A genuine promotion should normally move an employee into the salary band or pay grade attached to the higher-level role. The new salary should then be set using documented placement criteria, not a single automatic percentage applied without regard to the new range. Employers should consider the new job's value, the range minimum and midpoint, the employee's relevant experience and skills, internal comparators and any applicable collective-agreement rules. Directive (EU) 2023/970 does not prescribe a promotion increase percentage, but Articles 4 and 6 reinforce the need for objective, gender-neutral job valuation and accessible pay-setting and progression criteria.
Jurisdiction: European Union
A Promotion Should Reflect a Real Change in Job Value
A promotion should normally represent a move into work with greater responsibility, complexity, scope or another material increase in job value. Changing a title without changing the underlying role does not automatically create a different salary-band position. Employers should define the difference between progression within a level and promotion to a higher level. That distinction matters because salary structures become difficult to manage when grade changes are used simply to create room for pay increases. A promotion decision should be supported by the job architecture and by the same objective evaluation principles used to place other jobs into levels.
The Employee Normally Moves Into the New Role's Range
Once the role is evaluated at a higher level, the employee should normally be placed in the salary range attached to that new level or grade. The existing salary remains relevant, but it should not be the only reference point. The employer should compare current pay with the new range minimum, midpoint and internal placement rules. If the existing salary is below the new minimum, the promotion may require at least movement into the new range. If the employee is already well inside the new range, a standard percentage increase may place them differently from comparable workers unless the organisation reviews the result.
A Fixed Promotional Percentage Is Simple but Can Distort Range Placement
Many organisations use a typical percentage increase for promotions because it is easy to administer. The risk is that employees entering the same grade can end up at very different positions solely because their previous salaries were different. That can perpetuate historical pay differences. A more structured approach can use a percentage guideline while also checking the new range, comparable employees, relevant experience and the minimum necessary adjustment. The organisation should define when the guideline can be overridden and who approves exceptions so that flexibility does not become uncontrolled discretion.
Promotion Placement Should Use the Same Objective Factors Across Comparable Workers
The factors used to set post-promotion pay should be defined in advance. Relevant experience, acquired skills, the complexity of the new role, internal position and other job-related considerations may be appropriate where they are applied consistently. Managers should not be able to negotiate very different promotion outcomes for similar workers without evidence. Compensation teams can improve consistency by reviewing proposed salaries against employees already performing comparable work in the new grade. This does not require identical pay, but material differences should be explainable through objective factors rather than bargaining strength alone.
Promotion Decisions Can Create Compression and Equity Issues
A promotion can expose structural problems in a salary band. A newly promoted employee may land close to the pay of more experienced employees already in the higher level, creating compression. The opposite problem can arise when a promoted employee enters at a salary far below comparable colleagues. Employers should review these cases before final approval rather than treating the promotion as an isolated transaction. The relevant question is how the employee's new salary fits the range and the comparable-worker population after the promotion, not merely whether the increase from the old salary appears large enough.
The Directive Does Not Prescribe a Promotion Increase Percentage
Directive (EU) 2023/970 focuses on equal pay, objective assessment of work value and transparent pay-setting and progression criteria. Article 4 requires objective and gender-neutral evaluation of work, while Article 6 requires workers to have access to the criteria used to determine pay, pay levels and pay progression. Neither provision specifies that a promotion must result in a particular percentage increase. Employers therefore retain design flexibility, but the resulting promotion framework should be objective, explainable and consistently applied.
Record the New Role, New Range, Placement Rationale and Approvals
A promotion record should show more than the final salary. Employers should retain the old role and level, the new role and level, the applicable salary range, the placement factors used, the approved increase and any exception from normal guidelines. This makes it possible to compare promotion outcomes across workers and over time. Periodic analysis can identify whether one group receives smaller promotional increases, enters new grades lower in the range or waits longer for promotion than comparable workers. Those patterns may require deeper review even when individual decisions appear reasonable in isolation.
Frequently Asked Questions
Should a promotion always move someone to a new salary band?
A genuine promotion to a higher-valued role normally should align the employee with the range for that new role. Some organisations use structures where career movement occurs within a broad band, so the precise mechanism depends on the architecture.
Is there a standard promotion increase percentage?
No universal or EU-mandated percentage applies. Employers may use guidelines, but the result should still fit the new salary range and objective placement criteria.
Can a promoted employee be paid below the new range minimum?
That may indicate a structural or implementation problem. Employers should review the applicable range rules, national law, collective agreements and the rationale before approving below-range placement.
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.