Salary transparency has been a talking point in recruitment for some time. But with the Government announcing plans to introduce new laws requiring employers to publish salary information in job adverts, it’s a conversation that’s becoming harder to ignore.

And perhaps that’s no bad thing.

At Moxie & Mettle, most of our clients have always been happy to disclose salaries upfront when advertising vacancies. We see this as a positive. It gives candidates clarity and helps manage expectations from the start. It also allows everyone to decide whether an opportunity is right for them.

There have been the odd occasion when clients have preferred not to publish salary information openly. In those situations, we advise them to provide a salary indication so we can still set clear expectations with candidates. Even where the figure is hidden from public view on the job board, we need to have that information to advertise the role and manage the recruitment process properly. For us, being upfront about salary is an important part of getting the right conversations started.

That raises an obvious question: why?

What are employers reluctant to disclose?

There are valid reasons why some businesses prefer not to publish salaries. They may have some flexibility depending on experience. Others might have a broad salary range or want to see the quality of candidates available before agreeing on a figure.

But there are other possibilities.

Is the salary below the market rate? Are employers worried that advertising the figure will put people off? Or is there an issue with how existing employees are paid? For example, advertising a new role at a higher salary could raise some uncomfortable questions internally.

Recent UK recruitment research suggests this isn’t unusual. CV-Library’s 2026 Candidate Behaviour Barometer found that only 58% of job adverts included salary information over the previous 12 months. This means around 42% were advertised without it. The research also found that 41% of jobseekers would refuse to apply for a role if no salary was provided.

For candidates, the frustration is understandable. Applying for jobs, speaking to recruiters and attending interviews all take time. Finding out several stages into the process that the salary is much lower than expected can be disappointing. Quite frankly, it’s often avoidable.

As recruiters, we also need to have honest conversations with candidates. If we can’t share the salary, we’re left managing expectations without having all the information candidates need to make a decision.

The salary isn’t the only problem

There’s a bigger issue emerging in the recruitment market, and it goes beyond whether a salary is published.

Many businesses are under pressure to cut costs, restructure teams and make the most of existing resources. Following redundancies and changes to team structures, responsibilities that were once shared across several people are increasingly being brought together into one role.

The result can be job descriptions that ask an awful lot of one person.

We’re talking about roles that combine strategic planning with hands-on delivery. They may cover several disciplines, agency management, team leadership and responsibility for business results.

In marketing, for example, an employer might want someone to oversee strategy, manage digital channels, lead content and communications, manage external agencies and deliver measurable results. They might also expect the person to have creative design skills.

These are substantial responsibilities. In some businesses, they might previously have been shared across two or more positions.

Yet the salary doesn’t always reflect the breadth of the role.

Employers understandably want value for money, particularly in a challenging economic climate. But there’s a difference between recruiting someone who can take ownership and expecting one person to absorb the responsibilities of an entire team.

Candidates are noticing this. They’re looking beyond job titles and reading the detail of what’s expected. They’re asking whether the responsibilities are realistic and whether the workload is manageable. They’re also questioning whether the salary reflects the level of responsibility involved.

If the salary puts candidates off, is that telling you something?

This is perhaps the most important question in the salary transparency debate.

If an employer is reluctant to advertise a salary because they think it will put candidates off, perhaps the problem isn’t transparency. Perhaps it’s the salary itself.

Not every business has the budget to offer market-leading salaries, and that’s understandable. But employers need to recognise that pay is part of their overall offer.

If a role pays below the market rate, there may still be candidates interested in it. However, they need to know that upfront so they can decide whether the opportunity is right for them.

Many people are finding it difficult to secure a new role. Some may therefore accept a lower salary than they’d ideally want. Getting back into work or having some financial security may simply take priority.

However, that doesn’t mean they’ll stay. If a more suitable opportunity with better pay comes along, there’s every chance they’ll move on. In the long run, the employer could be facing another recruitment process and starting all over again.

Leaving salary information out doesn’t necessarily make a position more attractive. It can simply delay an inevitable conversation.

When the expectations in a job description are much greater than the salary on offer, employers may need to rethink the role. Simply hoping to find someone willing to take everything on isn’t always the answer.

What does the future look like for salary transparency?

The Government’s plans to introduce mandatory salary disclosure in job adverts are likely to speed up a shift that’s already happening in the UK recruitment market.

This could mean businesses taking a closer look at salary benchmarking and whether their current pay structures are fair and competitive. It may also encourage more honest conversations about what companies can realistically offer and what they expect in return.

From a candidate’s perspective, greater salary transparency should mean fewer surprises and more informed applications. People will have a clearer idea of what’s on offer before investing time in the recruitment process.

But publishing a salary is only part of the picture.

Greater transparency won’t automatically make salaries more competitive. Nor will it correct unfair pay differences or make an unrealistic job description any more manageable.

Ultimately, successful recruitment relies on a realistic match between the responsibilities of a role, the experience required and the salary on offer.

At Moxie & Mettle, we’re fortunate to work with clients who understand the value of being upfront about salary. Most of the businesses we work with are happy to disclose this from the outset. We see that as a positive reflection of an open and straightforward approach to recruitment. It’s something that benefits everyone involved, and we hope to see more of it as salary transparency becomes an increasingly important part of hiring.

Ultimately, being open about salary from the outset makes for a better recruitment experience for everyone. It helps employers attract candidates with the right expectations and allows candidates to make informed decisions. Surely that’s a good starting point for any successful hire.