Pay Transparency Is Coming for Insurance. The Question Is: Are You Ready – or Just Hoping to Be?

Pay Transparency Is Coming for Insurance. The Question Is: Are You Ready – or Just Hoping to Be?
April 22, 2026 9 mins

Pay Transparency Is Coming for Insurance. The Question Is: Are You Ready – or Just Hoping to Be?

Pay Transparency is Coming for Insurance

Pay transparency is no longer a future consideration for insurers – it is a fast‑approaching test of governance, data discipline and leadership credibility. While the EU Pay Transparency Directive is the immediate trigger, its implications are global

Key Takeaways
  1. Although the legal obligation currently applies within the EU, pay transparency reflects a broader global shift, and some multinationals are already extending EU‑level standards more widely, driven by consistency, governance and future readiness, not just regulation.
  2. Transparency does not create pay gaps – it exposes them, along with the quality of decision‑making, data and governance that sit behind reward outcomes.
  3. As transparency expands, line managers become the frontline of employee understanding – building HR communications capability early ensures that transparency informs rather than confuses, reinforcing trust and confidence across the workforce.

Most insurers know the EU Pay Transparency Directive is coming. Many are tracking and  planning for it. But far fewer are genuinely ready, and fewer still are using this moment as a strategic advantage rather than a compliance headache. But the latest pulse suggests insurance is mid‑journey – not lagging, but not yet ready to stand behind pay outcomes at the level transparency will demand.

And that matters, because pay transparency is not just another regulatory hurdle to clear – it reflects a broader shift in workforce expectations. In insurance, regulation is also the most consistent catalyst for action. For the insurance sector, like others, it is shaping up to be a stress test of governance, data discipline, leadership credibility, HR operations and how confident organisations really are in the way they reward people. The real question is no longer whether to comply with regulation, but whether they are prepared to explain and stand behind how reward and progression is determined across their organisation.

Aon’s Global Pay Transparency Study for the Insurance Industry, based on responses from 66 global insurers, and the latest pulse survey, make one thing clear: insurers are taking steps, but many are still early in execution, seeing improvements in pockets, rather than a fully operationalised transparency model.

 

A Reality Check for Insurance Leaders

Despite the Directive’s implementation deadline of 7th June 2026 now firmly in sight, only 26% of insurers in our study consider themselves ready for pay transparency. Even more telling? 27% say their level of readiness hasn’t improved in  the past 12 months, and 50% are taking a geographically targeted approach. That should give any executive pause.

This is not a sector that lacks sophistication. Insurance organisations manage risk for a living. Yet, when it comes to pay transparency, many are still taking a geographically targeted, compliance-only approach – doing the minimum, in the minimum number of locations, for as long as possible. That may feel pragmatic, but in reality, it’s increasingly risky.

The EU Pay Transparency Directive sets a floor, not a ceiling. Whatever variations emerge at national level, insurers will still be expected to explain how pay is determined, justify differences objectively, and report gender pay gaps publicly. And once that information is visible — to employees, regulators, works councils and the market — the narrative is no longer fully in their control.

Why Insurance Faces a Tougher Test Than Most

Pay transparency is challenging across all sectors. But insurance faces a particular combination of pressure points:

  • Highly differentiated roles across underwriting, actuarial, claims, distribution, technology and other corporate functions,
  • Complex pay structures, often combining base, variable pay, incentives and long-term awards,
  • Global operating models with legacy systems, local practices and inconsistent job architectures,
  • And a sector that is already under scrutiny for its ability to attract, retain and develop scarce talent for future readiness.

Against that backdrop, transparency exposes not just pay gaps, but decision-making quality  and consistency.

It’s no coincidence that regulatory compliance is the number one driver behind insurers’ focus on pay transparency, ranking 40% higher than the next driver globally (enhancing EVP). The biggest blockers are structural, not philosophical: data quality issues and inconsistent job architecture; manager capability to explain pay decisions confidently; fear of legal exposure when inequities are uncovered; the cost of remediation (particularly for mid‑sized carriers); and difficulty linking pay, performance and progression in a way that is explainable. But compliance alone won’t be enough to carry organisations through what comes next.

Five Actions That Matter — and Why Insurers Can’t Delay

The global Aon release on Five Key Actions for EU Pay Transparency Readiness lays out a clear framework. What’s striking is how closely those actions align with the areas where insurers are currently weakest. Let’s translate them into an insurance reality.

1. Define “Equal Work” — Before Someone Else Does It for You

The Directive hinges on the concept of work of equal value. That sounds simple. Yet only 54% of insurers say they have a robust job evaluation process in place and use it consistently across the organisation. That still leaves a meaningful cohort without consistent, robust job evaluation — and that’s exactly where transparency bites.

In insurance, inconsistency is not a technical problem, it’s a credibility problem. If you cannot clearly explain why individuals in comparable roles within the same country are paid differently – using objective, gender neutral criteria – transparency will surface that gap quickly and publicly.   

A robust, analytical job architecture is not “nice to have” under pay transparency. It is the backbone of defensible decision-making.

2. Get Your Data House in Order — Properly

If pay transparency is a spotlight, data is what it shines on.

Only 3% of insurers routinely conduct pay equity analysis every two years. Despite a recent regulation-driven uptick, with 26% completing an independent review in the past 12-18 months, 12% have never conducted an analysis at all.. And many rely on fragmented data spread across HR systems, payroll platforms and benefits providers. This is where good intentions collide with operational reality.

The Directive requires organisations to look at total pay, not just base salary. That means bonuses, incentives and benefits must all be brought together in a clean, auditable way. For insurers with complex reward structures, this is not a small task — but it is an unavoidable one. And those who delay are not avoiding the work, they are simply compressing it into a smaller, riskier window.

3. Fix the Gaps Before You Have to Explain Them

Transparency doesn’t create pay gaps – it reveals them. Here’s a statistic that should sharpen minds: 79% of insurers who conducted pay equity analysis identified gaps requiring intervention.

Under the Directive, organisations may be required to undertake joint pay assessments with employee representatives if unexplained gaps exceed certain thresholds. More importantly, employees will have the right to ask how their pay compares to peers doing similar work. 

Once reporting begins, remediation becomes harder. The smartest insurers are using the remaining time to identify outliers, understand root causes, and make targeted corrections before numbers go public. The last realistic window to act without exposure and reputational impact is now.

4. Governance Is About to Be Tested, and Publicly

Most insurers are comfortable with governance in theory, but pay transparency tests it in practice.

While 86% say they have a robust performance management approach, only 21% report having a robust succession and promotion process. That gap matters. Because under transparency, subjective or poorly documented decisions don’t just raise internal questions, they invite external scrutiny.

Governance is no longer just about controls. It’s about explainability. If a manager cannot clearly articulate why two people doing similar work are paid or progressed differently — and document that rationale — the organisation absorbs the risk.

5. Communication: The Most Overlooked Risk of All

Here’s the irony: while communication and governance are among insurers’ top stated priorities, 77% do not have a formal pay transparency communication strategy. That is a problem. Pulse findings also suggest a growing tension: many organisations plan further disclosure, but openly doubt whether managers are ready to support it – transparency is moving faster than managerial enablement.

Transparency without communication creates confusion instead of building trust. Employees don’t just want to see numbers, they want context – to understand how pay is set, how progression works, and what fairness looks like in practice.

Line managers will be the first point of contact, yet many are not trained or equipped to have these conversations confidently. That gap will show. And when transparency surfaces questions faster than the organisation can fix root causes, the risk is not abstract: it shows up as inconsistent explanations, perceived unfairness, and avoidable employee dissatisfaction. 

By contrast, those organisations equipping managers with the knowledge, confidence, and the practical tools they need to communicate pay transparency effectively are successful addressing employee questions consistently. As organisations equip managers to communicate with clarity and confidence, many are also reassessing the behavioural and capability expectations of future-fit leaders in insurance

3%

of insurers regularly conduct pay equity analysis every two years

Targeted or Broad? The Strategic Choice Insurers Must Make

Over half of insurers in EMEA say they are currently taking a targeted approach, acting only where compliance is required. That may feel sensible today. But the trend is clear: organisations are moving beyond compliance as transparency expectations rise globally.

Insurers getting this right are building scalable frameworks — starting where regulation demands, but designing with future expansion in mind. Because once transparency starts, it rarely stops.

From Compliance to Competitive Advantage

“How do we comply?” is an important question for insurance leaders, but “What do we want transparency to say about us?” is equally important. Done well, pay transparency can reinforce:

  • A credible employee value proposition,
  • Fairness and consistency in decision-making,
  • Trust between leaders and the workforce,
  • And confidence in the organisation’s reward strategy.

Done poorly, it exposes fragmentation, inconsistency and leadership discomfort.

The clock is ticking, but insurers still have a choice: treat pay transparency as a regulatory inconvenience – or use it as a catalyst to strengthen how they reward, govern and communicate.

Those who act now will enter this new era with control. Those who don’t will be answering questions they didn’t prepare for. And in insurance, we all know which risks are hardest to insure after the fact.

Aon’s Thought Leaders
  • Louisa Blain
    Head of Insurance for Human Capital

General Disclaimer

This document is not intended to address any specific situation or to provide legal, regulatory, financial, or other advice. While care has been taken in the production of this document, Aon does not warrant, represent or guarantee the accuracy, adequacy, completeness or fitness for any purpose of the document or any part of it and can accept no liability for any loss incurred in any way by any person who may rely on it. Any recipient shall be responsible for the use to which it puts this document. This document has been compiled using information available to us up to its date of publication and is subject to any qualifications made in the document.

Terms of Use

The contents herein may not be reproduced, reused, reprinted or redistributed without the expressed written consent of Aon, unless otherwise authorized by Aon. To use information contained herein, please write to our team.

More Like This

View All
Subscribe CTA Banner