We are pleased today to be able to launch the report ‘Benchmarking Remuneration and Rewards Packages Across Higher Education Estates and Facilities’, which is the output of a survey and linked focus groups on salary and related issues carried out with AUDE members during spring of 2024. Additional comparative data from the Office for National Statistics was used when relevant too. We are grateful for the help of the Professional Associations Research Network (PARN) in creating the report and undertaking analysis of survey responses on our behalf, and of course to all participating members too. This report is shared exclusively with AUDE members and is only available to logged-in members of the association. We have also made the report available to colleagues that are members of UHR.

The recruitment and retention of specialist staff within estates teams has come into strong focus in recent years. Increasingly the fundamental success or failure of our universities is attached to the quality of estates and facilities staff – including on themes of major strategic importance including the push towards net zero and decarbonisation of the estate, ‘right-sizing’ of the university estate to match with changing expectations of the teaching and working environment since the pandemic, energy management and more. Against this background every university wants to recruit and retain the best possible individuals available within the market. The findings of the survey are now available in this report, and will help AUDE members to benchmark reward and remuneration packages across the sector, and develop a strategy to address recruitment challenges.

There is a wealth of detail within the report on everything from estates and facilities staff attitudes towards higher education (where 79% agreed that the sector was a good place to work), to attitudes towards pay and grading bands where just 26% felt these worked effectively to recruit the right staff. We are sure that AUDE members accessing the report will find a thought-provoking spread of related information, whether that be on gender pay gaps, basic annual salaries in different regions, recruitment methods, the use of bonuses and other benefits and much more, within the pages of the report. Candidates appear to be placing much greater emphasis on non-fiscal elements of their remuneration - the value of flexible working being placed above financial considerations, for example. When looking for a new role, those working in Estates and Facilities also placed higher importance on HEI’s commitment to EDI and CPD than on an opportunity to earn a bonus or benefits beyond salary.

The report also includes a number of recommendations to the sector, including on issues such as the payment of market supplements, the active promotion of the university as diverse and inclusive employers, and the establishment of clear career pathways at every level.

Download the full report.

Jane Harrison-White, AUDE Executive Director, on publication of the report said: ‘The survey results tell us that three-quarters of members do not consider current pay to be appropriate to attract staff, and that 92% of respondents had experience of difficulties in retaining or recruiting vital ‘middle leaders’ within their teams. We aren’t advocating for unaffordable pay rises – it is neither our right or our role. But at a time when university finances are under the microscope, a form of settlement that takes account of the ever more strategically important results that are delivered by estates teams must be part of the long term plan within our institutions. Our estates and facilities staff rate career progression and development opportunities and the importance of diversity and inclusion more highly than simply the pay packet, in motivational terms. We were heartened to see the positive view of HE as a sector doing worthwhile work. We’d suggest estates departments can have constructive conversations based on this report with HR colleagues, not least around future recruitment campaigns and the importance of highlighting non-salary aspects of roles within those campaigns.’