Government Urged To Review University Market Premium Over Pay Disparities

A growing coalition of Senior Administrators and Professional Staff in Ghana’s public universities has called on the Government to urgently review the recently approved Market Premium structure, arguing that it has created significant pay disparities between Teaching and Non-Teaching Senior Members.
The group, comprising members of the Ghana Association of University Administrators (GAUA) and the Technical University Senior Administrators Association of Ghana (TUSAAG), insists that while they support improved welfare for lecturers, the current compensation framework unfairly disadvantages administrators and professional staff who play equally critical roles in the operations of public universities.
In a detailed position paper titled “Call for Pay Equity in Ghana’s Public Universities: The Case Against the Approved Market Premium,” the authors contend that the revised Market Premium departs from long-established principles of fairness, internal equity and comparable worth that have guided remuneration within the public university system for years.
Not Against Lecturers
According to the administrators, their concerns should not be interpreted as opposition to improved conditions of service for Teaching Senior Members.
Rather, they argue that the implementation of the revised Market Premium has widened the remuneration gap between teaching and non-teaching senior staff despite both categories belonging to the same Senior Member structure.
They acknowledged that Government, through the Fair Wages and Salaries Commission (FWSC), Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Labour, Ghana Tertiary Education Commission (GTEC), and management of public and technical universities, reached an interim agreement with GAUA and TUSAAG on April 22, 2026.
Under that agreement, the existing Market Premium and Non-Basic Allowance for Non-Teaching Senior Members were consolidated and increased by 40 percent with effect from April 1, 2026, although implementation began on July 1.
However, they argued that the subsequent package approved for Teaching Senior Members adopted a broader consolidation formula by incorporating additional remuneration components, including the Government and Internally Generated Funds (IGF) portions of the Online Teaching Support Allowance (OTSA), thereby significantly widening the compensation gap.
Universities Depend on All Professionals
The authors stressed that universities cannot function on teaching alone, explaining that the smooth operation of higher education institutions depends on the collective efforts of academic and administrative professionals.
They pointed out that administrators, accountants, lawyers, engineers, ICT professionals, architects, librarians, planners, procurement specialists, human resource practitioners, communication officers, quality assurance experts, medical officers and research administrators all perform indispensable functions that keep universities operational.
According to them, admissions, examinations, procurement, financial management, legal compliance, infrastructure development, student records, quality assurance and digital learning systems all rely on professional administrators.
They therefore argued that compensation policies should recognise the complementary contributions of all Senior Members rather than favouring one category over another.
Equity Concerns
One of the major concerns raised in the paper is what the authors describe as an anomaly in the revised Market Premium structure.
They claimed that under the new arrangement, an Assistant Lecturer (Grade 20 Step 7) receives a higher Market Premium than a Registrar (Grade 25L Step 1), despite the Registrar serving as the Chief Administrative Officer of a university and occupying a position analogous to the Professorial grade.
They argued that such an outcome raises legitimate concerns about internal equity and contradicts established job evaluation principles.
The paper recalled that before 2012, some administrative and professional positions actually attracted higher premium percentages than comparable academic grades due to their complexity and level of responsibility.
However, those differences were harmonised in 2012, resulting in both Teaching and Non-Teaching Senior Members enjoying a uniform 114 percent Market Premium in the interest of fairness and industrial harmony.
The current arrangement, they argued, effectively reverses that harmonisation.
Questions Over OTSA
The administrators also questioned the inclusion of the Online Teaching Support Allowance (OTSA) within the revised Market Premium for lecturers.
They explained that OTSA was introduced during the COVID-19 pandemic to offset internet connectivity and technology costs associated with emergency online teaching.
According to the paper, universities have since transitioned into blended learning environments where digital education depends heavily on ICT professionals, registry staff, finance officers, procurement personnel, quality assurance officers and communication specialists.
They therefore argued that if OTSA has effectively become a permanent component of remuneration, then the contributions of these professionals should equally be recognised.
Appeal for Inclusive Negotiations
The authors further called for more transparent and inclusive negotiations whenever decisions affecting Senior Members are being considered.
They maintained that although GAUA and TUSAAG participated in earlier negotiations, the final implementation produced outcomes that substantially favoured one category of Senior Members over another.
According to them, good labour relations require transparency, consistency and meaningful consultation with all recognised unions.
Legal Basis
The paper cited provisions of the Labour Act, 2003 (Act 651), particularly Section 68, which guarantees equal pay for work of equal value and prohibits unfair discrimination in employment.
It also referenced the Fair Wages and Salaries Commission Act, 2007 (Act 737), which mandates the Commission to implement a fair, transparent and systematic public sector pay policy through objective job evaluation and grading.
The authors argued that the current Market Premium should be reviewed to determine whether it aligns with these legal principles and with the objectives of Ghana’s Single Spine Pay Policy, which seeks to eliminate distortions, promote fairness and minimise industrial disputes.
Call for Review
The group is urging Government, through the Ministry of Finance, the Fair Wages and Salaries Commission, the Ghana Tertiary Education Commission and the proposed Independent Emoluments Commission, to undertake an urgent technical review of the revised Market Premium framework.
Among other recommendations, they are calling for a comparison of the consolidation formulae used for Teaching and Non-Teaching Senior Members, an assessment of why OTSA-related components were included only for lecturers, an evaluation of internal equity across analogous grades, and an explanation as to why an Assistant Lecturer now earns a higher Market Premium than a Registrar.
The authors maintained that their campaign is not intended to pit lecturers against administrators but to ensure that compensation within Ghana’s public universities remains fair, transparent and reflective of the contributions of all professionals.
They concluded that sustainable higher education depends on both strong academic leadership and competent professional administration, urging Government to work with all stakeholders to establish a compensation framework that promotes equity, industrial harmony and institutional excellence.