Equal pay shake-up: you may soon have to tell job applicants how much you are going to pay them before interview

The Equal pay and pay discrimination consultation builds on a call for evidence, which demonstrated a need for serious reform of the current system. The government accepts that the existing legal protection places too much of the burden of enforcement on individuals, encourages lengthy and adversarial disputes and doesn't do enough to protect those people who need it.

It is thinking about reforming the system in two distinct phases. Phase one will ‘fix' the systemic failures of the current equal pay regime and phase two will address pay gaps which impact disabled people, those from ethnic minority groups and outsourced workers. 

Phase 1: Fixing the system

The government is considering a range of reforms to prevent pay discrimination from happening, and making it easier for people to enforce their rights. This includes: 

1. Pay transparency

The consultation seeks views on proposals to:

• Include pay and conditions in job adverts. The government believes this might encourage employers to evaluate job roles before recruiting and encourage consistency when setting pay. It says that unless pay structures are clear, employers can make decisions based on stereotypes rather than focussing on the abilities needed to do the role. It believes it will also help to improve the recruitment process as candidates will know what the job pays before they apply and can go into the process with their eyes wide open.

  If there is no job advert, employers will have to give candidates this information in writing before they attend an interview. 

  The government is consulting on the amount of information that employers have to provide. It asks whether it should it include other financial benefits? And, in terms of pay, should it include a salary range or specify the actual salary? 

  This is not as onerous as the approach adopted by the EU under Article 5(1) of the EU Pay Transparency Directive which, as well as requiring employers to tell applicants the starting salary or salary range for a role, also prohibits them from asking about an applicant's pay history.  

• Extend ways employees can enforce their rights and streamline process. The government accepts that equal pay claims are ‘exceptionally complex, lengthy and expensive’ to litigate. It intends to establish an Equal Pay Regulatory and Enforcement Unit to ‘lift the heavy burden off individual workers’. It will focus on providing clearer guidance to resolve points of contention and will update the statutory code of practice on equal pay which was last revised in 2016. 

  It is also considering creating new powers for the Unit as follows: 

  1. Giving the Unit the legal right to require employers to disclose evidence about pay data and information before triggering a formal investigation process.

  2.  Enabling the Unit to require employers to undertake a job evaluation scheme/or equal pay audit to help establish whether pay discrimination has occurred - as part of its investigatory powers; and 

  3. Make formal recommendations binding on employers and requiring them to respond and provide updates on their progress. 

  The government will also launch formal reviews into i) the rules of procedure for pay discrimination claims, and ii) the independent panel of experts who advice tribunals on equal value claims, to identify and address inefficiencies which contribute to delays.

  And, where a tribunal has found that an employer has committed an equal pay breach, it must also order the employer to put in place a non-discriminatory job evaluation scheme if it doesn't already have an up to date one in place.

• Reinstating the statutory questionnaire procedure. But only in respect of pay claims. The use of the questionnaire would be optional, not mandatory. However, as before, a court or tribunal could draw an inference from a failure to answer a question within a set period of time or an evasive or equivocal answer. The government also intends to publish comprehensive guidance to help employers respond to questionnaires.

Phase 2: Making the right to equal pay effective for all

The government believes that people experiencing pay discrimination because of their race or disability do not currently benefit from equivalent protections to those available in sex-based equal pay claims. People wishing to bring contractual pay claims on the basis of race or disability have to plead direct or indirect discrimination, and in the case of disability may also claim discrimination arising from disability and, potentially, the failure to make reasonable adjustments. 

Rather than extending the current equal pay framework (which implies a sex equality clause into all contracts of employment) to include race and disability, the government wants to ‘level up’ the protections so they are broadly equivalent across both regimes.

It proposes doing this by: 

• Modifying contractual terms: in equal pay claims, the law automatically changes discriminatory contractual terms. No equivalent mechanism currently exists for race or disability pay discrimination claims. The government therefore proposes giving tribunals the power to amend discriminatory pay terms where an employee succeeds in a claim for race or disability discrimination.
• Undertaking equal pay audits: employers that breach equal pay laws can be required to carry out an equal pay audit. This requirement does not apply to race or disability pay discrimination claims. The government therefore proposes extending these powers so that employers found to have discriminated on the grounds of race or disability could also be ordered to conduct an equal pay audit and job evaluation exercise.
• Allowing claims for race and disability pay discrimination where the work is not materially similar but of equal value: the equal pay regime allows claims where work is rated as equivalent or of equal value. However, in cases of direct and indirect discrimination, there must be no material difference between the circumstances relating to the claimant and their comparator. The government proposes allowing race and disability pay discrimination claims where work is ‘rated as equivalent’ or of ‘equal value’.
• Allowing hypothetical comparators: equal pay claims currently require an actual comparator, whereas direct discrimination claims can rely on a hypothetical comparator. The government proposes allowing hypothetical comparators in equal pay claims in two prescribed, limited circumstances. However, the hypothetical comparator must be based on a real person.
• Extending time limits: Employment Tribunals can extend time limits for discrimination claims where it is just and equitable to do so. This discretion does not apply to equal pay claims. The government proposes giving tribunals the same discretion in equal pay cases, allowing time limits to be extended where it is just and equitable.

Outsourcing arrangements

The government is also concerned that outsourcing arrangements may allow organisations to avoid equal pay obligations. It is therefore proposing a new duty requiring contracting parties to take all reasonable steps to uphold pay equality in their contractual arrangements. 

Next steps

The consultation closes at 5pm on 27 October 2026. The government will then review the responses. 

Our newsletters

We publish monthly employment and education newsletters. If you'd like to be added to the mailing list, please let me know.