Is Salary Transparency the Future of the UK Legal Market?

Salary transparency is a hot topic at the minute, especially when many employers across Europe are already being pushed to disclose salary ranges, and new rules are expected to come into force that make this a standard practice. 

This raises a fair question for the UK market, particularly within financial services. Should we be heading in the same direction, and if so, what would that look like in practice for lawyers looking to move in-house and financial services legal teams looking to hire?

Where The UK Currently Stands

At the moment, salary transparency in the UK is inconsistent. Some employers include clear ranges within their job adverts, whilst others prefer to keep these discussions until later in the hiring process. As it stands, there is no legal requirement to disclose salary bands upfront, although there has certainly been ongoing discussion around pay gap reporting and fair pay practices. 

The EU’s Pay Transparency Directive, which EU countries are expected to introduce over the next few years, is no doubt going to put increasing pressure on the UK. It requires employers to provide salary ranges in job adverts as well as giving employees greater access to information about pay structures. Whilst the UK is no longer bound by EU law, changes in Europe do still tend to shape expectations here, especially in sectors such as financial services that operate across borders. The European Commission has also made it clear that greater transparency is seen as an important step in tackling pay inequality.

What This Means for Lawyers Moving In-House

For lawyers considering a move into in-house roles within financial services, clearer salary information could be really beneficial. Currently lots of candidates are navigating processes with limited visibility on compensation until relatively late in the recruitment journey, which can lead to frustrating misalignment and wasted time.

Greater transparency would allow candidates to assess potential roles more realistically from the very beginning. It would also make it easier to compare their opportunities across organisations, especially in financial services where bonuses and benefits can vary significantly.

There is a downside though. When salary ranges are set out clearly, there is usually less room to negotiate beyond them. Companies would also need to keep pay consistent internally, which would limit how flexible they can be when making offers.

Employers are unlikely to put full benefits and bonus details on job adverts either, meaning that a lawyer might dismiss a lower paid position without knowing that it comes with an excellent benefits such as pension, holiday and equity. The details of any discretionary bonus wouldn’t be published and with bonuses in financial services varying from none to 50% and more this is something that most lawyers would want to consider.

The Recruiter and Client Perspective

For recruiters, salary transparency can simplify some parts of the process while complicating others. Clear salary bands can reduce the number of unsuitable applications, help set expectations early, and reduce the risk of deals falling through at the offer stage. However, assessing candidate suitability is part of our role as a recruiter and in many ways, we would prefer to do this than miss a star candidate by reducing the interest, especially in today’s market.

Salary transparency can also reduce flexibility. Recruiters often work with clients who want to adjust their offers depending on the person they hire. Fixed salary bands can make it harder to reflect differences in experience or specialist skills, particularly in specialist legal roles. 

From a client perspective, transparency requires salary bands to be well thought through and internally consistent. This can be helpful, as it encourages organisations to review how they benchmark roles and reward performance, but it can also bring inconsistencies to light that then need to be addressed. Longer term, this can only help to close pay gaps, which is what the EU directive is required to do.

For lawyers moving into financial services from private practice there is an added complication. Law is one of very few vocations where people regularly choose to move to a different industry (in this case financial services) and expect to take a pay cut.  Private practice lawyers rarely know what level of salary to expect on moving in-house when they come to us and their expectations change as they come to understand the market. But for some, when they are taking such a huge hit on base salary anyway, they normally still won’t want to discount opportunities if they have no set financial demands. It also further complicates things if they are considering multiple industries.

Should The UK Follow The EU?

There is a strong argument that the UK will move in this direction, even if not immediately through legislation, because candidates are increasingly reluctant to engage with roles that lack basic information on pay.

That said, a full move to mandatory transparency is not guaranteed, especially in sectors that value discretion around compensation. Financial services firms might also be a fair bit slower to adopt a uniform approach, given the complexity of their reward structures. 

A gradual change is the most likely prediction, with more organisations beginning to publish their salary ranges, either to remain competitive in hiring or to align with international standards. For lawyers exploring in-house roles, that could mean a much more straightforward process. For clients, it may require a bit more work at the outset, but it should simplify the hiring process over time.

Jul 2026