Frequently Asked Questions

The Fair Pay Bill is a proposed law that aims to make salaries fairer and more transparent in South Africa. Right now, many people are unfairly paid — not because of their skills or experience, but because of historical inequality rooted in the legacy of apartheid, which made it unlawful for a Black and white person to earn the same even if they were doing the same work, unequal access to employment opportunities, or unfair bias in the setting of pay.

The Fair Pay Bill is a proposed amendment to the Employment Equity Act 55 of 1998 which seeks to address that.

It aims to ensure that what you earn is based on your skills, experience, and what the job itself is worth — not what you were paid before. It aims to dismantle systemic pay discrimination, especially against Black professionals, women, and young workers.

Relying on salary history in hiring locks people into cycles of underpayment. Many workers — especially from historically disadvantaged groups — begin their careers underpaid due to the legacy of unfair pay discrimination and disparities in accessing employment opportunities. When employers base new job offers on that low pay, the inequality follows employees from one job to the next.

The Fair Pay Bill seeks to break that chain by ensuring salaries are determined based on the budget set for the role, market rates, and the required skills and experience — not by what a person earned in their current or past employment.

The Bill introduces three key changes:

• Salary transparency: Employers must include a salary or salary range when advertising a job. This means you'll know upfront what the job pays.
• No more salary history questions: Employers cannot ask what you earned in your previous job, unless you choose to share this information — which you may only do after receiving an offer of employment. Although the employee may request that this information be considered, employers will not be able to use past payslip differences as a justification for unequal pay. Your current or past pay can no longer be used against you.
• Right to talk about pay: The existing right provided for in section 78(1) of the Basic Conditions of Employment Act 75 of 1997 is further cemented in the Fair Pay Bill as a pay transparency measure. Employees are legally allowed to discuss their salaries with their colleagues, if they choose. They cannot be threatened for doing so. This helps expose unfair pay differences and promotes fairness.

This Bill helps a broad range of South African workers — from those who have been in the labour market for decades to those just entering it. It provides the following benefits and protections:

• You can negotiate better because you know the salary or salary range of the job.
• You are paid based on your value, not your past.
• It becomes harder for employers to discriminate unfairly.
• It creates a culture of openness that deters unfair pay discrimination.

No. Employers can still offer different salaries based on experience, qualifications, and skills. But they can no longer unfairly differentiate on the basis of current or past pay.

No, it balances fairness with flexibility.

Employers can still decide salaries within a range, assess experience and qualifications, and ask about salary expectations after making an offer of employment. They just can't rely on current or past salary to set pay.

It shouldn't. The Employment Equity Act already imposes positive obligations on employers to eliminate unfair discrimination in remuneration. This means that the Fair Pay Bill is not introducing a new obligation — employers should already be doing this.

The Employment Equity Regulations, 2025, further reinforce equal pay for work of equal value through structured job evaluation criteria. Simply put, employers are already required to determine how much a job is worth. The Fair Pay Bill is seeking to make that salary or salary range transparent and ensure that businesses do not unfairly deviate from it.

There is no evidence from other countries that these types of laws reduce hiring.

In fact, they can:

• Attract better candidates
• Improve company reputation
• Reduce disputes and legal risks
• Build trust in the workplace

In theory, markets should be fair. In reality, South Africa's labour market is shaped by apartheid-era inequality and ongoing racial and gender pay gaps. The market is not going to correct itself in this regard and requires course-correcting interventions — this Bill is one of those course correctors.

Employers will still be able to use tools for determining pay, including market surveys, skills assessments, and experience-based measures.

Market forces cannot override the constitutional and statutory duty to ensure equitable and non-discriminatory pay practices. The Bill doesn't distort the market — it helps correct unfair distortions that already exist.

Yes. The Constitution allows laws that promote equality, even if they limit certain practices. Section 9(2) of the Constitution of South Africa, 1996 permits legislative and other measures designed to protect or advance persons disadvantaged by unfair discrimination. A ban on salary history questions falls squarely within this framework, as it prevents the replication of past disadvantage in present wage-setting.

The Bill further complements South Africa's international law obligations. South Africa is a signatory to a number of related instruments, including:

• The Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No. 100) of the International Labour Organization;
• Article 23(2) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; and
• The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals — SDG 5 (Gender Equality), SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth) and SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities).

Human dignity and equality are core foundational values established under section 1 of the Constitution to reverse apartheid's injustice and protect all people. The Bill falls squarely within this framework.

Rights are not absolute and must be balanced in terms of section 36 of the Constitution.

A prohibition on salary history questions is a reasonable and justifiable limitation in pursuit of substantive equality and serves a compelling government purpose of reducing income inequality.

Given South Africa's history of structural inequality, courts have consistently prioritised transformative constitutionalism, permitting measures that actively dismantle systemic disadvantage. The regulation of fair pay practices is a conduct-based regulation, not a core infringement of expressive freedom.

No. Employers still set salaries, hire who they want, and decide on what to pay them.

No. Most employers already follow employment equity law and do pay reporting and audits. This Bill fits into existing systems and only requires simple policy changes.

It's a low-cost, high-impact reform.

No single law solves everything, but this is a practical and targeted step.

There is clear logic: if past pay drives future pay, then removing it breaks the cycle.

Yes. 22 states and 24 cities in the United States have enacted salary history bans and pay transparency laws. At the federal level, the United States has introduced the Salary History Question Prohibition Act (H.R.2219), which is currently before Congress.

Similarly, the European Union adopted the EU Pay Transparency Directive (2023/970) in 2023. Member countries across the EU are required to implement strict pay transparency measures. Key requirements include disclosing salary ranges in job ads and prohibiting salary history questions. Member states must also set penalties for non-compliance, including fines.

• Young job seekers
• Women
• Black professionals
• Workers stuck in low-paying cycles
• Ethical businesses that already pay fairly

South Africa is one of the most unequal countries in the world.

This Bill is about breaking cycles of unfair pay, creating real economic opportunity, and making the economy work better for everyone.