A STRUGGLE for power over Glasgow's multi-million pound college sector has intensified.
The regional body set up to help run the city's three colleges - City of Glasgow, Clyde and Glasgow Kelvin - has identified the need for additional staff at a cost of up to £180,000.
The Glasgow Colleges' Regional Board (GCRB) argues the extra staff are necessary to add financial expertise and help it run the sector.
Read more: Tired of the Big Six? Why not create your own energy firm
However, some colleges are privately concerned because the money will come directly from their budgets unless extra funding if provided.
In addition, institutions already have their own finance directors and the appointment of additional staff at board level is seen as taking further power away.
The request for the additional members of staff is included in a board paper which states: "Based on the extent of responsibilities and activities... it is proposed that for GCRB to operate effectively that its staffing complement should be increased and that it should recruit a finance and resources director and a curriculum and quality director.
"With respect to the above proposals, members should be aware that Scottish Government estimates of GCRB staffing needs... suggested that a regional strategic body such as GCRB was likely to require a chief officer, a finance officer and a regional curriculum lead.
"Resources required for additional staffing would be more extensive and are currently estimated at an additional cost to GCRB of £150,00 to £180,000. The funding for this would have to be either provided as additional resource from SFC or allocated from the main grant provided to the region."
Read more: Tired of the Big Six? Why not create your own energy firm
John Gallacher, a Scottish organiser for the Unison union, said: "We would be concerned if the Glasgow regional board became too large and started to become a financial burden with costs passed on to the colleges.
"However, we believe that if the structure is to be effective in helping to run the three colleges then it will need that sort of expertise."
Earlier this month, The Herald revealed minutes from a GCRB board meeting which showed leading figures engaged in an unprecedented row over who has ultimate control over decision-making.
Paul Little, the principal of City of Glasgow College, wrote to the GCRB accusing it of failing to act in a “fair, transparent and robust” way over funding decisions and questioning why his college should be answerable to the umbrella body.
A response from Robin Ashton, the chair of the GCRB, accuses Mr Little of making a “very serious and completely unsubstantiated allegation” over the quality of its governance. Both Clyde and Kelvin colleges have accepted the role of the GCRB.
The row is the latest blow to the further education sector since the Scottish Government’s controversial merger programme which reduced the number of colleges to 20 in 13 regions across the country.
In an official report on the merger in 2016 Audit Scotland identified six colleges where severance arrangements for senior staff had been poorly handled.
Read more: Tired of the Big Six? Why not create your own energy firm
Auditors also warned Edinburgh College that it was facing an uncertain financial future - racking up debts of more than £3 million after missing student recruitment targets and facing a cash claw back after falling foul of official rules governing funding.
Last year it emerged regional boards across Scotland were costing the taxpayer £500,000 a year despite not yet fulfilling their intended role.
In the case of the GCRB, which was responsible for £400,000 of the costs, there was a complete breakdown in 2015 with infighting between board members leading to the resignation of Henry McLeish, the former First Minster, from his role as chair.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel