The uni strike is symptomatic of a dysfunctional market. In the real world, we judge employment numbers and values by marginal value vs market rates. i.e. for any role, what do I need to offer to attract a suitable person, and would the value they add exceed that cost?
1/12

Different people can add different value, which will set the maximum they are offered. That’s not just per role, but per person, because some people will add more value in a role than others.
2/12

How are public-sector universities supposed to make this judgment? Thanks to “student loans” and arbitrary targets to maximise student numbers, demand for their product has little to do with the value of what they’re offering.
3/12

Most courses at most universities charge the maximum permitted, regardless of the difference in quality, the marketability of the qualification (both by subject and by quality) and the cost of provision. Imagine a market in which the price of Bentleys and Dacias are the same.
4/x

Students apply for courses without much consideration of their market value because the “loans” to pay for them aren’t real loans and the cost of poor judgment is minimal.
5/12

The marginal value to a bottom-rank uni of a mediocre academic in a subject that offers minimal returns to the students’ “investment” may therefore exceed their average cost. Conversely, an excellent teacher of a valuable subject may not be worth much more to a top-rank uni.
6/12

I am sure there are plenty of excellent academics who are underpaid compared to their value to the students and to their employment options outside academia.
7/12

But I am also sure that there are plenty of less-valuable academics whose employment value would be low or zero if numbers and rates were determined in a genuine market, where students were fully liable for the costs.
8/12

Collective bargaining and distortion of student incentives means the former are effectively subsidising the latter. If so, it’s no good academics arguing for everyone to be paid a wage that reflects the top-end value.
9/12

If you are any good, you should be under-paid as a function of the system. If you don’t like it, don’t strike to raise wages for all, good or bad, valuable or worthless. That’s deadweight cost on taxpayers.
10/12

Campaign for an end to collective bargaining so the best (like you) can be paid what they’re worth, with the added benefit of differentiating valuable courses by cost.
11/12

That would mean that we’d have fewer and cheaper places on less-valuable courses or at lower-quality institutions. But given that we have a surfeit of graduates and a shortage of vocational skills, that would constitute an important correction for the economy.
12/12