EU Pay Transparency Directive – Worker’s Right to Receive Information

EU countries must implement the regulations of the EU Pay Transparency Directive into local laws by June 7, 2026. The Directive introduces new obligations for employers and rights for workers. This includes workers’ right to receive information regarding pay levels and respective obligations for employers to provide this information. While Germany has not yet transposed the directive into local law, it is one of few countries that already has a similar right in place within its existing legislation. This article outlines the requirements of the right to information following from the EU Pay Transparency Directive and the insights that can be drawn from experience with the German regulation.

Which information will employers need to provide to workers under the EU Pay Transparency Directive?

• Employers must make the criteria (which must be objective and gender-neutral) used to set workers’ pay, pay levels and pay progression easily accessible. The directive provides for the option for EU countries to exempt employers with fewer than 50 workers from making such pay progression criteria accessible to workers.
• Workers have a right to request and receive information about their own pay and the average pay levels broken down by sex for workers doing the same work or work of equal value.
• Employers must provide the information within a reasonable time period (within two months after the request).
• Employers must proactively remind workers annually of this right.

What are the current rules on the right to information in Germany?

Employees have the right to inquire about the criteria used to determine their own pay and the pay of a comparable job, as well as the information on the median pay in the peer group of employees of the opposite sex. Information may be requested regarding the average monthly remuneration and up to two individual remuneration components. The median as a statistical data point is not the same as the average remuneration in the comparison group. The median can be very low or high within the range of salaries depending on the individual case, which is why its informative value with regard to gender-discriminatory remuneration has been criticized in some cases. In the meantime, however, the German Federal Labor Court has determined that a salary below the median of the peer group constitutes an indication of discrimination on the grounds of gender. The employer then has the burden of proof to rebut this presumption. The worker seeking information must name the comparative activity themselves. If, from the employer's point of view, it is not a job of equal value, it must then provide reasons for this and refer to what is considered to be a job of equal value.

What are common pitfalls and what can employers learn from them?

Responsibility and Preparation

By now, the right to information has not received major attention in German companies – neither among employers nor employees. However, when a company is confronted with a request, those prepared have a significant advantage. This includes designating the responsibility to handle such request to a role or team. The responsible person or team should be provided with training, and it is advisable to also prepare a template to answer a request. 

It is also important to consider that in operations with a works council, the works council is generally responsible by default to handle and answer the request – the required data, however, normally must be collected and provided by the employer. Employers have the option to pull back the responsibility of handling and answering requests for information, however. Ideally, employers should consider doing so before receiving the first request is made. Discussing responsibility over an existing request is prone to cause tension with the works council and is time-consuming.

Timing

Having a pre-defined responsibility within the company and maybe even a template can also help with another issue: Under current German law, the request must be answered within three months while the Directive provides for only two months to prepare the response. The entry of the request should be duly noted as well as the deadline to provide the response. Under current German law, missing the deadline can have serious consequences: If either no answer is given or only a grossly incomplete or incorrect answer is given, this will lead to a shift in the burden of proof in favor of the employee. The employer will then have to provide evidence that there is no discrimination on the grounds of gender. Therefore, time is of the essence. As the EU Pay Transparency Directive also provides for easier evidence requirements for workers, we do not expect the German implementation law to be more employer-friendly in this regard.

Further strategic considerations

As mentioned, the request for information has not become a mass phenomenon (yet) in Germany. It appears more frequently as a companion to other requests for information or legal actions. It is particularly popular in dismissal protection claims or disputes about the correct classification in a pay grade. In addition, such requests are often made by works council members, which act as a “test balloon” for other employees. In such cases, the potential impact of such request for information quickly goes beyond the request itself and the employee that has submitted the request. However, a court decision on the question of whether gender-based pay discrimination exists is problematic both in terms of corporate governance and the company's image. Once the burden of proof has shifted to the employer, it becomes more difficult to defend. For this reason, we recommend taking the right to information seriously now and reviewing the company's processes with regard to the implementation of the EU Pay Transparency Directive.