Remote workers do not receive a separate or reduced pay-information right under Directive (EU) 2023/970 simply because they work away from an employer's premises. If a remote worker is covered as a worker under the relevant employment relationship, Article 7 gives the same core right to request and receive in writing their individual pay level and the relevant sex-disaggregated average pay levels for categories of workers doing the same work or work of equal value. The more difficult question for cross-border remote work is often which Member State's implementing law and procedures apply, so employers should analyse the employment relationship and jurisdiction rather than treating location alone as the comparison rule.
Jurisdiction: European Union
Remote Work Does Not Create a Separate Article 7 Category
Directive (EU) 2023/970 does not establish one set of Article 7 rights for office-based workers and another for remote workers. The core question is whether the person is a worker within the Directive's scope under the relevant employment contract or employment relationship. If that test is met, the worker can use Article 7 in the same way as other covered workers. Employers should therefore avoid internal policies that limit pay-information requests to workers who are physically based at a particular office or who can submit a paper request in person.
The Same Core Information Right Applies
A covered remote worker can request their own individual pay level and the average pay levels, broken down by sex, for the relevant category of workers performing the same work or work of equal value. The right is about the worker's legal and occupational relationship to the comparison group, not whether colleagues sit in the same building. Employers still need to identify a defensible category using the same equal-work and work-of-equal-value principles that apply elsewhere in the workforce.
Physical Location Alone Does Not Define the Comparison Group
Remote work can make organisations tempted to group workers by home address, office assignment or country code without examining whether those distinctions are relevant to the equal-pay analysis. Article 7 links comparative information to categories of workers doing the same work or work of equal value. Location can be relevant where it reflects objective differences in the role, labour market or working conditions, but it should not automatically replace the underlying comparison test. Employers should document why location matters when it affects a category or pay decision.
Cross-Border Remote Work Requires a Jurisdiction Check
The main complexity arises when a remote worker performs work in one Member State for an employer or team based in another. Directive (EU) 2023/970 sets the EU framework, but Member States transpose it into national law. Employers should identify the employment relationship, the legal employer and the national rules that govern the worker rather than assuming the headquarters location controls every procedure. National law may determine request channels, enforcement bodies and procedural detail, so cross-border remote arrangements should be mapped before a request arrives.
Remote Workers Need a Practical Request Channel
Article 7 requires employers to inform all workers annually of the information right and the steps needed to exercise it. A process that depends on an office noticeboard, in-person HR desk or paper form may fail operationally for remote staff. Employers should provide a channel that remote workers can actually use, such as an accessible HR portal, designated email address or another documented method permitted by national rules. The request date should still be recorded so the reasonable-period and two-month timing requirement can be monitored.
Written Responses Can Be Delivered Digitally if the Process Is Effective
Article 7 requires workers to receive the information in writing, but the Directive does not require the worker to be physically present to receive it. Digital delivery can be an efficient way to respond to remote workers provided the communication is secure, complete and accessible. Article 8 also requires information under Article 7 to be provided in a format accessible to persons with disabilities and to take their particular needs into account. Employers should therefore combine remote delivery, confidentiality and accessibility rather than treating them as separate systems.
Remote Status Should Not Be Used as a Reason to Delay or Narrow the Right
An employer should not treat a remote request as inherently more difficult simply because the worker is outside the main office. The same legal timing rule applies: the Article 7 information must be provided within a reasonable period and no later than two months. Where the request raises a genuine jurisdictional or category question, HR should investigate it promptly and document the reasoning. Remote work may complicate the analysis, but it does not justify ignoring the request, substituting an irrelevant organisation-wide average or postponing the response without a defensible reason.
Frequently Asked Questions
Do remote workers have Article 7 pay-information rights?
Yes, where they are covered as workers under the relevant employment relationship. Remote status by itself does not remove the ordinary Article 7 right.
Are remote workers compared only with people in the same location?
No. The Directive focuses on categories of workers doing the same work or work of equal value. Location may be relevant where objectively justified, but it is not the sole comparison rule.
What if a remote worker lives in a different Member State?
The employer should identify the applicable national implementing law and employment relationship because cross-border remote work can affect procedural and jurisdictional questions.
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.