Employers should be banned from asking job applicants about their previous salaries or pay expectations to prevent existing pay discrimination from following workers into new jobs, Britain’s equality watchdog has said.
The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) wants the government to go further than its proposed reforms requiring employers to disclose salary information in job advertisements. It argues that allowing recruiters to base offers on previous earnings can perpetuate inequalities, particularly among workers who have historically been underpaid.
The recommendation comes as ministers consider changes to equal pay legislation intended to make discrimination easier to identify and challenge. Research by the Fawcett Society, a gender equality charity, found that 58 percent of women and 54 percent of men felt that questions about their previous earnings had resulted in them being offered lower wages.
Mary-Ann Stephenson, chairwoman of the EHRC, told The Times that the existing equal pay system was too complicated and difficult for workers to navigate. She welcomed the government’s proposals on salary transparency but said they needed to be strengthened to prevent discriminatory pay practices from continuing when employees change jobs.
Employers urged to abandon salary history questions
Stephenson said publishing salaries in job advertisements was a positive development but that employers should no longer be permitted to ask candidates about their previous earnings or salary expectations.
“Publishing salaries in job adverts is a positive step. But employers should not be allowed to ask about candidates’ salary history or expectations, which can result in existing inequalities being carried into a new role,” she said.
The recommendation follows a government consultation launched in July on reforms to the equal pay framework in England, Scotland and Wales. Ministers have proposed requiring employers to publish pay information in job advertisements or provide it in writing before interviews where no advertisement has been placed.
The consultation also considers introducing a statutory pay questionnaire, which would allow employees to request information about possible discrimination before bringing legal proceedings. The EHRC wants employers to be legally required to respond, arguing that workers need timely access to information if they are to establish whether they have been treated unfairly.
Previous salaries can perpetuate pay inequality
Kim Wright, legal director in the employment team at UK law firm Birketts LLP, told HRreview that using previous earnings to determine salary offers could leave workers at a disadvantage throughout their careers.
“What someone was paid by a previous employer should not determine what they are worth to the next one. If someone has historically been underpaid, starting negotiations with their current salary risks that disadvantage simply following them from job to job.
“We have already seen similar bans introduced in parts of the US and the early evidence is encouraging. Research looking at what happened after the changes found that people moving jobs saw pay increase, with women and non-white workers seeing some of the biggest gains.”
Research published in The Journal of Economic Inequality in 2024 examined the effects of salary history bans introduced in several US states. It found that employers were more likely to advertise salary information following the restrictions and that workers changing jobs experienced higher pay.
The researchers found particularly strong increases among women and non-white workers, whose earnings rose by 6.2 percent and 5.8 percent respectively compared with comparable workers in states without such bans. The study also found no evidence of adverse employer reactions in the short term.
Higher earners could lose negotiating advantage
Wright acknowledged that removing salary history from recruitment negotiations would not necessarily benefit every applicant. Employees who already command particularly high salaries may currently be able to use those earnings to negotiate more generous packages when changing jobs.
“That does not mean the change will advantage everyone. Someone who is already particularly well paid may currently be able to use that salary as leverage when negotiating their next move. Removing salary history from the conversation could take away some of that advantage.
“For me, that does not undermine the case for change. A level playing field does not necessarily mean everyone gets paid more. It means an employer looks at the job, the skills and experience needed and what the individual brings and decides what that is worth. It should not depend on whether someone happens to come into the negotiation from a position of historically high or low pay.”
She said employers could use the proposed restrictions to reconsider how they determine salaries, placing greater emphasis on the responsibilities of individual positions and the skills and experience required rather than applicants’ previous remuneration.
“There is a cultural opportunity in this too. Pay is one of the clearest ways an organisation shows how it values its people. Moving away from salary history gives employers an opportunity to demonstrate that they are prepared to pay people for the role they are doing and the value they bring, rather than perpetuating someone else’s assessment of their worth.”
Watchdog calls for stronger enforcement powers
The EHRC has also called for greater powers to enforce equal pay legislation, including a legal requirement for employers to respond to requests for information about potential discrimination. The watchdog believes the proposed statutory questionnaire could help resolve disputes earlier, reducing the need for lengthy and expensive employment tribunal proceedings.
The government is considering establishing an Equal Pay Regulation and Enforcement Unit to improve compliance with existing legislation. The EHRC has argued that it would be the most appropriate organisation to host the unit because of its expertise in equality law, although it has warned that additional funding would be necessary.
More than 10,000 equal pay claims are brought to employment tribunals each year on average, according to figures reported by The Times, with some disputes taking more than a decade to resolve. The government’s consultation acknowledges that the current system has become complex and costly for both employers and employees.
William Furney is a Managing Editor at Black and White Trading Ltd based in Kingston upon Hull, UK. His writing focuses on contemporary employment issues including pension schemes, employee health, financial struggles affecting workers and broader workplace trends.
- William Furney
- William Furney
- William Furney
- William Furney
