Under Directive (EU) 2023/970, a category of workers is not simply a department, title or pay grade. It is a group of workers performing the same work or work of equal value, grouped in a non-arbitrary manner using objective gender-neutral criteria. Article 4 identifies skills, effort, responsibility and working conditions as core criteria, with other relevant factors allowed where appropriate. Employers should therefore map employees using job-content and job-evaluation evidence, document the grouping logic, review exceptions and involve workers' representatives where national law or practice requires it. This category field then supports Article 9 category-level reporting and any Article 10 joint pay assessment.
Jurisdiction: European Union
A Worker Category Is More Than a Job Title
Article 3 defines a category of workers by reference to the same work or work of equal value. That makes the category concept broader than a title field and more specific than an organisational department. A category should bring together workers whose jobs are comparable under objective gender-neutral criteria. Job titles, codes, families and grades can support the analysis, but none of those fields should automatically control the result. The grouping should be explainable in terms of the work itself and the criteria used to assess its value.
Use Objective Gender-Neutral Job-Value Criteria
Article 4 requires pay structures to support comparisons based on objective gender-neutral criteria. The Directive expressly identifies skills, effort, responsibility and working conditions and permits other factors relevant to the specific job or position. These criteria should be applied consistently and should not undervalue relevant soft skills. A practical mapping process can therefore use an existing gender-neutral job-evaluation system where it is suitable, or create a structured comparison using documented factors. The important point is that the grouping method should not be arbitrary or indirectly based on sex.
Build the Category From Job Evidence, Then Attach Employees
A repeatable workflow separates job design from employee data. First define the job or role profiles and the factors used to assess their value. Then determine which roles belong in the same category. Only after that should individual employees be mapped into the category using reliable job codes, position records or approved mappings. This sequence reduces the risk that the pay outcome of a particular employee influences the category definition. It also makes the analysis easier to update when people move roles because the category logic remains attached to the job structure rather than to one person's compensation history.
Review Broad and Narrow Categories for Distortion
Categories that are too narrow can fragment the workforce into groups too small to reveal meaningful patterns, while categories that are too broad can combine jobs that differ materially in skill, responsibility or working conditions. Employers should therefore test category size and internal consistency. Useful checks include grade spread, pay range, job-family diversity, evaluation scores and the number of workers whose assignment required manual override. A category with many exceptions may indicate that the grouping rule needs refinement. Statistical convenience should not override the Directive's underlying comparability framework.
Category Mapping Directly Affects Reporting and Remediation
Article 9 requires gender pay gaps by category of workers, broken down by ordinary basic wage or salary and complementary or variable components. Article 10 can require a joint pay assessment where the average pay difference in a category meets the Directive's threshold and the other conditions are satisfied. Category design therefore affects where a difference appears and how the employer investigates it. That is why the methodology should be stable, documented and reviewable rather than adjusted after results are known merely to change the outcome.
Maintain a Category Mapping Register
A practical governance tool is a mapping register that records each job code or role, its assigned worker category, the evaluation basis, the effective date, the approver and any exception rationale. Historical versions should be retained so prior reporting periods can be reproduced. Where workers' representatives participate under national law or practice, the record can also document consultation or agreement points. This register creates a bridge between job architecture, compensation analytics and legal review and reduces the risk that category logic exists only in an analyst's spreadsheet.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can a pay grade be used as a category of workers?
It can be an input, but a grade should not automatically be treated as the legal category. The grouping must still reflect the same work or work of equal value using objective gender-neutral criteria.
Can employees with different titles belong to the same category?
Yes. Different titles can belong to the same category where the work is the same or of equal value under the relevant criteria.
Should categories be changed after seeing the pay gaps?
Category methodology should be established and documented independently of a desired result. Changes may be appropriate when the job architecture or evidence changes, but result-driven regrouping can undermine defensibility.
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.