Legislative progress on the implementation of the Gender Pay Transparency Directive

At a glance

• The Dutch implementation of the Gender Pay Transparency Directive (Directive) has had a somewhat chequered journey.
• Initially published in March 2025, the government indicated that it would postpone implementation of the bill until January 2027, with a knock-on effect for publication of the first gender pay gap reports for larger employers.
• However, in light of the European Commission's confirmation in December 2025 that it would not permit exceptions to full implementation of the Directive by the 7 June 2026 deadline for any jurisdiction, the government is now reconsidering its position.
• The bill has now made some progress, moving to the Council of State. Notably, there are important changes to some of the original draft provisions impacting on the definition of 'employer', as well as a dilution in the role of Works Councils.

Following some legislative delay in the progress of the new laws implementing the Directive, the draft bill has now been sent to the Council of State for consideration.  Please see our earlier article for details of the original provisions of the bill and its progress to date: Draft bill published for implementation of the EU Gender Pay Transparency Directive (update) - DLA Piper GENIE and Netherlands delays implementation of the Gender Pay Transparency Directive (update) - DLA Piper GENIE.

Importantly, there have been some changes to the provisions since originally drafted:

• The term 'wage structures' (loonstructuren) has been replaced with 'job evaluation and classification system' (een systeem voor functiewaardering en -indeling). This change has no impact on policy, but the new terminology more accurately reflects current HR practices.
• The definition of 'employer' has been revised. Previously, the definition referenced the definition used under the Works Council Act (WOR), which was broadly the employer connected to the enterprise. Now, the legislation states that the employer is the contractual employer.
• It is now explicitly stated that personal data processed in the context of the right to wage information, as well as in fulfilling reporting and evaluation obligations, may be used solely for the purpose of applying the equal pay principle.
• In certain cases, consolidated reporting at group level is also now allowed. The rationale is that '…. subsidiaries generally have their own remuneration policies, tailored to their specific sector, market position or corporate culture, meaning pay differences may vary per subsidiary. However, it is still possible to present the data in consolidated form in the annual accounts, provided the pay data per subsidiary is broken down. There are also conceivable situations where a parent company determines the remuneration policy centrally and subsidiaries have no room to deviate from it. In that case, reporting at group level is permitted'.
• It is no longer a requirement that the Works Council must approve the accuracy of the information being reported.  This requirement had been subject to criticism because, in practice, the Works Council does not have the tools to check the data's accuracy and, further, it does not fit within the WOR.
• The manner in which hirers include temporary agency workers in their reporting has been adjusted. If temporary agency workers are involved, the report must now consist of two sections: one covering the hirer's own employees, and one covering temporary agency workers. The section relating to temporary agency workers must be based on the terms and conditions of employment that the hiring company has shared with the temporary employment agency in accordance with the general information obligation under the Waadi (the Dutch Workers Allocation by Intermediaries Act). The categories of employees with the same or equivalent work used must be the same in both sections.