Mandatory salary disclosure in UK job adverts means employers will have to state what a job pays in the advertisement itself, instead of hiding the pay behind phrases such as competitive salary or leaving it until late in the hiring process. Prime Minister Andy Burnham announced on 5 November 2026 that the government will make it a legal requirement for all employers to say what you pay, with legislation to be brought forward as soon as possible. It is not the law yet: for now the government is urging firms to publish salaries voluntarily, and on 10 November the Competition and Markets Authority backed the plan in principle, while warning that the rules must be designed carefully so they do not harm competition.

The proposal matters because pay is usually the first thing a jobseeker wants to know and often the last thing an advert reveals. Applying for jobs without knowing the salary wastes applicants' time and can leave them negotiating from a position of ignorance, particularly if they are young, returning to work after a break, or supporting a family. The government argues that putting the pay in the advert will help jobseekers make informed choices, expose unjustified differences in pay, and help close the gender pay gap. Employers, unions and the competition watchdog have all had their say, but the detail of the law, including exactly what must be shown and how it will be enforced, has not yet been published.

What exactly has the government announced?

On 5 November 2026, the Prime Minister told businesses they should publish salaries in job adverts now, rather than wait for a new law to force them to do so. The government is planning to make pay details compulsory in adverts, and says it will bring forward legislation as soon as possible. Burnham framed the change as a matter of basic fairness, saying: Whether you're a young person starting out or a parent trying to support your family, you should know what a job pays before spending your time and effort applying for it.

The announcement followed a Cabinet Office consultation on pay and reducing discrimination, launched in the summer, in which the government says 94 percent of respondents backed greater transparency, including 93 percent of businesses. The government has said it will set out further details on what information will be required and how the legislation will be enforced in due course. It has also made clear the call applies to everyone, including Members of Parliament advertising for staff in their own offices. Asked about parliamentary recruitment, Burnham said the principle would apply completely to MPs too, and that they should act voluntarily before the law changes because it is the right thing to do.

Is it the law yet?

No. There is currently no legal obligation on UK employers to disclose salaries in job advertisements, and no implementation date has been announced. The government has confirmed its intention to legislate, but no bill has been published and the timetable depends on the legislation being brought before Parliament. Until then, the Prime Minister's call for immediate voluntary action is exactly that: a call, not a rule.

That distinction matters for both sides. Jobseekers cannot yet insist on seeing a salary in every advert, and employers who continue to withhold pay details are not breaking the law. What has changed is the direction of travel. The government has committed itself publicly, the competition watchdog has backed the principle, and employers are being encouraged to change their recruitment practices ahead of the proposed legislation rather than scramble when it arrives.

What will employers have to show in adverts?

This is the biggest unanswered question, and the government has not yet said whether a pay range will be enough or whether a single figure will be required. It has not specified which employers or roles are covered, or how compliance will be enforced. Those details are promised in due course, and how they are answered will decide whether the rule changes behaviour or becomes a box-ticking exercise.

The Competition and Markets Authority, responding on 10 November to the Office for Equality and Opportunity's consultation on reform of the equal pay framework, set out two possible designs. The first is a binding minimum salary. The second is a pay range with a binding minimum and an indicative upper bound. The regulator said the government should test both options further as it develops the policy. Its concern is that publishing a specific salary, whether binding or not, could give rival employers a focal point for their offers and so weaken competition between them. It also said the government would need to stop firms using excessively wide pay bands that provide little meaningful information, and proposed that only the bottom of any band be binding.

The warning about wide bands is a real one. Research from the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development, the professional body for human resources, has found that some employers already publish ranges wider than 10,000 pounds. A range that wide may technically satisfy a disclosure rule while telling a candidate very little about what they would actually earn. That is why the definition of an acceptable range, and whether the stated minimum must be honoured, will be central to the final law.

How many job adverts show pay today?

Most do not, or do not do so clearly. Data from the jobs website Adzuna shows that only 51 percent of the adverts on its site in September carried salary information, and that the proportion has been falling in recent years. Adzuna's co-founder Andrew Hunter has said being open about pay should be the norm, not the exception, and argues that employers who put a salary on a job advert attract more applicants, and better-suited ones.

Research from the CIPD paints a similar picture. It found that just 18 percent of employers always publish specific salaries in job advertisements, while only 41 percent consistently disclose salary ranges, leaving many applicants uncertain about potential earnings. The public sector and charities are more likely to reveal pay information than private firms, and pay ranges are more common than specific salaries. The figures help explain why the government believes a legal minimum standard is needed: voluntary practice has not moved far or fast enough on its own.

Why is the government doing this now?

The announcement is explicitly tied to youth employment. The government framed it as part of efforts to reduce the number of young people not in education, employment or training, known as NEET, which stands at nearly one million. Around 13 percent of 16 to 24-year-olds are currently outside employment, education or training. A review of youth inactivity led by former Labour health secretary Alan Milburn is expected to report later this month, with further measures anticipated to help young people enter the workforce.

The reasoning is that applying for jobs without knowing the pay wastes time and discourages people with the least experience of the labour market. Burnham said the current system felt stacked against applicants, and described it as soul destroying for young people to apply for jobs when the salary is not listed and sometimes not even get a reply. Publishing salaries upfront, the government argues, could expose unjustified differences in pay, give workers greater confidence to challenge discrimination, and prevent disagreements over pay escalating into disputes.

There is also an equality argument. The government believes greater transparency could help women challenge discrimination and avoid being disadvantaged when negotiating salaries. Bridget Phillipson, the Minister for Women and Equalities, said mandatory disclosure would help jobseekers assess whether a position offered sufficient financial security and contribute to efforts to reduce the gender pay gap. In her words, what a job pays is rightly at the forefront of people's minds when looking for work, and it shouldn't be a guessing game.

What does the equality watchdog want?

The announcement came a week after the Equality and Human Rights Commission, the UK's equality watchdog, said employees should legally be able to find out what their colleagues are earning. The commission described publishing salaries in job adverts as a positive step, and went further by recommending two additional measures.

The first is pay questionnaires: employers should be required to respond to questionnaires from workers seeking information about colleagues' pay. At present, employers do not have to answer employee requests for salary information about co-workers. The second is a ban on salary-history questions: employers should be prevented from asking about a candidate's current salary when making an offer, to stop a history of discrimination from carrying forward into a new job. Today, UK employers may ask about current earnings, although applicants are under no legal obligation to answer.

These are recommendations from the watchdog, not government policy. But they signal the direction of travel, and a cautious employer will assume that a ban on salary-history questions and stronger pay-information rights could follow the advert requirement. The commission's intervention also shows that the advert rule is part of a wider rethink of the equal pay framework, not a standalone measure.

What are employers and unions saying?

Reaction has been broadly supportive, with practical reservations. The Trades Union Congress, the umbrella organisation representing trade unions in Britain, welcomed the announcement. Its general secretary, Paul Nowak, criticised the widespread use of vague salary descriptions and called for employers to provide clear information about remuneration. The Fawcett Society, a charity campaigning for gender equality, also backed the move. Its chief executive, Penny East, said salary secrecy had disadvantaged women by making it harder to negotiate fairly and challenge unequal pay.

Employers' representatives have been more cautious. Neil Carberry, chief executive of the CIPD, said that giving salary details was a good thing in principle, but that in practice it was more complicated. As he put it, there isn't always a single fixed figure, and employers will want to set pay based on a candidate's skills, experience and potential. He also said that drafting job adverts is best left to good employer practice rather than government regulation.

These objections point to genuine design questions the law will have to answer: how to handle roles where pay depends on experience, how to treat commission or bonus-heavy jobs, and how to avoid forcing a wide, uninformative range. For employers that currently withhold salary information, the change could also require a review of recruitment policies, advertised pay ranges and internal salary structures, since publishing pay information could expose inconsistencies between salaries offered to new recruits and those received by existing employees.

How does the UK plan compare with the EU?

The proposals are similar to measures being introduced in the European Union, where employers must disclose the initial pay or pay range for new roles, either in a published job advert or before an interview. For multinational employers this is significant: a company hiring in both the UK and the EU will soon need a consistent approach that satisfies both regimes, and the simplest route is to adopt the stricter standard across the board rather than maintain different practices by country.

The comparison also shows that the UK is not moving alone. Pay transparency is becoming the expectation across Europe, and the UK's consultation, the equality watchdog's recommendations and the competition watchdog's response all point in the same direction. The employers who will find the transition easiest are those who have already done the unglamorous work: clear pay bands, consistent internal pay, and a recruitment process that does not depend on a candidate's salary history.

Frequently asked questions

Do all UK job adverts have to show a salary now? No. There is no legal requirement yet. The government announced on 5 November 2026 that it will legislate to make salary disclosure compulsory, and is urging employers to publish pay voluntarily in the meantime. No implementation date has been announced.

Will employers have to show a single salary or a range? That has not been decided. The Competition and Markets Authority has suggested two options: a binding minimum salary, or a pay range with a binding minimum and an indicative upper bound. The government has said it will set out what information is required in due course.

Does the plan cover all employers? The government has said the legal requirement will apply to all employers, including parliamentary offices, but the exact scope, including whether any employers or roles are exempt, has not been published. Further details are expected when the legislation is brought forward.

Can an employer still ask what I currently earn? Yes, for now. UK employers may ask about a candidate's current salary, although applicants are under no legal obligation to answer. The Equality and Human Rights Commission has recommended banning salary-history questions, but that is a recommendation, not government policy.

When will the law take effect? No date has been given. The government says it will bring forward legislation as soon as possible, and the competition watchdog has suggested a staged implementation or a post-implementation review to check whether firms respond with excessively wide or standardised bands. Until the bill is published, the only certainty is that the direction is set and employers are being asked to act now.