“Most public discourse has focused on these very specific requirements, employee rights, and the many complex obligations of employers, but perhaps too little on the opportunities this EU Pay Transparency Directive still brings us. Opportunities that I see as providing long-term added value to accompany us as employers, and which I hope we will all benefit from, of course, if we address this directive from a mature and professional perspective,” Florina Andra Ilie, Senior Manager, HR & ESG Advisory, Forvis Mazars said during Work Compass HR Conference organized by The Diplomat-Bucharest.

“It is very important to align easily with the main changes brought by the pay transparency directive, and I would start with the main objective, which is reducing unjustified pay gaps and increasing equity in organizations. I would recommend reading each specific requirement in the directive from this perspective and it is always important to anchor ourselves in this objective.”

Key statements:

• You probably know that all EU member states must transpose this directive by June 7, 2026, so we don’t have much time left before it comes into force. What does it mean for it to come into force? First, all organizations must comply with the transparency requirements and ensure equitable remuneration systems.
• All companies, regardless of organization size, whether small or large companies with 10 employees, must respect these employee rights, and it doesn’t matter if we are public or private sector companies. Reporting is mandatory for companies with over 150 employees starting in 2027, for data from 2026.
• Here we are talking about real pay gap indicators between men and women and other related indicators. Companies with 100 to 150 employees will probably have to report starting in 2031 for 2030 data. If we are not required to report, it doesn’t mean we shouldn’t measure internally. Because we do need to prove we have equitable systems; we still need to disclose some of these indicators to our own employees. So, we certainly need to monitor ourselves and perform these calculations.
• On March 30, the first draft of this directive was transposed into national legislation. So, we have a draft law that we can review, look at all the details, and I can tell you it is very aligned with the directive and its requirements. Now we have 10 days to submit comments, observations, questions, after which they will probably be integrated, and we will have a final draft based on which we all certainly need to make changes to our internal remuneration system.
• As for key implications for organizations, we are talking about pre-employment transparency. Candidates have access to the salary level or range for the targeted position before the interview. It remains our decision whether we want to publish these details in the job ad or simply send them in writing before the interview.
• Then we have employees’ right to information. Employees can request information about their salary level compared to other similar roles and about the award criteria. Here we are talking about salary placement criteria, bonus criteria, salary increase criteria, and promotion criteria. We must ensure we have these criteria, that they are documented, disclosed, and understood by all our employees.
• And finally, reporting and accountability. As I mentioned earlier, organizations must measure and explain gender pay differences greater than 5%, including work of equal value. This introduces an element of complexity: how we evaluate and measure this work of equal value.
• From public discussions and our talks with each organization, we observe several fears. One is that we have another bureaucratic exercise of legal compliance that doesn’t help us much; we just have to put in a lot of effort as employers. Another is that it will create internal tensions. Many employees think they will learn their colleagues’ salaries. That’s not the case; we need to clarify this. As employers, we will continue to respect GDPR clauses.
• Another fear is that costs will rise. Who knows what corrections need to be made, how much documentation and bureaucracy, who knows, any effort in this area is indirectly a cost. However, the perspective from which we view this directive is very important. Namely, that it doesn’t create new problems; it exposes old ones. The principle of equal equity has existed in Romanian legislation for many years, just as it has at the EU level. We just need to ensure we pay equitably, but what we lack—and what this directive brings—is a monitoring mechanism, a way for us to prove we do this seriously.
• This directive is a test of real, not declarative, equity. We must justify and prove it. It is a test of managerial maturity, because ultimately, HR can provide a framework, a process, procedures, principles. But it is up to managers to apply them consistently in organizations.
• In addition, the directive is a test of alignment between values and practices. So, I would say that in essence, the directive is an internal audit of organizational equity and coherence from which we won’t escape, and my recommendation is to initiate it as early as possible because it will bring us long-term benefits within our organization and competitiveness in the market.
• I would like to emphasize the central element behind this equity principle, namely the remuneration system. If we ensure we have a mature remuneration system aligned with best practices, we resolve 80% of everything this directive entails.