Daily Mail, on UK Politics, 27 October 2026

0.0out of 10Nothing found

Bosses should be banned from asking job applicants about their salary history and be forced to reveal current wages, equality watchdog says

No framing issues found.

Employers should not be allowed to ask job applicants what they have previously been paid in interviews, an equality watchdog has said. The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) said bosses must instead reveal how much their current employees earn, amid fears that knowing a worker's salary history can exacerbate existing inequalities. The commission urged the Government to go beyond its existing plan to force companies to list salaries in job adverts – part of a broader overhaul of equal pay laws.

Britain's equality watchdog said banning asking potential new hires about their previous earnings would help stop pay discrimination. It pointed out that knowing previous salaries or pay expectations could allow existing inequalities to follow workers from their old job to their new one. The commission also pointed to research by the Fawcett Society, which found that 58 per cent of women and 54 per cent of men felt that questions about their previous salaries had led to them being offered a lower wage.

The chair of the EHRC said employers should not be allowed to ask about candidates' salary history or expectations Mary-Ann Stephenson, chair of the EHRC, told The Times : 'Unequal and discriminatory pay can fuel inequalities and limit opportunities in many aspects of our lives. 'But the current equal pay system is too complex and is often difficult for people to navigate. These reforms are an opportunity to make the system better for both workers and employers. '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.' The EHCR's recommendations came after a government consultation in July on reforms intended to make it easier to identify and challenge unequal pay. Ministers' current plans to improve the system include requiring all employers to detail salary information in public job listings, or provide the information in writing before an interview if no advert has been placed.

Also among the proposals is a new enforcement unit, and changes intended to deliver faster pay dispute resolutions. The EHRC, however, said the proposals needed strengthening, calling for legal backing to enforce a new statutory pay questionnaire, which would allow workers to obtain information about possible discrimination before taking legal action. Ms Stephenson pointed out that the proposed questionnaire would only make a difference if employers are required to respond.

The EHRC also said it would be the best body to house the proposed new Equal Pay Regulation and Enforcement Unit, but warned it would need additional funding to be effective. More than 10,000 equal pay claims on average are brought to employment tribunals each year – and some disputes take over a decade to resolve. The Government consultation in July acknowledged that the system had become overly complex. The Chancellor, John Healey, is expected to outline several new workplace measures in the Budget on Wednesday, including paternity pay for self-employed fathers for the first time.

READ MORE: Bungling Labour backtracks on manifesto vow to equalise minimum wage for under-21s after youth jobs crunch

Read the original article on dailymail.com (opens in a new tab)
About this analysis

The Daily Mail reports the Equality and Human Rights Commission's call to ban employers from asking about salary history and to require them to reveal current pay, and sets it against the Government's existing equal pay proposals. The headline and body attribute each recommendation to the watchdog, and the survey figures are credited to their source. Nothing in the article misleads its reader.

What it gets right

  • “equality watchdog says”

    The headline keeps the attribution. It presents the ban as the watchdog's recommendation, not as the outlet's own position or as settled policy.

  • “research by the Fawcett Society, which found that 58 per cent of women and 54 per cent of men felt that questions about their previous salaries had led to them being offered a lower wage”

    The figures are credited to a named source and described accurately as what respondents felt, not as proven outcomes. Giving both the women's and the men's figures avoids overstating the gap.

  • “The EHRC, however, said the proposals needed strengthening”

    The article separates the Government's existing plans from the watchdog's criticism of them and attributes that criticism clearly.

Spot something we missed? Report this article

More from Daily Mail

  1. 27 OctTwo men are charged with National Security Act offences following RAF Fairford 'terror plot' - as suspect believed to be assisting Iran3.0
  2. 27 OctBungling Labour backtracks on manifesto vow to equalise minimum wage for under-21s after youth jobs crunch6.0
  3. 27 OctQUENTIN LETTS: His policies are as skimpy as his shorts, but after 100 days of watching Andy Burnham up close, this is what I've learned about our Daytime TV Prime Minister6.0
  4. 27 OctDAILY MAIL COMMENT: After 100 days in Downing Street, what exactly has the PM achieved?0.0
  5. 27 OctPM's new foot in mouth Brexit blunder: Two weeks after climbdown over Russia and referendum, No10 spokesman has to row back on Burnham's freedom of movement comments6.0

Everything we scored from Daily Mail