'Say what you pay': a blunt instrument?

The government plans to make employers publish salaries in job adverts.

Greater transparency is welcome, but reward is multifaced and a proper fix will take more than putting a number on an advertisement. 

The announcement on 5 November commits the government to introducing legislation ‘as soon as possible’. There is no start date yet, and the detailed requirements remain to be settled, but the direction is clear.

Reward is not just a number

“Say what you pay” is a simple message, but it seems to me like a very blunt instruction for a highly complex issue.

There are times when a fixed rate for a particular job is entirely appropriate, but as roles become more complex, the range of relevant skills, experience and responsibilities can widen dramatically. A meaningful salary band can reflect that complexity rather than conceal unfairness.

The more important question is whether the system behind the salary actually paid is fair. How are roles valued? What determines someone’s starting point? How do they progress? If differences can be explained consistently, transparently and honestly, that is surely the aim.

There is no single answer. The CIPD’s 2024 Pay, performance and transparency report notes that salary ranges can conceal more than they reveal, particularly when they are broad and do not explain where a successful candidate is likely to start or how their pay may progress.

Transparency is most useful when employers can explain both how the range is set and what determines progression within it at the outset (i.e. the advert), and as the employee develops.

Younger workers want more than salary

In addition, the makeup of the workforce is changing. Salary matters, but it is only part of the offer. The CIPD’s Good Work Index 2026 identifies pay, pensions and other employee benefits as key elements of job quality, not simply headline earnings. Its Flexible and Hybrid Working Practices in 2025 report also found that 80% of employees said working flexibly had improved their quality of life.

For candidates, the wider package matters: the ability to work from home; flexibility over hours; additional holiday; pension contributions; sick pay and development opportunities are all relevant considerations. A salary figure alone cannot show the full value of a job or whether it will work for a particular individual’s set of circumstances.

The 80% figure relates to flexible working generally, not homeworking alone. The research supports the wider reward argument, but does not rank those individual benefits or establish how much younger workers value them more than salary.

These findings do not make salary unimportant; they show why employers should give thought to and explain the wider offer: flexibility, development, pensions, leave and other benefits, all have a valuable part to play.

What should government support?

Salary disclosure can be a useful starting point, but it should not become a substitute for fair pay structures or a fuller picture of working life.

The government could help employers by signposting useful resources to assist with consistent job evaluation, clear progression and meaningful flexibility, supported by practical guidance that works for businesses of different sizes.

The aspiration for fairer reward is laudable, but it will need more than simply stating salaries in job advertisements.

For advice on what you can do to build a healthier workplace for your business, please contact the Harrison Drury office on 01772 258321 or see further details about our Employment & HR team.

Helen Russell