Average gender pay gap for jobs of equal value
Measurement answer
What this metric measures
Compares average gross hourly earnings of women and men performing jobs assessed as equal in value and expresses the gap as a percentage of average male gross hourly earnings.
Specification
Metric specification
- Result format
- Single value
- Unit
- Average equal-value gender pay gap (%)
- Reporting basis
- Reporting period
- Aggregation
- Never average published gaps; recompute only from compatible earnings and employee populations within the same equal-value job grouping, currency and period.
- Pillar
- Social
- Topic
- Equal pay and fair work
- Controlled domain
- Workforce
- Entity type
- Metric
Reporting boundary
Employees in jobs assessed as equal in value under the declared job-evaluation method, pay-element definition, entity boundary, currency treatment and reporting period.
Cross-library identity
Library mappings and variants
These links compare quantity, population, boundary, period, unit, denominator, aggregation, dimensions, and method edition. Partial relationships are navigation aids only and never authorize observation reuse.
- Population or boundary subset relationshipPartial relationship; observations remain separate.Gender pay gap — S1-16
Verified source occurrences
Framework coverage
This is one canonical metric. The bindings below show every verified framework occurrence without creating duplicate metric pages. Edition, disclosure, role, and relationship remain source-specific.
- Adopting DisclosureESRS S1
European Sustainability Reporting Standards
- Publisher
- EFRAG
- Edition
- Taxonomy entry point dated 22 December 2023; package published 30 August 2024
- Requirement
- Not Specified
- Relationship
- Broader Than
- Mapping outcome
- Cross Library Link
- Source locator
- ESRS S1; S1-16; paragraph 97; datapoint S1-16_01; taxonomy concept esrs_GenderPayGap
- Adopting DisclosureSource evidence
UN Global Compact Communication on Progress
- Publisher
- United Nations Global Compact
- Edition
- 2026 Communication on Progress Questionnaire and Guidebook, effective 2026
- Requirement
- Not Specified
- Relationship
- Defines Disclosure
- Mapping outcome
- Direct Evidence
- Source locator
- HR/L6, PDF page 29; Guidebook PDF page 38
- Adopting Disclosurehrl6-equal-value-average-gender-pay-gap
UN Global Compact Communication on Progress
- Publisher
- United Nations Global Compact
- Edition
- 2026 Communication on Progress Questionnaire and Guidebook, effective 2026
- Requirement
- Conditional
- Relationship
- Maps Source Identity
- Mapping outcome
- Published
- Source locator
- 2026 CoP Questionnaire PDF page 29, HR/L6; Guidebook PDF page 38
Value structure
Dimensions and units
- Unit
- Average equal-value gender pay gap (%)
- Reporting basis
- Reporting period
Unit meaning: The difference between average male and average female gross hourly earnings for jobs of equal value, divided by average male gross hourly earnings and multiplied by 100.
Table fields and units
- Equal-value job group
- Average male gross hourly earnings
- Average female gross hourly earnings
- Average equal-value gender pay gap (%)
- Population, period and method
Published dimensions
- Equal-value job group and job-evaluation method
- Employee population and organizational boundary
- Source-native women and men categories
- Gross hourly earnings components and currency
- Reporting period and privacy suppression
Calculation method
Formula information
- Status
- Specified
- Formula type
- Percentage
Formula
equal_value_gender_pay_gap_percent = ((mean_male_hourly_earnings - mean_female_hourly_earnings) / mean_male_hourly_earnings) * 100Apply the formula only within the same jobs-of-equal-value population, earnings definition, currency and reporting period.
Variables
| Symbol | Variable | Definition | Unit |
|---|---|---|---|
mean_male_hourly_earnings | average male gross hourly earnings | Average gross hourly earnings of men in the equal-value job population. | [ISO currency] per hour |
mean_female_hourly_earnings | average female gross hourly earnings | Average gross hourly earnings of women in the equal-value job population. | [ISO currency] per hour |
Verified sources
Evidence and status sources
Sustopedia checked each record-specific claim directly against primary publisher material. Labels distinguish current measurement authority from future compatibility and corroborative, legal, edition, or method status context. Corroborative evidence can support a stated limitation but cannot establish the core measurement by itself.
Measurement evidence
- Measurement evidenceChecked 1 September 2026
2026 Communication on Progress Questionnaire
- Publisher
- United Nations Global Compact
- Edition
- 2026 Communication on Progress Questionnaire and Guidebook, effective 2026
- Locator
- HR/L6, PDF page 29; Guidebook PDF page 38
Supports: The 2026 CoP specifies the average gender pay-gap formula and requires the earnings comparison to use jobs of equal value.
Open official source
Use with context
Interpretation boundaries
Method disclosures required
Source-edition basis: 2026 Communication on Progress Questionnaire and Guidebook, effective 2026
- Equal-value job assessment and employee population
- Gross hourly earnings components, currency and working-time treatment
- Women and men category definitions and missing-category treatment
- Zero-comparator, privacy-suppression and rounding rules
- Reporting period, source edition and assurance status
Record-specific limitations
- The result is method-sensitive to job evaluation, pay components, population and currency treatment.
- A zero or small gap does not establish equal-pay compliance or absence of individual pay discrimination.
- Small cohorts require privacy-aware suppression and can produce unstable averages.
Interpret this metric with the stated reporting boundary, period convention, value shape, and unit. Results prepared with different boundaries or conventions may not be directly comparable.
Measurement evidence supports the core record-specific claims described above. Corroborative evidence can support limitations, while compatibility and status sources provide their separately labelled context. None of these cards by itself determines an organisation's legal applicability, filing readiness, assurance status, or compliance conclusion.