What the directive says
Chapter III of Directive (EU) 2023/970 (Articles 14 to 23) sets out how equal pay rights are enforced. Each member state decides the procedures and the amount of fines, so the details differ by country.
Member States shall ensure that, in administrative procedures or court proceedings regarding alleged direct or indirect discrimination in relation to pay, where an employer has not implemented the pay transparency obligations set out in Articles 5, 6, 7, 9 and 10, it is for the employer to prove that there has been no such discrimination.
Directive (EU) 2023/970, Article 18(2)
Read the full chapter in the official text on EUR-Lex.
What it means in practice
Full compensation, without a cap
A worker who suffered damage is entitled to full compensation: back pay and related bonuses or payments in kind, compensation for lost opportunities and non-material damage, and interest. The compensation may not be limited by a fixed upper limit (Article 16).
The burden of proof shifts
When a worker presents facts that suggest discrimination, the employer must prove there was none. If the employer has not met its obligations on recruitment, pay criteria, information requests, reporting or joint pay assessment, the burden is on the employer, unless the breach was manifestly unintentional and minor (Article 18).
Comparisons and evidence
The comparison is not limited to the same employer when a single source sets the pay conditions, nor to colleagues employed at the same time. Courts can order the employer to disclose relevant evidence (Articles 19 and 20).
At least three years to bring a claim
Limitation periods may not start before the worker knows, or can reasonably be expected to know, about the infringement, and must be at least three years (Article 21).
Fines set by each country
Penalties must be effective, proportionate and dissuasive and include fines. Repeated infringements carry specific penalties (Article 23). Equality bodies, workers’ representatives and associations can act on behalf of or in support of workers (Article 15).
Country by country
Penalties and the authorities in charge differ by country. The table comes from our tracker and changes when a country’s law moves.
| Country | Penalties | Competent authority | Equality body |
|---|---|---|---|
| Austria | – | Federal Ministry of Labour, Social Affairs, Health, Care and Consumer Protection; procurement authorities for the federal Article 24 limb; Styrian Equal Treatment Commissioner for the regional employee-information and municipal-reporting functions | Ombud for Equal Treatment (Gleichbehandlungsanwaltschaft); regional equality bodies/commissioners operate within Länder public-service regimes |
| Belgium | – | Federal Public Service Employment, Labour and Social Dialogue | Institute for the Equality of Women and Men |
| Bulgaria | – | Ministry of Labour and Social Policy; Commission for Protection against Discrimination | Commission for Protection against Discrimination |
| Croatia | – | Ministry of Labour, Pension System, Family and Social Policy; State Inspectorate | Ombudsperson for Gender Equality |
| Cyprus | Proposed article27 provides up to six months’ imprisonment and/or a €10,000 fine for employer breaches and specified inspection offences, with corporate-officer liability subject to the stated defence. Courts can also order compliance and impose repeated financial penalties for non-compliance with an order. | Department of Labour Relations, Ministry of Labour and Social Insurance | Office of the Commissioner for Administration and the Protection of Human Rights (Equality Body) |
| Czechia | Enforcing a prohibited pay-secrecy clause may constitute an administrative offence punishable by a fine of up to CZK 400,000. | Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs; State Labour Inspection Office | Public Defender of Rights |
| Denmark | – | Ministry of Employment and Equality | Existing Danish Institute for Human Rights; L68 proposes Arbejdsmarkedets Institut for Ligeløn as the specialised pay-equality body. |
| Estonia | – | Ministry of Economic Affairs and Communications; Labour Inspectorate | Gender Equality and Equal Treatment Commissioner |
| Finland | Proposed §21b: failure to submit the joint pay assessment can attract a €5,000-€80,000 neglect fee, with proportionality and minor-breach relief and specified public-body exemptions. The Tribunal can order compliance with the listed transparency duties, backed by a conditional fine. | Ministry of Social Affairs and Health (legislative lead); Ombudsman for Equality / National Non-Discrimination and Equality Tribunal for supervision and enforcement under the Equality Act framework. | Ombudsman for Equality (Tasa-arvovaltuutettu). |
| France | Proposed private-sector administrative penalties are capped at 1% of payroll for key reporting, unjustified-gap remediation and collective-negotiation/action-plan failures, and generally at €450 per breach for individual applicant/worker obligations; other criminal sanctions are also strengthened. | Ministry of Labour; DREETS and labour inspection | Defender of Rights |
| Germany | – | Federal Ministry for Family Affairs, Senior Citizens, Women and Youth; Federal Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs | Federal Anti-Discrimination Agency |
| Greece | Full compensation and administrative sanctions are provided through the Labour Law Code; no euro amount is recorded without a separate primary citation to the general penalty provision in Article 572. | Ministry of Labour and Social Security; Labour Inspectorate | Greek Ombudsman |
| Hungary | – | Reporting/supervisory authority not established by the programme. It names the Minister for Social Affairs and Family Affairs as presenter of the planned bill; this is not a designation of an enforcement authority. | Commissioner for Fundamental Rights |
| Ireland | – | Department of Children, Disability and Equality; Workplace Relations Commission | Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission |
| Italy | Art. 13 routes established pay discrimination into the remedies under D.Lgs. 198/2006, including cessation and damages. Breaches of transparency duties also affect the evidentiary burden and enforcement exposure. | Ministero del Lavoro e delle Politiche Sociali; Ispettorato Nazionale del Lavoro and equality bodies for enforcement functions | Equality bodies / Consigliere di parità under D.Lgs. 198/2006 |
| Latvia | Proposed sections21-24 permit warnings or fines in penalty units: individual-information failures up to70 for a natural-person employer or220 for a legal person; reporting failures up to140/2,800; refusal of a JPA up to70/700; unequal-pay breaches up to140/2,800. The State Labour Inspectorate conducts the administrative proceedings under section25. | Ministry of Welfare; State Labour Inspectorate | Ombudsman of the Republic of Latvia |
| Lithuania | Administrative liability applies for failures to provide required pay information; other Labour Code breaches remain subject to labour-law and administrative enforcement. | Valstybinė darbo inspekcija (VDI); Valstybinio socialinio draudimo fondo valdyba (Sodra) administers pay-transparency data flows; labour disputes bodies/courts provide remedies. | Lygių galimybių kontrolieriaus tarnyba |
| Luxembourg | – | Ministry of Labour | Centre for Equal Treatment |
| Malta | General contraventions: €2,500-€5,000; gender/intersectional equal-pay breaches: €5,000-€7,000; repeated infringements attract a more severe punishment within those limits. Failure to provide accurate and complete pay information within 45 days of the worker's first request is an offence and the Director may initiate proceedings. | Department for Industrial and Employment Relations (DIER); Industrial Tribunal and courts for remedies/enforcement. | National Commission for the Promotion of Equality (NCPE), or successor entity under law. |
| Netherlands | Proposed amendment 36949-8 would make breaches of the bill's Article 7(1) equal-pay obligation administratively fineable by adding Article 7(1) to the relevant enforcement provisions. The amendment adds this administrative enforcement route alongside existing civil damages/compensation remedies and is not yet adopted. | Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment; Netherlands Labour Authority | Netherlands Institute for Human Rights |
| Poland | UC127 Article 59 proposes PLN 2,000-60,000 fines for specified job-evaluation, criteria/information, reporting, JPA/remediation and privacy-process failures. Article 16 separately voids pay-secrecy restrictions; Article 59 does not expressly list Article 16 as its own offence. | Ministry of Family, Labour and Social Policy; National Labour Inspectorate | Current Commissioner for Human Rights remains separate; UC127 proposes a Commission for Counteracting Discrimination in Employment under Article 18(3) of the equal-treatment Act. |
| Portugal | The draft classifies breaches of recruitment, reporting, correction and JPA duties as very serious; employee-information breaches as serious; pay-criteria disclosure breaches as minor. Repeated violations may attract accessory sanctions. No euro amount is recorded without a separate primary citation to the general penalty scales. | CITE; labour inspectorate; labour-ministry data-processing entity (proposed allocation of functions) | Commission for Equality in Labour and Employment (CITE) |
| Romania | – | Ministry of Labour, Family, Youth and Social Solidarity; Territorial Labour Inspectorates | National Council for Combating Discrimination and ANES |
| Slovakia | For failure to submit the statutory pay report, the Ministry first sets an additional compliance period of at least 15 days; continued failure triggers a fine of EUR 4,000-8,000 under §16. Other breaches are subject to the amended labour-inspection and anti-discrimination enforcement framework. | Ministerstvo práce, sociálnych vecí a rodiny SR; labour inspectorates exercise inspection/enforcement functions under the amended labour-inspection framework | Slovenské národné stredisko pre ľudské práva |
| Slovenia | – | Ministry of Labour, Family, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities | Advocate of the Principle of Equality |
| Spain | – | Ministry of Labour and Social Economy; Labour and Social Security Inspectorate | Instituto de las Mujeres |
| Sweden | – | Ministry of Employment; Equality Ombudsman | Equality Ombudsman |
How to prepare
- Meet the transparency obligations on time: a missed obligation shifts the burden of proof to you.
- Document pay decisions and the criteria behind them, so you can show why pay differs.
- Keep records long enough to answer claims for at least three years.
- Justify or fix gaps found in pay analysis before they become claims.
- Know your national authority and equality body and how they supervise.
Questions employers ask
Evenpay keeps pay data, categories and the reasons for pay differences in one place, so you can show how pay was set when someone asks. See how pay transparency reports work.