Pay information must be shared earlier in the process
Salary in the job ad has become an exceptionally hot topic right now. The reason isn’t just changed candidate behaviour or a tighter talent market. It’s above all the EU Pay Transparency Directive and its national implementation across member states. By 2026, pay has to be discussed earlier and more openly than before. The only question is when and how.
The short answer to the question in the title is clear: the law sets the minimum, the employer decides the maximum. The directive doesn’t force employers to publish the salary in the job ad, but it does force them to tell applicants the starting pay or pay range early enough. In practice, this changes recruitment more than many yet realise.
What does the Pay Transparency Directive say about recruitment?
The goal of the EU Pay Transparency Directive (EU 2023/970) is to tackle pay gaps before they arise. In the recruitment phase this means that salary negotiation can no longer be based on asymmetric information, the applicant’s previous pay level or negotiating power, but on open and objective starting information.
Under the directive, employers must give applicants information about the initial pay for the position or its range. The information must be based on objective and gender-neutral criteria, and it must be provided in good time, at the latest before the first job interview. Member states implement the details in national legislation: Finland’s draft law, for example, follows the directive’s minimum requirements without national gold-plating, and most member states have taken a similar line. Check how the directive has been transposed in the countries where you hire.
The directive also prohibits employers from asking about an applicant’s current or previous pay. The idea is simple: pay must no longer be anchored to the past. It must be based on the role and its demands.
It’s essential to understand what the directive does not do. It doesn’t force you to publish the salary in the job ad. But it doesn’t prevent it either. The employer retains discretion, and that’s exactly where the strategic question arises.
Do you have to state the salary in the job ad?
No. But in practice, for many employers it’s the clearest and lowest-risk way to meet the obligation.
The directive allows several ways to provide pay information: it can be stated directly in the job ad, in a separate message before the interview, or by other means, as long as the timing is early enough. The problem with the “we’ll tell you later” model isn’t so much legality as execution.
If pay information is only given later in the process, the employer must be able to show that it was given to all applicants consistently, on time and on the same grounds. It also has to be documented. The further the process goes without an open pay conversation, the bigger the risk that practices look inconsistent, or even discriminatory.
That’s why many employers conclude that publishing the pay range already in the job ad is the administratively lightest solution. It standardises the process, removes room for interpretation and makes meeting the requirements simple.
Starting salary or pay range in the job ad: what does the law require?
The legislation doesn’t take a position on which is better. It only requires that the applicant is informed of either the starting pay or its range. Stating a starting salary works especially well in roles where the level of demands is very clear and variation is small, for example many junior roles, or positions where a collective agreement strongly steers the pay level. A starting salary gives an unambiguous starting point and leaves no room for interpretation.
A pay range, on the other hand, suits expert and leadership roles better, where the demands, responsibility and required skills can vary. What’s essential is that the range must not be arbitrary. It has to be based on predefined, objective and gender-neutral criteria such as job levels, responsibilities or skill requirements.
You don’t have to state the salary in the job ad, but in 2026 an open pay range is one of the most effective ways to meet the legal requirements and improve the quality of recruitment.
What does good pay disclosure look like in practice?
Well-executed pay disclosure gets several things right at once. It states the pay, but it also explains why the pay is what it is.
With a starting salary, this usually means a clear message about the level of demands the pay is based on and what it includes. With a pay range, good practice is to clearly tie the lower and upper ends of the range to different levels of responsibility or competence. When the applicant understands what determines where pay lands within the range, the salary negotiation becomes considerably more constructive.
Many employers use the opportunity to open up total compensation as well. In addition to fixed pay, you can describe a possible variable component, bonuses or commissions, and key benefits. This isn’t mandatory, but it reduces misunderstandings and improves the employer brand. The whole package matters, even when it’s not said out loud.
What do you gain from pay transparency beyond legal compliance?
The Pay Transparency Directive forces employers to make visible things that have long been implicit in many organisations. This is exactly where the biggest benefit lies.
When pay criteria, job levels and requirements are written down, career progression also becomes clearer. Employees can see what the next level requires and how pay development connects to growing skills and responsibility. At the same time, pay raises become decisions that are easier to justify, no longer appearing random or person-dependent.
The same structure serves not only recruitment but also pay comparisons and future reporting obligations. When the foundation is in order, transparency doesn’t feel like a threat but a natural continuation.
When is salary in the job ad a competitive advantage for the employer?
The recruitment market has already become more open than the law requires. For many applicants, missing pay information is a reason not to apply, or to view the employer with caution.
Pay transparency works especially well in roles where competition for talent is fierce and applicants compare several options side by side. Openness filters out unnecessary applicant volume, speeds up the process and reduces situations where recruitment collapses at the final stage over a salary conversation.
What should employers take away from this?
Pay transparency isn’t just a new obligation. It’s a change in how recruitment and rewarding are done. The law sets the minimum, but employers who go further often gain the most.
A pay range without structure is a risk, but a well-defined pay model is an asset. It makes recruitment easier, reduces later pay disputes and prepares the organisation for upcoming reporting requirements.
How to prepare in practice
Preparation starts with the basics: do roles have defined job levels, are pay ranges defined, and has the recruitment process decided at which point pay information is given? All of this must also be documented: documentation is the employer’s best protection if practices later need to be justified.
Recruitment is one of the biggest sources of pay gaps
One key reason the Pay Transparency Directive targets the recruitment phase specifically is that many pay gaps arise unnoticed at the very start of employment. Few employers consciously pay differently based on gender, yet gaps still emerge, in the absence of structures.
Put bluntly: if pay is set within a wide range and the final level is determined in a negotiation, pay starts to reflect negotiating behaviour rather than the demands of the work. Research and practical experience show that men, on average, negotiate more aggressively and more often from the top of the pay range than women. When the same pattern repeats from one recruitment to the next, pay gaps start to accumulate.
This is where the scale often surprises people. The gender pay gap threshold that triggers further action under the directive is five percent. It sounds like a lot, but in reality the gap can arise from very small amounts. For example, the difference between monthly salaries of €3,000 and €3,150 is already five percent. In a single recruitment the difference looks negligible, but over several recruitments and years, it becomes a structural problem.
This is exactly why the directive prohibits asking about salary history and requires that the starting pay or range is based on objective and gender-neutral criteria. The aim isn’t to prevent salary negotiation. It’s to make sure the negotiation happens within a clear framework, where the outcome depends on the demands of the role, not the applicant’s boldness.
Where to go from here?
If you’d like to spar on how your organisation should build job levels and pay ranges that hold up in both recruitment and upcoming regulation, book a demo or a conversation with our experts.
