Pay differences need a defensible assessment of the work and the criteria actually used. Job titles and management levels alone do not establish whether roles are equal or of equal value.
Legal context and practical consequences
Compare duties, responsibility, requirements and working conditions. Formally neutral criteria may disadvantage a protected group, while a difference in pay does not by itself establish every element of a claim. Gather job profiles and documented reasons without giving unnecessary access to sensitive salary data. Individual rights must be assessed under the applicable law; European policy requirements and national implementation should not be treated as identical to every presently enforceable employer obligation.
Preparing the review
Useful documents include policies, process descriptions, contracts and technical specifications where relevant. Distinguish changes required before implementation from issues addressed through clearer responsibilities or documentation. Training and review of actual practice help maintain compliance. A changed system, purpose or organisation may require a new assessment rather than relying indefinitely on an earlier approval.
Four practical examples
Example 1
Two similar roles have different pay. Compare duties and the documented reasons for the difference.
Example 2
A bonus formula disadvantages one group. Assess indirect discrimination and possible justification.
Example 3
A complaint is received after recruitment. Preserve records and examine applicable claim deadlines.
Example 4
A pay review uses sensitive personnel data. Restrict access while providing the information legally required.
Source and further information
Official source · Related employment-law topic
Archive allocation: June 2026. Written and reviewed retrospectively on 13 November 2026. Court decisions retain their actual decision dates.