Australian universities should stop trying to defend their executives’ salaries and talk more about the value they create for their communities, according to the nation’s newest higher education boss.
University of Canberra (UC) vice-chancellor Bill Shorten said university executives were on a hiding to nothing if they tried to justify their pay. “It’s a killing field for the vice-chancellors to be out there arguing their own wages,” he told the Brand Australia 2025 symposium, hosted by the Future Campus news site.
“You’ve lost before you start. It’s a bit like politicians’ wages. They wouldn’t have been happy [until] politicians in Canberra…were camping on the lawn and hitchhiking from home.”
Shorten joined UC in January after an 18-year career in federal politics, including six years as opposition leader. The previous substantive vice-chancellor, Paddy Nixon – who left UC in late 2023 with over a year remaining on his contract – received a?sector record A$1.785 million?(?899,000) in his last year.
Asked about his predecessor’s remuneration, Shorten said the final settlement had included a “notice provision” that “bundled…two years’ wages into one”. He said that as a politician and union leader, he had “run campaigns” both for and against people’s wages.
“I think if a vice-chancellor performs well, they’re probably worth the money. They’re complex positions. But I’ll leave it to other vice-chancellors to defend that. All I know is, I practise what I preach. I cut my wage.”
The Australian?newspaper??that Shorten had accepted a package of A$860,000, 15 per cent less than Nixon’s regular salary. This would leave the?former political leader among the dozen lowest-paid vice-chancellors, according to the most recently published institutional accounts.
Shorten said the sector’s social licence was under threat, partly because “many Australians do not have a clue what happens at universities. Surely everyone knows what we do. Well, I’m here to tell you, a lot of people do not.
“Public life in this country is a bit like nature. It hates a vacuum. If we don’t fill the agenda, then others will. And if we can’t recognise that sometimes some of the criticisms have a grain of truth, then I think it becomes very hard to deal with the challenges.”
He said the “outrage” directed at universities was sometimes justified. “How do you handle outrage? The answer…is don’t cause outrage,” he said.
“How can you have a situation where…staff are not being paid properly? How do you have a situation where people do not feel safe? Where Australians of Jewish heritage…think about dropping out of university altogether, or academic staff feel threatened?
“I think the real issue is not the wages, although that’s a legitimate topic of inquiry. It is [whether] people think they’re getting value for money from Australia’s universities. If we can answer that question in our value proposition, then I think people put up with some of the other stuff. You can have a less heated debate and a…legitimate discussion about governance.”
