logo
Why Labour's plan to expose everyone's pay is bad news

Why Labour's plan to expose everyone's pay is bad news

Telegraph01-07-2025
When Pimlico Plumbers' staff revealed their salaries to each other for a reality TV show in 2012, it turned things upside down.Colleagues had assumed people doing the same jobs would be paid the same, but that wasn't the case at all. The exercise revealed pay discrepancies of up to £9,000.
To restore order, managing director Charlie Mullins had to reluctantly agree to foot the bill for pay rises.
'It cost me a few quid once people found out what their colleagues were making. I had to put more money into the wages pot, and we did uncover some huge pay differences between people doing similar jobs. There was even a spectacular resignation from one guy who didn't get a pay rise,' recalls Mullins, who sold the business in 2021 and launched home repairs service WeFix last year.
This social experiment may be about to take place in workplaces across Britain. Labour may force employers to publish salary bands, and make pay information available to employees.
The idea is that by requiring employers to be more open about pay structures, salary ranges, and progression criteria, it becomes easier to identify and correct inequalities where people are doing the same or similar jobs.
But this could have side effects, experts suggest, such as forcing business owners to hand out pay rises they can't afford, sparking resentment among colleagues and even pushing down high earners' salaries.
Mullins believes salary transparency laws are really about the Government 'meddling' in how businesses are run.
'I'm all for transparency,' he says. 'But this government has no clue about running a business, so they should leave well alone.'
Nearly half of employers now anticipate they will have to stump up for unexpected pay rises as a result of the Government's proposed changes, with 60pc expecting more requests for pay negotiations, according to a survey by HR and financial advisory WTW.
Nyree Ambarchian, who runs communications agency Jack & Grace, introduced a transparent pay system in 2022. But she hadn't anticipated that this would lead to the company paying some of its staff more. She had to offer a higher salary to a prospective employee to match her previous one, but that had a knock-on effect.
'It wasn't just that person we needed to worry about, because we already employed somebody at exactly the same level,' she adds. 'So in making that hiring decision, the real cost to us wasn't just the extra that new person was looking for, but also the uplift in an existing member's pay.'
Wages getting pushed up like this is an added burden for small businesses that are already feeling a huge crunch. From April this year, employers began paying National Insurance contributions at a higher rate of 15pc, starting at a lower threshold, while the minimum wage for those aged over 21 was increased.
Environmental consultancy Tyler Grange introduced a fully transparent salary structure last year for its 85 employees. As a result of the process, the company had to give out a number of additional pay rises, says managing director Jon Berry.
'It was often as an inconsequential result of someone joining us from another organisation or because we'd needed to attract a key recruit within a highly competitive market,' Berry explains. He says that introducing salary transparency cost the business around £30,000.
Despite the unscheduled pay rises, Berry believes going transparent has made the recruitment process more streamlined as salary expectations are clear. Current team members know what they need to do to get promoted and what future salaries might look like. In Ambarchian's case, the agency conducts yearly reviews and has funds put aside for when unique situations arise.
Mullins says of his experiment: 'At times I wished I'd never given the go-ahead for the project, but things settled down after a few weeks, and I think once everything was out in the open, the company was better for the transparency. People stopped being suspicious of how much their mate at the next desk was making.'
Lost talent and lower wages
Yet, having transparent salaries can cause confusion and create resentment if bosses don't properly communicate, says Justine Woolf, of Innecto Reward Consulting.
For example, an employer can publicise that a role falls into a certain salary bracket, but employees don't always understand why they are paid an exact amount within the band, and are frustrated when they don't move up.
'Say the salary band for a role is £30,000 to £50,000. The market rate for your job might be £35,000, but a high performer in the same band might earn £45,000. Employers don't always clearly explain the difference. This can lead to a feeling of unfairness,' says Woolf.
In the US, where 15 of its 50 states have mandated some form of salary disclosure, organisations have lost talent, and wages of some high earners have actually fallen. For example, a law in California introduced in 2010 requiring municipal salaries to be posted online led to a 7pc drop in salaries for top managers, and a 75pc increase in the resignation rate, according to the US National Bureau of Economic Research.
For others it could mean their salaries increase at a slower rate. In 2006, Denmark began requiring companies to be transparent about pay bands, leading to a reduction in the gender pay gap – at the expense of salary increases for men.
High performers can also be impacted when salary transparency prompts an employer to pay two people a similar rate to avoid conflict, even if one deserves more, according to a study published in Nature Human Behaviour, a journal.
'People could become demotivated if they feel, 'I've put in all that effort, and I've got very little return in terms of internal movement. Am I really valued for my contribution?'' says Woolf. 'And that's when people will start to think about going elsewhere.'
Lee Holmes, chief of NFINOX Global, which has transparent salary bands, predicts that the rise of salary transparency will spotlight the disproportionate number of people in the finance industry earning unexplainably high salaries. It could see many of them jump ship to protect those large figures, rather than risk a pay cut.
London-based Holmes believes that transparency shouldn't hold genuinely high performers back. Companies which set salary bands and make them known across the company should still reward people based on what they've achieved rather than what a salary band dictates, he says.
He has suffered from this himself, he adds. 'I was once doing a job that encompassed four or five different roles, and when I asked for more money to reflect that, I was told that my job title was linked to a certain salary, and that was it.' He left that role not long after.
Holmes' observation overall is that it is often the most vocal people who end up on higher pay, whereas those who quietly get on with their job often don't get recognised.
'I do think that once [salary transparency] comes out these people will get found out, and if they do, then great,' he says. 'It creates a better working environment for everyone else.'
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

New ‘integrated regulator' should replace Ofwat and drive ‘fundamental reform' of the water sector, review finds
New ‘integrated regulator' should replace Ofwat and drive ‘fundamental reform' of the water sector, review finds

The Guardian

time28 minutes ago

  • The Guardian

New ‘integrated regulator' should replace Ofwat and drive ‘fundamental reform' of the water sector, review finds

Update: Date: 2025-07-21T05:56:48.000Z Title: Commission recommends new integrated water regulators to replace Ofwat Content: One of the Independent Water Commission's most important recommendations is the creation of a new integrated water regulator for the sector in England, and a single water regulator in Wales. These new body would replace Ofwat, the criticised regulator which the Guardian reported on Friday was to be abolished. The new integrated regulator in England would combine the functions of Ofwat, the Drinking Water Inspectorate, as well as taking on the water functions from the Environment Agency and Natural England. The commission says this could 'significantly strenthen' oversight of water companies, arguing: A single regulator would be able to oversee all operations of a water company from all angles and come to a 'whole firm view' of performance issues and compliance failures – some of which may interrelate and may not have been adequately understood in the current model, where cooperation between regulators is limited. This could deliver greater accountability in the regulatory framework with one organisation and one board responsible and accountable for the outcomes of the sector. It could also mean 'more joined-up approach to regulation overall', allowing issues to be tackled faster and more effectively. There would also be increased accountability for delivery, as well as reduced regulatory burden by simplifying water company and stakeholder interactions with regulatory bodies, the Commission suggests. A more joined-up, coherent and streamlined approach to regulation could also benefit investor confidence, the Commission suggests, adding: Although a merger inevitably presents uncertainty in the short-term, in the long-term it should create greater stability overall for the regulatory system – establishing the clear and objective conditions necessary to attract investment. Update: Date: 2025-07-21T05:55:52.000Z Title: Introduction: Independent Water Commission pushes for 'fundamental reform' Content: Good morning, and welcome to our rolling coverage of business, the financial markets and the world economy. England and Wales's water industry requires 'fundamental reform' to address the problems that have dogged the sector, a new review has found. A new official report into the water sector, just released, is recommending a swathe of new meaasures, including new regional water authorities with responsibility for 'integrated and holistic water system planning'. The Independent Water Commission has found that a fundamental 'reset' of the water sector is needed, to raise standards across the industry, in a 465-page report which just landed. Sir Jon Cunliffe, the former civil servant and central banker who led the Commission, is warning this morning that 'no single, simple change' will fix the water industry, which has been beset by under-investment, rising pollution incidents, soaring customers billd and meaty shareholder payouts. Cunliffe says: This sector requires fundamental reform on all sides – how we manage the demands on water, how the system is regulated, how companies are governed and how we manage the critical infrastructure on which we all rely. He also calls for 'a long-term, cross-sector strategy for water', explaining: It may sound academic, but it is profoundly important. A clear set of national priorities for water – covering the water industry, agriculture, land-use, energy, transport, housing development – is essential. Without it, we will continue to be dogged by inconsistency, short termism, unintended consequences and risk willing the ends without ever fully understanding the means required. Cunliffe's report has 88 recommendations in total, which include: a long-term, cross-sector strategy for water. the modernisation of the legal framework for water regulatory changes, including a new integrated regulator for water greater transparency in areas such as operator self-monitoring and scrutiny of water company reporting the introduction of a single social tariff, to improve affordability and customer service Changes to the economic regulation of water companies, including 'a company-specific supervisory function' that would feed into the current price review structure New national resilience standards for infrastructure, to help guarantee the maintainance of underground pipes and other water and wastewater assets

New Tesla Model Y squares up to Skoda Enyaq in family EV showdown!
New Tesla Model Y squares up to Skoda Enyaq in family EV showdown!

Auto Car

time30 minutes ago

  • Auto Car

New Tesla Model Y squares up to Skoda Enyaq in family EV showdown!

Open gallery Model Y or Enyaq - which takes the family EV crown? Quick steering and a more rear-biased drive set-up make the Tesla seem agile Minimalist Tesla interior feels solidly built overall and provides good space Skoda's front end will tend to run wide of the apex if you push hard Skoda's cabin creates a slightly more upmarket ambience and is roomy Close Tesla's in a spot of bother. Its sales across Europe have dropped and profits have taken an even more vertiginous slump. Adding to its woes was the recent news that it was forced to issue its eighth (yes, you read that right) recall of its cubist Cybertruck, this time to remedy its propensity for shedding stainless steel bodywork. So what's going on? If you look at many of the headlines, the finger points directly at the company's controversialist CEO, Elon Musk. His appetite for attracting attention of the wrong kind certainly hasn't helped lure customers into showrooms – although it has created a cottage industry in 'not in my name' bumper stickers – but as ever the answer is, well, more complicated than that. For starters, there's the current tariff situation. Then there's the fact that Tesla is actually more of a tech company than a car firm, which brings its own challenges. Like a smartphone manufacturer, it's all about the software, and in this respect it's one of the best in the business, streets ahead of the legacy brands (and that also includes its understanding of battery chemistry). Yet this means it doesn't follow some of the tried and tested methods of the established practitioners, such as model cycles that include visually appealing mid-life refreshes designed to persuade people to part with their cash for cars that might otherwise be getting close to their sell-by date. By contrast, Tesla's line-up comes across visually as a bit old hat, as if the company has been peddling the same, unchanged product from day one. The recent Model 3 'Highland' is a case in point. It's a thoroughly overhauled car, but to the casual observer it could just as easily be the 2017 original. The same can be said of the Model S and Model X, which have both benefited from top to bottom technical titivation but are indistinguishable from their decade-old progenitors. However, the stakes are higher for the Model Y, which is the brand's best-seller and until very recently topped the sales charts across Europe. As a result, Tesla has taken a leaf out of rivals' books and delivered a facelift that will leave buyers in no doubt this is a box-fresh proposition. Speaking of which, the Tesla isn't the only family-sized all-electric EV to have gone under the knife. The Skoda Enyaq Coupé (and its more sensible SUV sibling) has always been one of our favourite protagonists in this corner of the market, and five years on from its debut the Czech machine has been treated to the industry-standard nip and tuck. Looks are clearly subjective but, to our eyes, Tesla's tweaks are more eye-catching. You can see the DNA of the original car between the A- and C-pillars, but at the front there's a Cybertruck-inspired nose complete with a pencil-thin LED light bar, while the rear features a neat-looking, indirectly lit, full-width tail-light. By contrast, Skoda has grafted its bold new 'Tech-Deck' nose onto the Enyaq, but the rest of the car's appearance has been left largely untouched. It's a similar story inside, where the Skoda looks and feels very much the same as the old car. There's a revised 13in infotainment screen that looks slicker and responds more swiftly but otherwise it's business as usual. This means that, unlike in the Model Y, you do get some handy physical shortcut keys and a separate display ahead of the driver for speed and range information. As ever, the Tesla's dashboard is dominated by its centrally mounted infotainment screen, which literally controls all of the car's major functions (although, unlike in the Model 3, there is an actual column stalk for the indicators. Hallelujah!). Still, the set-up is one of the best around, proving a doddle to navigate and always responding crisply to your demands. It's sufficiently good that you almost don't miss the odd button or two. With its greater mix of rich materials and more complex dashboard and door mouldings, the Skoda's cabin looks a little more upmarket than the Model Y's, but in terms of touchy-feely perceived quality, there's little to separate the two. In fact, it's the uplift in solidity that you notice most in the starkly minimalist cabin of the Tesla. There are still some areas of the car that look a little hand-finished – the cheap LED spotlight in the boot and the thin fabric covering the A-pillar-mounted tweeters – but overall the Model Y is full of appealing materials and exhibits a tight fit and finish. The Tesla also scores strongly for space and versatility, which is surely one of the biggest considerations with cars like these. There's a large load area with plenty of underfloor storage compartments, plus the trademark 117-litre frunk. (The Skoda's bonnet lifts to reveal various EV ancillaries but no space for luggage overspill from its 570-litre boot.)Rear occupants in the Model Y also have plenty of head and leg room, while a powered reclining backrest and completely flat floor add to the feeling of comfort. What's more, the addition of a small touchscreen now allows occupants to adjust the temperature and switch on their heated seats without having to issue orders to the driver. Up front, the sense of space is enhanced by the low scuttle and large windscreen, which helps deliver a more panoramic view of the road than in the Skoda. However, this Sportline-trim Enyaq hits back with heavily bolstered front seats that offer greater support. Grab the tape measure and you'll find the Enyaq pretty much matches the Model Y for accommodation. Where the Skoda edges ahead is in those thoughtful details that have become a calling card for the Czech brand, such as the umbrellas secreted in the front doors and the multitude of handy boot dividers, hooks and nets. That said, you're unlikely to run out of room for odds and ends in the Model Y, with its large, carpeted door bins, cupholders galore and a lidded cubby between the front seats that's so deep you'll need to send Lassie for help if you ever fall in. So it's even-stevens for practicality, but what about performance and poise? Once again, our two dual-motor contenders are separated by the width of a Tesla key card, but they go about their business in slightly different ways. If outright urge is your thing, though, the Model Y is a slam-dunk choice. With 375bhp and a lower, 1997kg kerb weight, the Tesla is seriously rapid and feels especially so in Sport mode, when its throttle response is even sharper. The 282bhp Enyaq, with a claimed 0-62mph of 6.7sec, is no slouch but it's left gasping in its rival's wake on a straight road. Throw some corners into the mix and there's less clear air between the two. With its quick, albeit lifeless, steering, the Tesla feels more agile – an impression exaggerated by a rear-biased power delivery that allows you to tighten your cornering line with a dose of throttle. Special mention also has to go to the new brake-by-wire set-up, which offers a firm pedal and plenty of progression. With its slower but better-weighted steering, the Skoda feels a little lazier in its reactions, its narrower-section front tyres gently squealing into safe understeer at the limit. Yet despite its heftier kerb weight, the Enyaq feels better tied down over bumpier stretches of Tarmac, containing body movements more effectively than the Tesla, which can hop and corkscrew a little when pressing on. Traction isn't a problem for either all-wheel-drive vehicle. The Skoda maintains a narrow advantage when it comes to cruising comfort. Both have firm low-speed rides – although the newly softened Tesla is much better here than its predecessor – that calm down at speed, and while each delivers decent refinement, the Enyaq does a marginally better job of isolating you from road and wind noise. You can also tailor the regen brake assistance in each – a first for Tesla – although the Model Y has a more effective one-pedal calibration. As you would expect, both cars have driver aids galore – and you'll be either fine or frustrated with that depending on your point of view. On the plus side, turning off the lane keeping assistance is a doddle in either car and the other systems are as unobtrusive as they get these days. Mind you, because the Model Y uses plenty of cameras (the Enyaq favours radar), its various warnings become increasingly inconsistent as each lens becomes coated with road grime. So we have established that each of these cars is practical, delivers all the performance you're ever likely to need and, while you're unlikely to pick either for a dawn raid on your favourite roads, they both steer and stop with admirable accuracy and agility. Tesla Model Y vs Skoda Enyaq Coupe: Verdict Ultimately, then, it comes down to the numbers – and again the margins are tight, although the more cost-effective contender probably isn't the one you would expect. When it comes to claimed range, the Model Y totes a figure of 364 miles as standard, reduced to 353 miles with the optional wheels of our test car, while the Skoda stretches to 334 miles. Thanks to Tesla's mastery of battery chemistry, motor efficiency and (relatively) lightweight construction methods, the Model Y gets closer to its WLTP numbers in real-world use. Over the course of our test, it delivered an impressive efficiency return of 3.8mpkWh, whereas the Enyaq could manage only 3.4mpkWh. Then there's the thorny issue of cash. In Long Range AWD form, the Tesla's sticker price is £51,990, a scant £1330 more than the Enyaq. Yet nobody turns up to a dealer with a suitcase full of banknotes for cars like these: they plonk down a deposit and finance the rest. Put your pen to a PCP deal and over four years you'll shell out £499 a month for the Model Y and £527 for the Skoda. Again, not that much in it, but there's something significant about Tesla getting one over on a brand famed for delivering value for money. Are these cost savings enough to swing the result in favour of the Model Y? By the tightest of margins, we would say yes. Sure, Tesla has some PR issues bubbling away in the background, but as a spacious, sensible and swift family wagon that packs genuinely innovative engineering, the new Model Y makes a compelling choice. Maybe that will give Elon something to smile about. 1st. Tesla Model Y The revised Tesla Model Y fixes most of its predecessor's flaws yet retains its efficiency, performance and impressive practicality. 2nd. Skoda Enyaq Coupe It's a close-run thing for the Skoda Enyaq, which in facelifted form remains a refined, thoughtfully designed and thoroughly likeable car. Join our WhatsApp community and be the first to read about the latest news and reviews wowing the car world. Our community is the best, easiest and most direct place to tap into the minds of Autocar, and if you join you'll also be treated to unique WhatsApp content. You can leave at any time after joining - check our full privacy policy here. Next Prev In partnership with

'Broken' water industry set to be overhauled - nine key recommendations from landmark report
'Broken' water industry set to be overhauled - nine key recommendations from landmark report

Sky News

time30 minutes ago

  • Sky News

'Broken' water industry set to be overhauled - nine key recommendations from landmark report

The system for regulating water companies in England and Wales should be overhauled and replaced with one single body, a major review of the sector has advised. It has recommended abolishing regulator Ofwat as well as the Drinking Water Inspectorate (DWI), which ensures that public water supplies are safe. The report, which includes 88 recommendations, suggests a new single integrated regulator to replace existing water watchdogs, mandatory water metering, and a social tariff for vulnerable customers. The ability to block companies being taken over and the creation of eight new regional water authorities with another for all of Wales to deliver local priorities, has also been suggested. The review, the largest into the water industry since privatisation in the 1980s, was undertaken by Sir Jon Cunliffe, a career civil servant who oversaw the biggest clean-up of Britain's banking system in the wake of the financial crash. He was coaxed out of retirement by Environment Secretary Steve Reed to lead the Independent Water Commission. • Single integrated water regulators - a single water regulator in England and a single water regulator in Wales. In England, this would replace Ofwat, the Drinking Water Inspectorate and water-environment related functions from the Environment Agency and Natural England • Eight new regional water system planning authorities in England and one national authority in Wales • Greater consumer protection - this includes upgrading the consumer body Consumer Council for Water into an Ombudsman for Water to give stronger protection to customers and a clearer route to resolving complaints • Stronger environmental regulation, including compulsory water meters • Tighter oversight of water company ownership and governance, including new powers for the regulator to block changes in water company ownership • Public health reforms - this aims to better manage public health risks in water, recognising the many people who swim, surf and enjoy other water-based activities • Fundamental reset of economic regulation - including changes to ensure companies are investing in and maintaining assets • Clear strategic direction - a new long-term National Water Strategy should be published by both the UK and Welsh governments with a "minimum horizon of 25 years" • Infrastructure and asset health reforms - including new requirements for companies to map and assess their assets and new resilience standards In a speech responding to Sir Jon's report, Mr Reed is set to describe the water industry as "broken" and welcome the commission's recommendations to ensure "the failures of the past can never happen again". Final recommendations of the commission have been published on Monday morning to clean up the sector and improve public confidence. Major other suggested steps for the government include greater consumer protection by upgrading the Consumer Council for Water into an ombudsman with advocacy duties being transferred to Citizens Advice. Stronger and updated regulations have been proposed by Sir Jon, including compulsory water metering, changes to wholesale tariffs for industrial users and greater water reuse and rainwater harvesting schemes. A social tariff is also recommended. Oversight of companies via the ability to block changes in ownership of water businesses and the addition of "public benefit" clauses in water company licences. To boost company financial resilience, as the UK's biggest provider Thames Water struggles to remain in private ownership, the commission has recommended minimum financial requirements, like banks are subject to. It's hoped this will, in turn, make companies more appealing to potential investors. The public health element of water has been recognised, and senior public health representation has been recommended for regional water planning authorities, as have new laws to address pollutants like forever chemicals and microplastics. A "supervisory" approach has been recommended to intervene before things like pollution occur, rather than penalising the businesses after the event. A long-term, 25-year national water strategy should be published by the UK and Welsh governments, with ministerial priorities given to water firms every five years. Companies should also be required to map and assess their assets and resilience Please refresh the page for the fullest version.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store