30.09.2026 | Articles, SAVALnews
Our current legislation already requires equal pay for the same work or work of equal value, unless there is an appropriate and acceptable justification for a difference.
A Government proposal has been submitted for the implementation of the EU Pay Transparency Directive in Finland. The revised legislation is due to enter into force on 1 January 2027. The original entry of the Government Programme under Prime Minister Petteri Orpo already called for the adoption of the Directive at the minimal level. Nevertheless, improvements to the equality legislation will be enacted.
Our current legislation already requires equal pay for the same work or work of equal value, unless there is an appropriate and acceptable justification for a difference. The purpose of the Directive and its implementation is to prevent gender-based pay discrimination in practice by strengthening the requirements for transparency of remuneration.
Employers who employ at least 100 employees on a regular basis would be obliged to report information on any gender pay disparities and to carry out a pay assessment in co-operation with personnel representatives. An employee would have the right, upon request, to receive information in writing on the average wage levels of an employee group doing the same work or work of equal value. This right does not allow the employee to obtain the salary details of a particular person, but rather to receive information concerning a group, as a whole, and an average wage level. Therefore, salary details of an individual worker will not be shared with a colleague, even by request, despite the Pay Transparency Directive often being misinterpreted to mean this. Every employee still has the right, of course, to speak to colleagues about their own wages if they wish.
In addition, the intention is to lay down definitions of gender pay gap and employee groups, as well as to clarify how to identify work of equal value.
The issues mentioned in this paragraph are covered in more detail in an article found in ASIA magazine 2/2025 (see www.asia.fi/uutishuone/palkka-avoimuusdirektiivi-tuo-muutoksia - article in Finnish). To this extent, the Government proposal submitted in the summer of 2026 will not result in any changes. In this article, we will focus on changes to the Gender Equality Act that will be entering into force but that are less discussed.
The amendment of the Gender Equality Act will also improve the position of jobseekers. In the future, the employer must inform jobseekers of the initial pay or pay range of the job in question. The criteria for determining the pay level must be objective and gender neutral. Merely referring to a collective agreement is not sufficient, but the terms and conditions of the collective agreement relating to the determination of pay must be specified when the salary is based on a collective agreement.
The amended law states that pay details must be provided either in the job advertisement, prior to the job interview or in another way, in sufficient time. According to the explanatory memorandum of the law, the details must be provided as early as possible. There is no specific obligation stating that the employer must provide pay information before the job applicant is asked to present their own pay request. However, according to our interpretation, the employer must do so because the purpose of the provision is to ensure an informed and transparent pay negotiation. This purpose is not realised if the job applicant is expected to initiate the discussion.
One new provision will be an express prohibition that prevents the employer from asking a job applicant to share information concerning their pay from current or previous employment relationships.
In some instances, the gender wage gap can already be traced back to the recruitment phase. One example might be a situation in which a woman’s job application does not end up on the stack of applicants who move to the next application phase for a high-paying job, while the application of a man with fewer merits does. For this reason, the law is being amended to prohibit certain actions of the employer during the recruitment process that can be considered discrimination.
If, during the recruitment process, the employer passes over a person who is more merited than the individual of another gender who is selected, this may be a case of prohibited discrimination. This gives rise to a presumption of discrimination, which the employer can refute by demonstrating that the action was due to an acceptable factor unrelated to gender. The employer can also refute the presumption of discrimination by demonstrating a weighty and acceptable reason for their action based on the type of job or task.
Another example of prohibited discrimination is if, during the recruitment process, the employer otherwise acts in such a way that puts an applicant at a disadvantage on the basis of their pregnancy, childbirth or other gender-related factor.
The practical purpose of this amendment is to ensure the possibility of compensation for discrimination occurring during a job application process. In the past, discrimination was prohibited at all stages of recruitment, but the possibility to receive compensation will now also extend to the application process preceding the recruitment decision. In practice, this refers to, for example, the selection of applicants for a job interview or aptitude test.
The purpose of the amendment is also to facilitate proof of discrimination. In terms of the Gender Equality Act, this means that in the future, pay and other working conditions can also be compared between those who have worked at different times for the organisation. Therefore, the object of comparison who has received higher pay does not have to be working at the same time as the individual with the lower pay, i.e. the potentially discriminated person. The object of comparison may be, for example, a predecessor or successor of the discriminated person, or any other person who has done the same or equal work as the potentially discriminated person at a different point in time. It is prohibited pay discrimination if gender is the reason for the lower pay level.
In the future, jobseekers will be better informed about the pay for job positions, improvements will be made to the recruitment process, and it will be easier to prove pay discrimination. These are all steps in the right direction.
The pay of any individual employee will still not be disclosed to colleagues if the individual does not wish that. On the other hand, the justifications for pay differences will be more transparent, comparisons will be easier and possibilities to influence one’s own pay will be improved.
Text Sirpa Leppäluoto, Labour Market Director at ASIA. Photo by Mika Pakarinen / Keksi Agency, Adobe & AI. The article is also available on ASIA membership magazine 03/2026.
Bullying and inappropriate treatment in the workplace: What is workplace bullying? AI does not replace a lawyer