City AM, on UK Politics, 26 October 2026

3.0out of 10Minor

Healey to ‘increase minimum wage by 3.9 per cent’

Tap a highlight to see why it matters.2 findings

Chancellor John Healey will reportedly hike the minimum wage by nearly four per cent at the Budget, setting the floor for wages for all over 21-year-olds at £13.20 for the next year. Healey is expected to deliver of 3.9 per cent to low-wage workers on Wednesday, according to The Times . However, the increase will also mark the end of the government’s desire to equalise wages for under 21-year-olds with other adults.

The national living wage could rise from £12.71 to £13.20 while the national minimum wage, which applies to younger workers, will also only rise by 3.9 per cent from £10.85 to £11.27. The policy is popular among voters although business chiefs have long warned that extra staff could add to pressures in the jobs market and force them to raise prices. Increases in the minimum wage by former Chancellor Rachel Reeves were cited as a reason for rising unemployment.

The unemployment rate is at 4.7 per cent, rising from around 4.4 per cent in the last two years. Labour’s manifesto promised to end a “discriminatory” minimum wage for young people. The party said it would bring wages in line with the living wage by 2030. The government takes recommendations by the Low Pay Commission, which is an independent body. It sets the commission a mandate on pay increases. Former Prime Minister Rishi Sunak said the quango should be abolished in May.

Healey’s plan to balance risks Business chiefs have said a rapid rise in the minimum wage had deterred bosses from hiring younger people given added costs. The unemployment for those aged between 16 and 24 surpassed 16 per cent for the first time in over a decade. Healey and Andy Burnham have also made solving a crisis among ‘Neets’ , which are young people out of employment, education and training, a top priority. Alan Milburn, whose review on youth joblessness is set to be completed next month, linked a rise in unemployment to additional costs on employers from higher wages in a report over the summer.

The Treasury declined to comment on “speculation”.

Read the original article on cityam.com (opens in a new tab)
What we found (2)

City AM reports The Times's account that John Healey will raise the national living wage by 3.9 per cent and drop the plan to equalise youth rates, and it attributes the core claim. It calls the rise "huge" in its own voice, then says younger workers' pay will "only" rise by the same amount. It gives the employers' case on the youth rate and quotes no union or young worker.

  1. Uses a loaded word

    Minor

    “a huge pay increase”

    Why this matters
    The word "huge" puts the outlet's own verdict on a 3.9 per cent rise.
    The impression it gives
    A reader takes the rise as unusually large.
    The context
    The article's own figures show a rise from £12.71 to £13.20. Two sentences later City AM says younger workers' pay will "only" rise by the same 3.9 per cent, so the outlet calls the same percentage both huge and small.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“will also only rise by 3.9 per cent”

    Show it in the article

  2. One side gets the space

    Minor

    “Kate Nicholls, the chair of UK Hospitality, said equalisation of wages between younger and older workers “would damage job opportunities at entry level” as she welcomed the decision.”

    Why this matters
    City AM gives the only named outside voice on the youth rate decision to the head of an employers' body.
    The impression it gives
    A reader hears only the case that equal youth pay costs jobs. The workers who lose the promised equalisation appear only as figures.
    The context
    The article reports a manifesto promise to end a "discriminatory" youth rate and gives business chiefs and Milburn space to argue against it. No union, young worker or low pay campaigner is quoted on the reversal.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“Business chiefs have said a rapid rise in the minimum wage”
    • Elsewhere in the article“end a “discriminatory” minimum wage for young people”

    Show it in the article

What it gets right

  • “according to The Times”

    City AM names the source of the pre-Budget figure rather than presenting the report as confirmed policy.

  • “The Treasury declined to comment on “speculation”.”

    It reports the Treasury's response, so the reader knows the figure is not officially confirmed.

Spot something we missed? Report this article

More from City AM

  1. 27 OctBudget 2026: Will the real John Healey please stand up? 0.0
  2. 26 OctFarage: ‘Loathsome’ banks should not be hit with new tax0.0
  3. 26 OctHealey’s state pension shield could create ‘messy £200m cliff edge’3.0
  4. 26 OctAndy Burnham doesn’t listen to anyone but himself0.0
  5. 26 OctInstead of nostalgia for industries of the past Andy Burnham should look to the stars0.0

Everything we scored from City AM