“It's unfortunate when people start to bandy 'pay percentages' about without considering that percentage pay rises unfairly discriminate against the low paid. (Statistically part-time workers, women and members of ethnic minority groups fall into this category.)

The higher the salary on which the percentage is calculated the greater become the pay differentials. It's senior managers and directors who always gain disproportionately through percentage pay rises. Thus double gain for VCs and the senior staff. It also increases disproportionately pension entitlement in final salary schemes, so such people acquire big payouts in comparison with others who have worked hard all their lives for a decent pension.

In respect of those at Board level or equivalent in education, is it good leadership to ¿take¿ pay award percentages above those of your staff? In 2007/2008 there were an extraordinary number of VC pay awards across the Universities well above the 6% of the national pay award received by staff in that period. Published information included the VC at the University of Gloucestershire in this group. Given that some institutions are now ¿downsizing¿ perhaps either the money received by the VCs and senior staff should be voluntarily paid back, or future pay of VCs and other senior staff be frozen until some form of equality in pay award systems has been achieved? This action may save someone¿s job and achieve a fairer reward system for everyone.”

“All this from the management that couldn't organise a party in a brewery?

After the universities speculative venture in London, the farce of selecting Paul Bowler, their deputy vice-chancellor to help sort out their finances and his subsequent rapid departure after just seven months; if the university had shareholders the management would have been swept away by now.

Paul Bowler had a report quoted in The Times' Higher Education Supplement which criticised top staff for creating a culture of high-risk investment at a time of recession. He said "large investment in high-risk, unresearched new business at a time of global recession", that resources had been used for "chasing speculative income" and that "there was no risk-management strategy, and financial control was overlooked."

I wonder which other sector of our economy has had to be bailed out by the taxpayer and is now seeking to reward itself?

The redundancies ought to start at the top and work down! Selling Pittville, and reducing lecturing staff will inevitably reduce teaching resources to the detriment of students who pay for their tuition.

This is the university with the second-worst debt-to-income ratio of any UK university. It is pretty obvious from Paul Bowles report that the management created this mess and now expect anybody but themselves to pay the price with their jobs!”

“It is revealing that Mr Drake uses the adjective 'irresponsible' to describe the pay claims of academics. Many of us at the University are convinced that it is the 'entrepreneurial', business-oriented and property-chasing policies of Senior Management that have 'irresponsibly' created the current dire economic situation. University staff, many of them leaders in their academic field, have been made scapegoats for these risky, speculative and unsustainable tactics. Tactics which, it is abundantly evident, have singularly failed.”

“Knowing any offshoot or subdivision of the state leaves me with modest doubt Paul Drake is being grossly overpaid. However Save UoG now,Gloucs that does NOT answer the original reservation I made ¿Higher education staff enjoyed a ¿five per cent pay rise¿ last year and the UCU have been campaigning for ¿another eight per cent next year.¿ Perhaps you might care to answer the taxpayers. Better still, why do you actually consider these people should attract these high value packages in return for pitiable results?”

“The salaries of academic staff are open to public scrutiny. The current pay deal is 0.5%. Perhaps Mr Drake would like to disclose his salary, given the significant pressures on the public sector?”