardless of how much they try otherwise.
The comments that I do here in the 21 Group are a minor problem for UCam when compared to what I say to people external to the University, and cc the leadership of UCam. The reason they now want to “redirect” my emails is simple: they do not want that the senior leadership is implicated in what is happening with me, so that they do not get to the situation of Paula Vennells when she was asked in the context of the Post Office scandal: “How can it be that you did not know?” Of course, they all know, and look the other way. But sooner or later, they will have to explain why they did not act. Stay tunned.
Please, consider telling your experiences to the MPs and other external bodies. Do not keep them to yourself as otherwise your institution will continue their abuses, not only against you but against many others who do not know how Universities like UCam deal with misconduct, via secrecy and cover-ups. This shameful culture must be addressed.
21percent.org · 28 January 2026 at 12:31
The scale of problems at Cambridge University can be judged by the following
At one time, the University used mainly Shakespeare Martineau for its legal problems
It’s now using with Bristows, Mills & Reeve, Farrer & Co , Carter Ruck and DWF as well as SM.
The scale of wrongdoing is such that the University needs a bank of employment law firms to cope
If you did not get a pay rise despite working your guts out … the money is being spent on lawyers.
TheResearcher · 28 January 2026 at 12:44
It would be cheaper to be honest!
Xerxes · 28 January 2026 at 14:06
“Yesterday I was given more precautionary measures …”
Some of these people might be better suited to working for ICE.
TheResearcher · 28 January 2026 at 14:19
Not sure if ICE would accept them. A few days before these new “precautionary measures” they replied to the MP who contacted them about me saying that my health was the priority of the University of Cambridge. Note this shameful behaviour: the same person who dismissed, without any investigation, a whistleblowing disclosure and safeguarding referral about the abuses against me to protect the most discussed Lead HR Business Partner in the 21 Group, dared to stress his alleged concerns about my health to the MP who contacted him enquiring about the situation. With this kind of character, I am not sure where he will find a job next but he will likely come up with something when he realizes he is becoming implicated in many cases.
Chirp · 28 January 2026 at 15:09
Would it be surprising in all of this if the dismissal of the whistleblowing disclosure and the statement to the MP about concerns about your health were to be found to have been both drafted by the same “most discussed Lead HR Business Partner in the 21 Group”…?
TheResearcher · 28 January 2026 at 16:09
Definitely. There is no doubt about that. It does not matter the evidence that you send in your complaints because the complaints are sent to her and she drafts the “response “of the University” where she exonerates herself. Many people in Cambridge tried to complain about her and she keeps being protected… But what do you think I did when the MP forwarded me the email from the University stating that my health was their priority, namely the priority of the person who had dismissed the whistleblowing disclosure and safeguarding referral without conducting any investigation? The most discussed Lead HR Business Partner in the 21 Group is no longer just the most discussed Lead HR Business Partner in the 21 Group but probably one of the most discussed Lead HR Business Partners in the country; even the MPs already know who this person is and how the senior members of UCam protect her! If you were affected by her and now mention her to the MP of Cambridge, I can assure you that it will ring a bell.
Eileen Nugent · 28 January 2026 at 17:37
Not sure they would have the necessary self-preservation instinct to check if a property was owned by a citizen & licensed gun owner & ensure they had a bulletproof search warrant valid at all levels of the legal system – state and federal – before forcing an entry into that property & potentially putting themselves in a reciprocal threat situation with a law-abiding, gun-owning, home-owning, citizen where the law with respect to use of lethal force could potentially then be on the side of the law-abiding, gun-owning, home-owning, citizen. Not sure they would have the self-preservation instinct to completely and absolutely avoid entering into that type of situation where there is absolutely no possibility of their being any good outcome or winner of any type connected to that situation.
Eileen Nugent · 29 January 2026 at 01:42
They might not realise that a law-abiding citizen has done is this – gone to the effort of learning what the laws are in great detail & also of developing the high levels of self discipline that are necessary to continuously enforce those laws in relation to themselves at all times.The law-abiding citizen has minimised their overall individual burden on all law enforcement agencies.
If others who have not gone to that same level of effort should then try to force an entry into the law-abiding citizens home without a warrant in the name of “law enforcement” there is a potential for that “law enforcement” activity to be viewed as terrorising that law-abiding citizen in their own home. That would turn that law-abiding citizen into law enforcement in their own home in that particular situation & turn those engaging in “law enforcement” into people who the law-abiding citizen is then enforcing the law in relation to in addition to enforcing the law in relation to themselves at all times.
That is what minimises the overall risk to every person in any high-risk law enforcement situation, the person with the best command of the law, the person who is the most capable of determining the exact level of force that should be applied in any high-risk law enforcement activity to complete the law enforcement activity, is the person who is in overall control of that high-risk law enforcement situation.
Eileen Nugent · 29 January 2026 at 01:52
That law-abiding citizen can do some dynamic law enforcement training in a situation – teach the lesson that the best way to maximise the probability of your kid growing up with a parent is to maximise the probability of every other kid growing up with a parent.
Eileen Nugent · 27 January 2026 at 18:34
“I want money, That’s what I want” – it’s like the King Midas myth, all that is irreplaceable & crucial in sustaining life is turned into one thing – gold/money – at which point that one thing is also left in a position where it is unable to play its own true function in sustaining life.
FlyingLizard · 27 January 2026 at 19:30
“I want money, That’s what I want” comes from here, I guess
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-P2qL3qkzk
Eileen Nugent · 27 January 2026 at 20:17
Sometimes a persons love is the only thing paying another persons bills because it is the only thing holding a person in working conditions that they would otherwise be unable to sustain their own existence in.
Struggling · 27 January 2026 at 20:06
We all need money to get by. But a select few at the top have taken it all for themselves.
Eileen Nugent · 28 January 2026 at 02:17
It’s not even about money, it’s about autonomy : housing autonomy – home ownership & housing stability, financial autonomy – low to no debt, health autonomy – manageable stress levels, academic autonomy – freedom to pursue interesting problems.
Does anyone want a letting agent in their life – “show us your payslips”, “sorry no children”? Property inspection every six months sometimes without notice & with no consideration for a tenants health state? Eviction notice every year? To receive a document on “tips to minimise condensation” citing breathing out as a major source of condensation? To move into a new house only to discover the former tenant has flooded the whole house from the upstairs bathroom as a goodbye gift to their former landlord?
It used to be that you could take sub-standard housing – housing that few others would ever contemplate living in as evidenced by the fact someone point blank refused to live in it – as a way of minimising debt probability & maximising housing stability but now even that strategy doesn’t work. Your substandard housing is now another persons ticket to a letting-agent-mediated-work-free life which means the letting agent has to continuously flip that substandard housing in order to price inflate it both to extract their own profit & to make that permanent holiday happen for another person and there goes your shit but stable housing. Unnecessary house moves – housing stability implications, financial stability implications, health stability implications.
Shit but stable conditions – housing, job – were what made academia possible, shit but unstable conditions – housing, job – are make academia impossible. It’s not the money, it’s the complete loss of autonomy.
Eileen Nugent · 28 January 2026 at 02:59
These conditions limit life flux – ratio of births to deaths – because these conditions are inhospitable to life.
MUSKETEER · 28 January 2026 at 22:45
These crooks do not stop at UCam!!! One of them is now presiding over wrecking the MRC!! Disgusting!!!!!
Bimodal · 28 January 2026 at 23:16
Nice piece + quick question. If the average (mean) wage at the university has stagnated, while the executive compensation bill has soared, wouldn’t that imply that the typical (median) salary has probably fallen?
21percent.org · 28 January 2026 at 23:38
Great, great spot. You are right.
The median salary has fallen (or at least grown more slowly than inflation). That is a really important point
When pay increases are concentrated at the top of the wage distribution, the mean is pulled upward. If the mean wage nevertheless remains unchanged, the only way this can occur is if pay for the majority of workers declines relative to those gains.
21percent.org · 28 January 2026 at 23:44
Let us also give the mean (inflation-corrected) salary. This is just total inflation-corrected wage bill/ total headcount.
As you see it has slightly fallen from its peak in 2019.
Given this as well as the effect @Bimodal mentions, it means that middle/low wage workers are probably quite a bit worse off.
(Unfortunately, there is not enough information in the public domain to calculate the median)
Curvescooper · 29 January 2026 at 06:29
I think we can still get numbers for mean salary among staff under 100k annual that’s just total wage bill minus salary to staff above 100k (total) / (total staff – staff above 100k). Cannot find a figure for the 100k+ total wage bill in annual accounts but guess it is possible to estimate….
21percent.org · 29 January 2026 at 10:52
Yes, we agree an estimate will be possible — we’ll look into it and post results later.
TigerWhoCametoET · 29 January 2026 at 10:27
Maybe those on six figure salaries want money but for those who have been ignored and mistreated it is a question of basic human dignity.
21percent.org · 29 January 2026 at 10:56
Agreed.
Very high compensation is typically justified on the basis that the individuals are experienced administrators, capable of understanding complex situations and acting with appropriate judgment and care.
In the case of Cambridge University, however, there is no evidence that these expectations are being met. There are basic failures of duty of care and basic failures of employment law.
TheResearcher · 29 January 2026 at 12:00
That is perhaps unfair because they tell us they work very very hard! Do not forget what our dear Vice-Chancellor Prof. Deborah Prentice told BBC here when she was asked about her salary:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m002jfys
“Oh well I mean I think that so whether vice chancellors are paid too much or too little is a matter for somebody to decide I mean it’s not a matter I don’t set my own salary and whether I’m overpaid or underpaid I am very well paid and I try to work very very hard for it and that’s all I can say”
If the text above reads a bit funny, these were her own words… Download the .mp3 and check around minute 45. But regardless, the legendary follow up from the broadcaster was, “I am sure you do.” It says it all.
Eileen Nugent · 30 January 2026 at 03:58
The median base salary for a university VC in the UK is ~£350k. That is over twice that of the Prime Minister of the UK of ~£172k. The prime ministers salary had it kept pace with inflation since 2009 would have been ~ £300k which is still below the current median base salary for a university VC.
A university as an organisational structure has significantly less complexity than the nation state that contains that university. Why then is the median base salary for a university VC in the UK so high in comparison to the salary of the prime minister of the UK?
Is there any other country in the world where the median salary for a university head is twice the salary of the prime minister equivalent in that country? The university sector in the UK seems to have grown arms and legs and then made a bid for freedom from common sense.
Eileen Nugent · 30 January 2026 at 04:13
We have tested and tasted too much, lover-
Through a chink too wide there comes in no wonder.
But here in the Advent-darkened room
Where the dry black bread and the sugarless tea
Of penance will charm back the luxury
Of a child’s soul, we’ll return to Doom
The knowledge we stole but could not use.
And the newness that was in every stale thing
When we looked at it as children: the spirit-shocking
Wonder in a black slanting Ulster hill
Or the prophetic astonishment in the tedious talking
Of an old fool will awake for us and bring
You and me to the yard gate to watch the whins
And the bog-holes, cart-tracks, old stables where Time begins.
O after Christmas we’ll have no need to go searching
For the difference that sets an old phrase burning-
We’ll hear it in the whispered argument of a churning
Or in the streets where the village boys are lurching.
And we’ll hear it among decent men too
Who barrow dung in gardens under trees,
Wherever life pours ordinary plenty.
Won’t we be rich, my love and I, and
God we shall not ask for reason’s payment,
The why of heart-breaking strangeness in dreeping hedges
Nor analyse God’s breath in common statement.
We have thrown into the dust-bin the clay-minted wages
Of pleasure, knowledge and the conscious hour-
And Christ comes with a January flower.
Advent – Patrick Kavanagh
Crooks love Crooks! · 30 January 2026 at 16:00
The crooks at the top protect others crooks that also get to the top sometimes:
Prof Smallman- Head of School
Prof Drinkalot- Director of Institute
Prof Teflon- Master of a College, former HoD
Prof ViciousWoman- Acting Center co-Director
The place stinks!