The question is very relevant. On the one hand, an employee has the right to know whether they are being paid fairly and without discrimination. On the other hand, a specific colleague’s salary is not simply an “internal company news” that can be freely shared with others.
Read more As delegations meet in the US, Israeli forces continue to push into Lebanon
A brief answer from lawyer and mediator Raimonda Joskaudienė: the employer is not obliged and usually does not have the right to disclose specific colleagues’ salaries.
However, this does not mean that the employer can simply respond: “none of your business.”
“The correct answer would be this: the employer does not have to disclose the salary of a specific Jonas, Rūta, or Agnė, but the employee has the right to receive information about the pay system, salary determination criteria, salary ranges for positions, and, according to the new transparent pay regulation, certain comparative data about wages in the same job group,” explained the lawyer.
Why can’t specific amounts just be disclosed?
Because an individual employee’s wage, when linked to a specific person, is personal data. Under GDPR, personal data is any information about an identified or identifiable natural person, and disclosing such data is data processing. Data can only be processed with a lawful basis, adhering to principles of legality, fairness, transparency, and data minimization.
“Therefore, the employer cannot tell the employee:
“Your colleague Rasa earns 2,300 EUR, and Tomas – 2,100 EUR.”
Such a response would be risky from both labor law and personal data protection perspectives.
But the employer can no longer hide behind the phrase “salaries are confidential with us,” – said R. Joskaudienė.
The Labor Code obliges the employer to ensure principles of gender equality and non-discrimination, as well as equal pay for the same or equivalent work. Wages must be determined not based on sympathies, loyalty, or “who negotiated better,” but according to objective criteria: job responsibility, qualifications, work results, competencies, working conditions, and other clear criteria.
Employers must have a pay system. It must specify employee categories by positions and qualifications, forms of payment, minimum and maximum wage amounts, grounds for additional pay, indexing procedures, and the system itself must be designed to avoid discrimination.
“Therefore, an employee has the right to ask not ‘how much does Petras earn?’ but:
“According to what criteria is my salary determined?”
“What salary range is my position assigned to?”
“Why do employees performing the same functions receive different salaries?”
“Are the differences justified by objective criteria?”
These questions are legitimate and justified,” explained R. Joskaudienė.
According to her, it is also very important that Lithuania has already adopted changes for wage transparency, implementing the EU directive on pay transparency into national law. From January 1, 2027, employees will have the right to request in writing from the employer information about their wages and the average hourly and annual wages by gender in the same job group.
According to the lawyer, this means that an employee will not have the right to receive a specific colleague’s salary but will have the right to receive comparative data allowing them to assess whether their pay is not unjustifiably lower than that of employees in the same job group.
“If providing such data could identify a specific employee’s salary, the right to information can be exercised through employee representatives, the State Labor Inspectorate, or the Equal Opportunities Ombudsman’s Office. These institutions will inform the employee whether the average wage difference in the job group exceeds 5 percent,” stated R. Joskaudienė.
Practically, according to her, this means:
The employer is not obliged to disclose specific colleagues’ salaries.
The employer must justify how wages are determined.
The employee has the right to know whether their pay is set according to objective, non-discriminatory criteria.
Pay transparency does not mean public discussion of salaries by name. It means a clear, verifiable, and legally justified pay system.
“This topic is especially important for employers because pay differences that cannot be justified by objective criteria can become not only a reputational but also a legal risk. The adopted amendments to the Labor Code provide that if a violation regarding equal pay for the same or equivalent work is found, the employee may be awarded unpaid wages, payments in kind, material and non-material damages, and compensation for lost work-related opportunities,” said R. Joskaudienė.
Therefore, her practical recommendation to employers is: do not fear transparency, fear chaos.
“If a company does not have clear pay ranges, job groups, criteria for wage increases, and procedures for awarding bonuses and premiums, then every employee question about salary becomes a conflict,” she emphasized.
And when the system is clear, the employee can be answered professionally:
“We cannot disclose specific colleagues’ salaries because they are personal data. However, we can explain which job group your position belongs to, what salary range applies, what criteria determine the salary amount, and how the salary is reviewed.”
According to her, this is the legally correct way: not names, but criteria; not rumors, but a system; not secrets, but justified transparency.
