Yes. Jobs in different departments can still be comparable or of equal value under EU equal-pay law. Article 4 of Directive (EU) 2023/970 focuses on objective, gender-neutral assessment of the work itself rather than on organisational boundaries. Employers should compare skills, effort, responsibility and working conditions across departments using a consistent methodology. A departmental difference can be relevant evidence, but it is not a legal shortcut for excluding a potential comparator.
Jurisdiction: European Union
Departmental Boundaries Do Not Decide Job Value
A department is an organisational choice, not a legal test of comparability. Two roles in finance, operations, HR, customer service or technology may perform very different tasks but still be of equal value when assessed using objective criteria. Article 4 requires employers to look at the work itself through factors such as skills, effort, responsibility and working conditions. An employer should therefore avoid assuming that workers in separate functions cannot be compared simply because they sit in different reporting structures.
Departmental Silos Can Hide Comparable Work
Organisations often develop separate job families, salary ranges and promotion practices for different functions. Over time, those systems can make comparable roles look unrelated. One department may use specialist titles while another uses coordinator or adviser titles even where the roles require similar levels of judgment, responsibility and skill. A work-of-equal-value assessment can cut through those silos by applying common criteria across the organisation and testing whether the different pay outcomes are supported by real differences in job value.
Use Common Factor Definitions Across Functions
Cross-department comparison becomes unreliable if each function defines skill, effort or responsibility differently. Employers should use common factor definitions and consistent rating scales so that evidence from one department can be compared with evidence from another. This does not require every job family to look identical. It requires the underlying evaluation logic to be stable. A role that manages significant financial risk in one department and a role that carries major people or safety responsibility in another can then be assessed on a comparable framework rather than through separate status hierarchies.
Different Departments Can Still Have Genuine Value Differences
Cross-department comparison should not be forced. Different functions may involve genuinely different levels of expertise, responsibility, workload or working-condition demands. The purpose of the analysis is to test those differences objectively. If one role scores materially higher on relevant criteria, the jobs may not be of equal value. If the value is equivalent despite different task mixes, the roles may be valid comparators. Employers should document the factor evidence rather than relying on broad statements that one function is inherently more strategic or valuable than another.
Cross-Department Evaluation Supports Better Pay Governance
A consistent organisation-wide comparison method can improve more than equal-pay compliance. It can help employers identify inconsistent salary bands, duplicated job levels and legacy pay practices that have grown separately across functions. It also supports clearer responses to worker information requests and more defensible explanations of pay differences. Employers should therefore treat cross-department work-value analysis as part of compensation governance rather than as an exceptional exercise used only after a dispute arises.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can employees in different departments be equal-pay comparators?
Potentially, yes. Departmental location does not by itself prevent comparison where the jobs are equal in value under objective, gender-neutral criteria.
Do different reporting lines make jobs incomparable?
No. Reporting lines can be relevant evidence about responsibility, but they are not conclusive by themselves.
Should employers use one job-evaluation framework across departments?
Using common factor definitions and consistent rating logic across functions makes cross-department comparisons more defensible and easier to explain.
Related Guides
Official Sources
Requirements and practices differ by jurisdiction and organisation. Check current local law, official guidance and professional advice for a specific situation.