Gender Pay Gap Reporting 2018

Leeds Arts University is committed to Equality, Diversity and Inclusion and has well developed policies which support this commitment.

Staff regularly receive training so that they understand their legal obligations and this is embedded in their day to day work. As part of these legal obligations we are publishing this data in response to our responsibilities under the Equality Act 2010 (Specific Duties and Public Authorities) Regulations 2017 which require us to report on a number of metrics as of 31st March in a given year. This is the University’s second report under the regulations.

Under the regulations the gender pay gap is the difference between the average pay (expressed as both the mean and median) of men and women expressed as a percentage and should not be confused with equal pay.

2018 Metrics

Mean gender pay gap - Women’s pay is 2.62% lower (2017 3.63% lower)
Median gender pay gap - Women’s pay is 5.69% lower (2017 5.69% lower)
The mean gender bonus pay gap - n/a no bonuses paid
The median gender bonus pay gap - n/a no bonuses paid

The proportions of male and female employees in each quartile pay band.
(This is the percentage of men and women in each quartile of our payroll on 31st March 2018 with quartile 1 being the lowest paid staff and quartile 4 being the highest paid).




Quartile 1

43.5% (2017 39.71%)

56.5% (2017 60.29%)

Quartile 2

32.4% (2017 44.93%)

67.6% (2017 55.07%)

Quartile 3

40.6% (2017 39.13%)

59.4% (2017 60.87%)

Quartile 4

49.3% (2017 47.06%)

50.7% (2017 52.94%)

The overall profile of our staff population on 31st March 2018 was 41.5% (2017 42.7%) men and 58.5% (2017 57.3%) women.


The University’s commitment to equality extends into how we approach Equal Pay, and we operate a grade structure based on the New JNCHES pay scale. All roles outside our most senior staff have their roles evaluated using the HERA job evaluation scheme, and the salary of senior roles are set by our Remuneration Committee which considers a range of metrics, external and internal data when setting pay levels.

The HERA scores are mapped to our grading structure to ensure that we remunerate staff fairly for the same role, for both like work and work of equal value regardless of their role within the institution. This ensures that we comply with the Equality Act 2010 and do not pay people unequally due to a protected characteristic.

The grading structure contains a number of spine points within each grade band; and staff are usually appointed to the bottom of the grade band. Advancement through the grade band is based on a number of set criteria. Under this framework staff who have held a role for a longer period are more highly remunerated within that grade band for their work; and this remuneration reflects the experience that they have gained in undertaking their duties.


Against this background it should be noted that on 1st August 2017 the University implemented a new pay and grading structure based on its job evaluation outcomes. This exercise included re-evaluating a significant number of roles to ensure that the evaluation remained robust. This has had no impact on the median gender pay gap, however the mean gender pay gap has decreased.

Last year the median pay gap was attributable to the staff profile employed on the census date which was distorted by the number of female no student ambassadors who undertook assignments on that day which distorted the figures. However with no ambassadors engaged this year and the median pay gap remaining the same, further analysis has taken place as to why the gap remains and impacted on the data.

  • The core University staffing has continued to grow with the expansion in the course portfolio and associated numbers of support staff which combined with staff turnover and changes to pay scales means that the raw data has changed significantly. Whilst the median percentage difference has changed, the median salary levels for both men and women have increased.
  • Considering the data on a quartile basis the following was observed:
    • In Quartile 1 (Lower Quartile) there was no median pay gap between genders in the lower quartile and the male mean salary was slightly lower than the female mean salary.
    • In Quartile 2 the female median salary is higher than the male, but the male mean salary was higher.
    • In Quartile 3 there is a median salary gap, and the female mean salary is higher than the male mean salary.
    • In Quartile 4 (Upper Quartile) there was no median pay gap and the female mean salary is higher than the male salary.
  • Because of the observations that within quartiles there was no median gender pay gap in 2 quartiles and that female median pay was higher in the other 2, the profile of the University’s staffing by grade is considered to be a factor. Analysis by grade shows the following data:








































The overall profile of our staff population on 31st March 2018 was 41.5% (2017 42.7%) men and 58.5% (2017 57.3%) women. Looking at the grade profile by gender there are significantly more women employed at Grade 4 (£24,285 - £27,285) and Grade 5 (£28,098 - £31,604) as a proportion of that demographic of the workforce than the overall workforce. There are also slightly more males as a percentage of Grades 8, 9 and 10b, than the overall workforce profile, however this involves small numbers of staff.

This picture suggests that the pay structure is underpinned by a robust job evaluation process, and that it is the profile of roles at the various grades that may be a contributing factor to the pay gap. The median female salary hourly rate equates to the penultimate spine point in grade 5, and the male rate to the bottom point of grade 6. It is therefore likely that increasing male representation at grades 4 and 5 will decrease the gender pay gap; and consideration will be given as to what can be done to attract male applicants to roles of this grade as they are advertised going forward. A change of 3 men in these roles would have altered the median salary of both genders to the same value and a 0% pay gap.

Whilst noting these factors do contribute to the difference in salaries and the action proposed may assist in its elimination, it should once again be noted that a complete eradication of a pay gap (with either gender being paid more) may be impossible to achieve with staff turnover and a grade band structure; however we will continue to monitor the detail behind any reported figures and take action where appropriate. Prior to publication these figures have been reported to our Senior Management Team and will be considered by our Equality Diversity and Inclusion Committee.