The recent approval of the revised Market Premium for Senior Members in Ghana's public universities has generated deep concern among Administrators and Professional Staff represented by the Ghana Association of University Administrators (GAUA), Technical University Senior Administrators Association of Ghana (TUSAAG) and other analogous professional groups.

While the intention behind the revised Market Premium may have been to improve the welfare of university employees, its implementation has created a significant disparity between Teaching and Non-Teaching Senior Members that threatens the principles of fairness, equity, and industrial harmony within the tertiary education sector.

The concern is not opposition to improved conditions for Teaching Senior Members. Rather, it is that Non-Teaching Senior Members, who are analogous colleagues within the same public university senior member structure, are progressively being made worse off through compensation arrangements that separate their conditions from those of their teaching counterparts.

It is important to acknowledge that Non-Teaching Senior Members were not entirely excluded from negotiation. On 22ndApril 2026, Government, represented by FWSC, Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Labour, GTEC and management of public and technical universities, reached an interim agreement with GAUA and TUSAAG.

Under that agreement, Market Premium and Non-Basic Allowance were consolidated, and the total was increased by 40%, effective 1 April 2026 which eventually took effect from 1st July, 2026. The concern, however, is that the subsequent framework approved for Teaching Senior Members applied a broader and more favourable consolidation formula, thereby widening the gap between analogous senior member categories.

The issue is not one of competition between Teaching and Non-Teaching staff. Rather, it is a question of fairness in the treatment of all Senior Members who collectively contribute to the mandate of Ghana's public universities

Universities Cannot Function on Teaching Alone

Every public university operates on three interdependent pillars: teaching, research, and administration. While lecturers deliver academic instruction and undertake research, administrators and professionals provide the institutional backbone that enables these functions to succeed.

University administrators and professionals include lawyers, accountants, procurement specialists, corporate governance experts, engineers, medical officers, architects, surveyors, planners, ICT professionals, librarians, human resource practitioners, communication experts, research administrators, laboratory managers, quality assurance officers, development planners, and many other specialists.

These professionals ensure that universities remain legally compliant, financially accountable, technologically functional, academically accredited, and administratively efficient.

Without admissions, examinations, procurement, finance, human resource management, quality assurance, legal services, estate management, ICT infrastructure, and student support services, teaching itself cannot take place.

Universities therefore thrive because of collaboration, not discriminatory assertions.

The Emerging Inequity in the Market Premium Structure

The revised Market Premium has unfortunately created an anomaly that is difficult to justify within established principles of job evaluation and internal equity.

For instance, under the approved structure, an Assistant Lecturer (Grade 20, Step 7) receives a Market Premium higher than a Registrar (Grade 25L, Step 1) whose position is analogous to the Professorial grade and who serves as the Chief Operations Officer of a university.

This means that the entry teaching senior member rank receives more than the highest non-teaching senior member administrative/professional category. This is the clearest evidence of internal inequity.

Regardless of the methodology used in arriving at these figures, such an outcome raises legitimate concerns about internal equity and comparable worth within the same Senior Member category.

It is important to note that job evaluation exercises previously conducted within the public university system placed several administrative and professional roles at higher premium percentage levels relative to comparable academic ranks, based on responsibility, complexity, and institutional impact.

However, in the spirit of equity and industrial harmony, these differentiated premium levels were harmonized in 2012, resulting in both Teaching and Non-Teaching Senior Members being placed on a uniform 114% Market Premium structure.

This deliberate equalization was not accidental; it was a negotiated outcome intended to preserve fairness, prevent internal fragmentation, and sustain cohesion among Senior Members who operate within the same institutional framework.

The current revision, therefore, appears to depart from that established principle of equity, reintroducing disparities that the 2012 harmonization sought to resolve.

The Role and Responsibility of Senior Administrators and Professionals

The Registrar is responsible for the administration of the entire university, advising the Governing Council and Vice-Chancellor, implementing policies, ensuring statutory compliance, supervising administrative divisions, and coordinating institutional governance.

Similar responsibilities are borne by Finance Directors, Internal Auditors, Directors of Works and Physical Development, Directors of Human Resources, ICT Directors, Planning Officers, Directors of Health Services and numerous other professionals.

When a junior academic rank receives a higher Market Premium than the highest administrative rank within the same Senior Member category, questions naturally arise regarding the principles that informed the policy.

The Original Purpose of Online Teaching Support Allowance (OTSA)

One of the factors incorporated into the revised Market Premium appears to be the Online Teaching Support Allowance (OTSA).

OTSA was introduced during the COVID-19 pandemic when universities migrated to emergency online teaching. It was intended to offset the additional internet connectivity and technology costs incurred by teaching staff during that extraordinary period. Funding was expected to come from both Government of Ghana and Internally Generated Funds (IGF), although implementation varied across institutions.

Today, however, universities have largely transitioned into blended and hybrid learning environments. Online teaching has become part of normal institutional operations rather than an emergency intervention.

More importantly, online teaching depends heavily on administrators and professional staff. ICT professionals design, maintain, secure, and troubleshoot digital learning platforms. Registry staff coordinate online registration, examinations, and academic records. Finance officers process fees and payments. Procurement officers acquire digital infrastructure. Quality assurance officers monitor programme delivery.

Communication officers manage institutional information just to highlight a few examples. Without these supporting functions, online teaching cannot occur.

If OTSA is now embedded into a permanent Market Premium structure, then equity demands that the contributions of all enabling professionals be equally recognized.

The Need for Fair and Inclusive Negotiation

For many years, issues affecting Senior Members have benefited from consultation among stakeholders, including non-teachingand teaching unions. Such engagement has contributed significantly to industrial peace within Ghana’s universities.

When one category of Senior Members perceives that decisions affecting all are negotiated without adequate consultation or produce outcomes that substantially disadvantage others, trust in the negotiation process is weakened.

The issue is not simply whether Non-Teaching Senior Members were consulted during the negotiation process. Indeed, records indicate that the Ghana Association of University Administrators (GAUA) and the Technical University Senior Administrators' Association of Ghana (TUSAAG) negotiated and agreed on an interim arrangement with Government. The fundamental concern, however, lies in the disparity created by the implementation of the revised Market Premium.

While the framework for Non-Teaching Senior Members consolidated relatively fewer remuneration components, the framework for Teaching Senior Members incorporated the Market Premium, Non-Basic Allowance, Government component of the Online Teaching Support Allowance (OTSA), Internally Generated Funds (IGF) component of OTSA, and an additional enhancement.

This difference in the composition of the remuneration package has resulted in a significant widening of the pay gap between analogous Senior Member categories, raising legitimate concerns about internal equity, consistency, and the principles of fair compensation within Ghana's public university system.

Good labour relations require transparency, inclusiveness, and consistency. Government must therefore ensure that all recognized unions representing Senior Members are meaningfully involved in decisions that affect their conditions of service.

The Role of Regulatory and Policy Institutions

Ghana Tertiary Education Commission (GTEC) and other institutions responsible for regulating higher education and advising government have an obligation to promote fairness, consistency, and institutional stability. Their responsibility extends beyond academic excellence to ensuring that policies support effective governance and harmonious industrial relations.

Compensation structures should reflect objective principles such as: Internal equity, Comparable worth, Job evaluation, Institutional responsibility, Professional qualifications, Leadership responsibilities, and The need to attract and retain highly skilled personnel across all critical functions of the university.

Where a compensation framework creates obvious disparities that undermine these principles, it is appropriate for policymakers to revisit the framework.

Preserving Parity and Cohesion

Ghana's universities require well-motivated lecturers to deliver quality teaching and research. However, the cumulative effect of successive compensation adjustments has gradually widened the disparity between Teaching and Non-Teaching groups.

As a result, Non-Teaching Senior Members are increasingly placed at a relative disadvantage despite their indispensable contributions to university governance, administration, finance, ICT, infrastructure, student services, and overall institutional functioning.

A university cannot achieve accreditation without administrators; it cannot account for public funds without finance professionals; it cannot defend litigation without legal officers; it cannot maintain digital learning without ICT professionals; it cannot manage infrastructure without engineers and estate managers; it cannot efficiently win and manage research grants without Research Administrators; and it cannot assure quality without professional administrators. Every profession matters.

The Labour Act Promotes Fair and Non-Discriminatory Employment Practices

The Labour Act, 2003 (Act 651) reinforces these constitutional protections. Section 68 provides that every worker is entitled to equal pay for work of equal value without distinction of any kind, while the Act generally prohibits unfair discrimination in employment and promotes equitable labour practices. These provisions underscore the importance of ensuring that compensation frameworks are based on transparent job evaluation and objective criteria rather than distinctions that cannot be reasonably justified.

Administrators and professionals are therefore justified in requesting an explanation of the methodology used in determining the revised Market Premium where the resulting structure appears to depart from established principles of internal equity.

The Fair Wages and Salaries Commission Has a Statutory Duty to Promote Equity

The Fair Wages and Salaries Commission Act, 2007 (Act 737) gives the Commission a clear statutory mandate. The Act requires the Commission to: Implement a fair, transparent and systematic public service pay policy, Undertake job analysis and job evaluation, Develop consistent grading and classification structures, Ensure internal consistency and external competitiveness within the public service; and Coordinate collective bargaining where Government is the employer.

Similarly, the Commission itself identifies fairness, transparency, and equal treatment as core institutional values and states that negotiations should be frank, open, and transparent.

The critical policy question for the Fair Wages and Salaries Commission (FWSC), the Ministry of Finance, the Ghana Tertiary Education Commission (GTEC), and the future Independent Emoluments Commission is whether the current market premium framework upholds the principles of internal equity, comparable worth, transparent job evaluation, and consistency across the Senior Member structure.

A compensation framework under which an entry-level teaching rank receives a higher market premium than the highest administrative or professional rank within the same Senior Member category warrants an urgent and objective technical review.

If a newly appointed Assistant Lecturer receives a higher Market Premium than the highest administrative officer of a university, stakeholders are entitled to ask whether the outcome adequately reflects the statutory objectives envisaged under Act 737. Such questions are not an attack on teaching staff; rather, they seek assurance that the pay framework faithfully reflects the law.

The Single Spine Pay Policy Was Designed to Remove Distortions

The philosophy underpinning Ghana's Single Spine Pay Policy (SSPP) was never to create divisions among public servants. Stated objectives include:

• ensuring equal pay for work of equal worth

• removing distortions in public sector pay

• promoting fairness and transparency

• minimizing industrial relations tensions, and

• linking pay to productivity.

Any remuneration outcome that is widely perceived as introducing new distortions should therefore be carefully reviewed against the original objectives of the Single Spine framework.

A Call on Government for Review

This discussion should not be framed as a contest between Teaching and Non-Teaching Senior Members. Ghana's public universities require both strong academic leadership and highly competent professional administration.

Government has an opportunity to demonstrate its commitment to fairness by reviewing the revised Market Premium and addressing the concerns of Administrators and Professional Staff. Government, through the Ministry of Finance, FWSC, GTEC and the Independent Emoluments Commission when fully operational, should conduct an urgent internal equity review of the revised Market Premium framework.

The review should compare the compensation outcomes for Teaching and Non-Teaching Senior Members, examine the formulae used for consolidation, assess the effect on analogous grades, and recommend corrective measures to prevent cumulative disadvantage against Non-Teaching Senior Members

The review should specifically:

1. Compare the teaching and non-teaching consolidation formulae

2. Assess why OTSA-related components were consolidated for Teaching Senior Members without a corresponding systems-support recognition for Non-Teaching Senior Members

3. Examine whether analogous grades remain internally equitable

4. Determine why an Assistant Lecturer receives more than a Registrar and analogous grades.

The request being made by administrators and professionals is that Government, through its relevant agencies, undertake an objective review to align the Market Premium with the LabourAct, the statutory mandate of the FWSC, and the objectives of the single spine pay policy.

As Government continues its efforts to strengthen higher education, it should ensure that no category of Senior Member feels overlooked or undervalued. A balanced and equitable Market Premium framework will not only improve staff morale but also reinforce the stability, efficiency, and excellence of Ghana's public universities. The strength of a university lies not in one profession alone but in the collective contribution of all its people.

Government should therefore reconsider the current Market Premium arrangements and work with all stakeholders to establish a compensation framework that is fair, transparent, sustainable, and reflective of the indispensable role played by both Teaching and Non-Teaching Senior Members.