̽Ƶ

UK universities ‘could cut 10,000 jobs every year’

Academics claim changes made to higher education system a decade ago have divided sector into ‘winners and losers’, with government-imposed limits on income exacerbating financial challenges

Published on
November 28, 2025
Last updated
November 28, 2025
A group of students on the steps of their university in Leeds, England
Source: iStock/Wirestock

Some 10,000 jobs could be lost each year at UK universities as leaders continue to cut staff numbers to tackle ongoing financial problems, new analysis suggests. 

Writing for ̽Ƶ, David Maguire and Alex Bols, vice-chancellor and chief of staff respectively at the University of East Anglia, updated their prediction made last autumn that 10,000 jobs could be lost in 2024-25, claiming this same amount could in fact be lost every year going forward. 

According to , there were 246,930 academic staff employed in the higher education sector in December 2023. 

Bols and Maguire trace the current financial problems higher education institutions are facing back to the government’s decision to remove the limit on student numbers in 2015-16 and deregulate student recruitment, while maintaining caps on tuition fees, thus limiting universities’ income. 

̽Ƶ

ADVERTISEMENT

They found there were “winners and losers” within the existing system. “The former include those with the reputation, resources and geographic opportunity to expand, as well as those that are most responsive to change and able to take early-mover advantage,” they write. 

“The losers consist of providers that, for a host of exogenous and endogenous reasons, have failed to maintain their enrolment numbers – either domestic or international.”

̽Ƶ

ADVERTISEMENT

Bols and Maguire found that 11 universities expanded by more than 11,000 students over the past decade, while the three institutions with the biggest growth expanded by more than 20,000 students – BPP University (28,915 more students), Canterbury Christ Church University (22,410) and UCL (21,490). 

However, even those institutions have not been immune to job cuts. Earlier this year, leaders at Canterbury Christ Church University refused to rule out compulsory redundancies as they sought to make “pre-emptive savings” of about £20 million. The local UCU branch objected to the move given the institution’s budget surplus.

Recent modelling by the Office for Students suggests the sector’s troubles are far from over. A report published in October found that 45 per cent of English higher education institutions were likely to face a financial deficit this year, with the sector experiencing a total net reduction in annual tuition fee income of £437.8 million in 2025-26 compared with forecasts.

Maguire and Bols’ prediction follows figures released by the University and College Union (UCU) in October, which calculated UK universities had announced cuts equivalent to more than 15,000 jobs over the past year. 

The UCU said university leaders have mooted staff reductions amounting to 12,230 jobs, while planned savings of £197 million could equate to the further loss of about 3,224 jobs, based on the average cost of employing a university worker. 

The threat of job cuts is causing widespread disruption across higher education providers. 

̽Ƶ

ADVERTISEMENT

Union members at universities including Nottingham, Sheffield and Sheffield Hallam have already planned strikes this academic year in response to plans to cut staff members at the institutions. 

Meanwhile, sector unions are currently balloting their members on plans to take national strike action over pay.  

̽Ƶ

ADVERTISEMENT

UCU general secretary Jo Grady said job losses in line with Maguire and Bols’ prediction are “completely unsustainable”. 

“They would torpedo learning and working conditions and leave institutions unable to function. Vice-chancellors must stop wasting money on new buildings, campuses and foreign ventures, and start protecting jobs. 

“Meanwhile, the government needs to lift its harmful restrictions on foreign students studying here and begin investing in the sector.”

However, Gregor Gall, an industrial relations expert who is a visiting professor at the universities of Glasgow and Leeds, was unoptimistic about the unions’ chances of turning the tide, pointing out that cutting staff numbers is the “quickest way” for universities to reduce expenditure – more so than limiting pay rises or selling off buildings. 

“The best that the UCU can hope for is to blunt the axe’s cut by delaying redundancies, bettering terms of leaving, having voluntary ones rather than compulsory ones and reducing the number of redundancies required,” he said.

“There is no ‘white knight’ riding over the hill any time soon with a Labour government overseeing all of this.”

̽Ƶ

ADVERTISEMENT

helen.packer@timeshighereducation.com

Register to continue

Why register?

  • Registration is free and only takes a moment
  • Once registered, you can read 3 articles a month
  • Sign up for our newsletter
Please
or
to read this article.

Related articles

There have been more winners than losers since domestic student recruitment was uncapped in England. But without better stewardship, all institutions must do what they can to swing the market in their favour, regardless of national priorities or local needs, say David Maguire and Alex Bols

28 November

Reader's comments (19)

What a tragedy for the UK's universities, it's academics and students. The rest of the world looks on aghast.
Not sure the rest of the world (of the rest of the UK for that matter) is over much concerned by the plight of the UK HE system, it probably has other more pressing concerns.
By 2040, UK universities will employ 5,000 senior management, maybe 20,000 cleaning and maintenance staff, maybe 2,000 academics, and some 50,000 computers which will run automated AI genberated lecures. By 2050 these computers will be sentient, able to guage stident reaction and progress. Then in 2060 we see the world's first computer strike, as these machines despair at the lack of student learning they are witnessing.
Hopefully these computers will eventually include spell check!
At least the comment was genberated by good ol' fashioned human fallibility
No doubt!!!!
But what is the floor number? There will be a point beyond which there wouldn't be an MVP for individual institutions, programmes and casting upward, the entire sector.
I despair at the state of UK universities. The news gets gloomier by the day.
Well we need to think about this and the proportions of employed staff and the resource spent on those various proportions. Obviously, the premium in such an environment would be placed, one would think, on maintaining active reseachers and teachers, given that student numbers are not declining. So serious pay restraint at the top end needs implementing. If student numbers decline, ceteris paribus, then I guess the MVP also declines to a lower baseline and we down size the sector. There needs to be some strategic planning on the national scale in my view. which cannot be deliverd by a partially marketised system with internal relentless competition for resource. But we need more data on which jobs and where would be under threat?
There is no way they will reduce the non teaching staff. They are increasing their marketing and socmed staff while closing departments and cutting faculty.
As a former lecturer I actually don’t know what university is for anymore. Teaching is mainly now done by people who are on precarious contracts and who can leave the job at any time. And aren’t given enough hours to focus on students. Professors are seeing their research leave and funding cut to the bone and are not even enthusiastic about doing it anymore. University is getting more expensive with less to show for it.
Well if so, more people will leave and fewer will want to enter the profession and then we won't have to make job cuts to existing colleagues? I think there will always be many people want to teach in Universities. For oner thing conditions in Colleges of HE and FE (not to mention schools) are pretty awful and University teaching is still a paradise in comparison.
It's really not.
Well it does look as if we are downsizing as a sector.
All of this requires centralised planning of the kind that is poo-pooed by the economic orthodoxy of free markets. Looking at the current state of the job market for young people. There are currently almost 1 million 16-25 year olds not in education, employment or training. How will downsizing HE help those young people, and what will that NEET number rise to if the sector shrinks? As for current students, after spending 9,000 pounds a year how do we tell them, sorry, you can’t finish your degree because we’re closing it down. You can move to Loughborough and finish your studies there, if they have the staff to teach a whole load of students from across the country, What happens to cities like Huddersfield, Sunderland and Sheffield if they no longer have a university. Those local economies rely on the university. If those universities downsize, it will only further reduce opportunities for young people. Unless of course, the government spends money and works on a strategy for young people. There seems to be no thought at all about the wider consequences of this. Universities downsizing is not like your local shop no longer selling Wispas.
"There are currently almost 1 million 16-25 year olds not in education, employment or training. How will downsizing HE help those young people". Well why is that the case? What are they doing? How will expanding or maintaining the sector at its curent size address this. Obviously, they need to find employment, but why are these people not working or looking for work? If they have the grades to go to University and are not accessing the system through the loan facility why are they not applying? Raising the student fees to further fund universities as this article suggests won't provide much incentive to the get them into education will it?. If they haven't the grades then there has to be another route into work, via apprenticeships etc. According to recent official figures, more than 639,000 graduates are claiming Universal Credit in the UK, making up 12% of all claimants, so that might argue there are too many graduates, or that they are wrongly qualified for employment and gong to Univesity is not getting them into work? And the jobs pur students take (as the THES often points out) are often non graduate or "graduate" jobs that do not really need a degree in the first place?
Why is this the case? Have a look at who has been running the country for the last few decades.
That's not really an answer to the questions concerning the optimal size of the UK HE system, the profile,quantity and indeed quality of the students it produces etc. Your assumtion seems to be that the sector should be expanding and more resource provided to do this, but we now have substantial numbers of students on universal credit or unable to find the graduate employment that they hoped and not paying back on their student loans underwritten by the taxpayer (and you want to expand this?). Are too many young people going to University and might they be better off being differently educated. The present government wants 60% of young people in HE/training with more of that percentage in apprenticeship kinds of training, for example so we are in theory looking at the expansion of the FE sector and the reduction of the HE sector. Do you want the expansion of both, or just Universities? It's clear the current sytem, to my mind, is badly failing young people on all fronts and just making them pay even more via a fee rise for their education or expecting the UK taxpayer to sacrifice even m9re of their "hard earned" in taxes for those loans that will never come back doesn't seem to be a good solution to me, bt I stand to be corrected. And if we supplied an extra £6.4% of funding, then how much would go into higher senior management pay (how would we prevent that?), the construction of expensive vanity project building projects etc etc (like with the the last huge rise in funding post 2006 which was spaffed away?). The people in charge you mention have also been democratically elected governments, mostly implementing manifesto commitments and stated policy objectives.
If fee income has fallen by £6.4 bn over the last ten years, can anyne explain or justify why VC pay has risen 30% across the same period across the board? The only rationale I ever hear is that "this is what our independent remuneration committees think we are worth and we have nothing to do with it". I suppose these are what David describes as additional "endogenous" factors?

Sponsored

Featured jobs

See all jobs
ADVERTISEMENT