Pay Transparency Is Coming: Are Your Managers Ready for the Conversations?
Pay transparency is becoming a bigger issue for UK employers.
The Government is consulting on proposals that would require employers to publish pay information in job adverts or provide it to candidates in writing before interview. The consultation also considers wider reforms to pay discrimination protections, employee access to pay information and enforcement. It closes on 27 October 2026, although any resulting changes would be introduced gradually rather than immediately.
For employers, this is about more than changing a recruitment process or meeting new requirements. Publishing a salary range is the easy part. The harder work will be helping managers explain how pay is set, why people may be paid differently and what employees need to do to progress.
Transparency changes the conversation
For years, phrases such as “competitive salary” or “salary dependent on experience” have allowed organisations to remain vague about pay. They give employers room to negotiate, but they give candidates very little information about what the role actually pays or how an offer will be decided.
Vague language can also undermine trust. Candidates may assume the organisation is trying to avoid revealing a low salary. Existing employees may wonder whether new starters are being offered more for similar work. Managers may then find themselves defending decisions they were never equipped to explain.
Pay transparency makes those conversations harder to avoid. It asks organisations to move from:
“It depends on the candidate” to clear criteria for placement within a pay range.
“That is confidential” to an explanation of how pay decisions are made.
“You need more experience” to specific evidence of the skills and responsibilities linked to progression.
“We offer a competitive package” to meaningful information about salary, benefits and development.
That shift can feel uncomfortable. It also gives organisations a chance to look at whether their pay decisions are actually being made consistently.
Explain the range, not just the numbers
A salary range is only useful if people understand what it means.
Managers and recruiters should be able to explain:
The minimum and maximum salary.
The typical point at which someone joins the range.
The skills, experience and responsibilities associated with different points.
How performance and progression are assessed.
How often pay is reviewed.
Whether bonuses, allowances or benefits sit outside the stated range.
Without this context, a range can create a different kind of uncertainty. A candidate may see a role advertised at £40,000 to £55,000 but have no idea what determines an offer of £42,000 rather than £52,000.
Before publishing ranges, employers should agree what determines where someone sits within that range. Otherwise, transparency may expose inconsistent decision-making rather than demonstrate fairness.
A candidate asking about the range might hear:
“The salary range for this role is £40,000 to £50,000. Most people joining at this level start between £42,000 and £45,000, depending on their experience against the role criteria. The top of the range is generally linked to a sustained ability to operate independently and take on the full scope of the role. We can talk through how your experience aligns during the process.”
This is more useful than simply naming a figure. It tells the candidate what the organisation is looking at when deciding where to make an offer.
When an employee asks, “Why am I not at the top?”
This question can make managers defensive, particularly if they hear it as a challenge to their authority. But the employee may simply be asking for a better explanation of how their salary was decided.
The manager should not compare the employee with colleagues or rely on vague judgements about attitude, potential or “fit”. They should explain the criteria used to determine pay and identify what would support progression.
For example:
“That is a fair question. Your current salary reflects your role level and the responsibilities you are currently carrying. The next part of the range is linked to leading projects independently, supporting colleagues and demonstrating consistent performance across the full role requirements. Let’s look together at where you already meet those expectations and agree what development would help you progress.”
This approach does not promise an immediate pay increase. It gives the employee a clearer explanation of how progression works and what they can work towards.
Managers should also be honest when the issue is not performance. If budgets are constrained, the organisation has paused pay progression or the pay structure is being reviewed, employees deserve to know that.
Do not blame previous employers
Greater transparency will also affect how organisations discuss starting salaries.
Some employers have historically based offers on a candidate’s previous salary. That practice can reproduce existing pay inequalities, particularly when candidates are entering a new role from an underpaid position.
A more inclusive approach is to assess the value of the role and the candidate’s experience against a consistent framework. Managers should avoid saying:
“We can only offer £45,000 because you were earning £42,000 before.”
Instead, they could say:
“The range for this role is £45,000 to £52,000. We assess offers against the responsibilities of the role, relevant experience and the skills demonstrated during the process. Your proposed starting salary is £48,000 because of your experience in managing similar projects and working with this type of client.”
This keeps the focus on the role and the evidence, rather than carrying someone’s previous salary into their next job.
Prepare managers before publishing ranges
Organisations should not introduce pay transparency through a new recruitment template alone. Managers need to understand the pay structure and feel prepared to answer questions about it.
Preparation should include:
Training on the pay structure. Managers need to understand salary bands, progression points, allowances, bonuses and exceptions.
Clear decision-making criteria. They should know what evidence supports different salaries and how those criteria are applied.
Conversation practice. Role-play can help managers respond to questions about pay without becoming evasive or defensive.
Escalation routes. Managers should know when to involve HR, reward specialists or employee representatives.
Regular reviews. Organisations should examine whether people doing comparable work are being paid consistently, including across gender, race, disability, contract type and working pattern.
A commitment to listen. Employees need confidence that raising a pay concern will not damage their reputation or career prospects.
A useful principle is: if managers cannot explain a pay decision clearly, it is worth asking whether the decision itself is clear enough.
Acknowledge when a decision needs reviewing
Transparency may reveal inconsistencies that were previously hidden. Managers will not always have every answer immediately. What matters is what they do when a question raises a genuine concern.
A leader might say:
“Thank you for raising this. I cannot give you a complete answer today because I need to review how this decision was made and check that the criteria were applied consistently. I will come back to you by [date] with an update. If we find that the decision was not fair or consistent, we will explain what happens next.”
That response avoids making promises before the facts are known, while making clear that the concern will be looked into properly.
Transparency is a trust practice
The Government’s proposals signal a significant shift in how employers may be expected to communicate about pay. But organisations should not wait for new legislation before improving their approach.
Pay transparency is ultimately about more than salary ranges. It is about whether people understand how their pay is decided, whether progression feels accessible and whether leaders can have honest conversations about money without shutting them down.
The organisations that handle this well will not simply publish figures. They will need managers who can explain those figures, answer difficult questions and recognise when a pay decision needs to be looked at again.
The question is not only whether your organisation is ready to disclose pay. It is whether your managers are ready to talk about it.
Need support getting ready for pay transparency?
Whether you are reviewing your pay structures, preparing managers for conversations about salary or looking at how consistently pay decisions are being made, we can help you work through what needs to change.
At Communicate Inclusively, we support organisations to examine their people practices, strengthen decision-making and equip managers to have more confident conversations about issues that affect employees.
If pay transparency is on your agenda, book a call or get in touch to talk about what support could look like for your organisation.