UoB’s Vice Chancellor is the highest paid in the country and the uni still can’t provide basic services for students

It was revealed last month that the University of Birmingham's Vice Chancellor is paid up to £439,000.

It has been reported that Sir David Eastwood is the highest earning Vice Chancellor in the country. As well as his basic salary, he is also on a long term bonus plan with a maximum value of £80,000, payable at the end of 2019-2020.

In a statement from the university they have defended the Vice Chancellor's salary saying: "Professor David Eastwood is recognised within the higher education sector as a highly successful and experienced leader of a large, complex organisation with global reach."

Many staff and students at UoB have been outraged by the unbelievable salary, even signing a letter of complaint that gained over 175 signatures.

However, a proposed new code on university bosses' pay was published by the Committee of University chairs earlier this week.

They have announced that univeristies will have to publish the pay of anyone earning more than £100,000 and give an explanation if someone is earning excess of £150,000, equivalent to the Prime Minister's salary.

Pay for university chiefs has risen considerably in recent years, and in 2015/16 the typical salary of a UK Vice Chancellor was 6.4 times that of an average university worker, according to a government consultation published in October.

Over the last year UoB have come under fire for suspending counselling sign-ups, which were and continue to be in high demand. Extra funding would provide major improvment for the uni's mental health service.

Perhaps another more worthwhile investment of the Vice Chancellor's pay could be providing enough study spaces for students. With over 28,000 students enrolled at UoB, the library only caters to the maximum of 2000 students.

In a statement responding to his pay, Eastwood emphasised that he likes to give a lot of it away. "I am committed to giving generously," he said. "The value of my giving to the University of Birmingham alone, for example, exceeds £100,000.

"I also give to numerous other educational, cultural, and social causes. My intention is quietly to exemplify the virtue of philanthropy," he continued, in his public statement.

"As a result of my earnings and personal belief in the importance of philanthropy I am able to give significant support to a range of institutions and causes that change people’s lives, and more generally use what I earn responsibly and with integrity."

If he gives £100,000 straight back to the uni, why do they need to pay it to him in the first place?