Pay Transparency by ICT Union

Good evening,

The summer is coming to an end, and the political year has started. With this government, that unfortunately means the attack on labor rights has started as well. On the 31st of August, the government voted to submit the proposal as is. This doesn’t mean it has been approved: next step is the parliament. Changes are still possible! You may wonder – why are we calling the implementation of the pay transparency directive (which is, broadly speaking, good) an attack on labor rights? Because the government is packing together a whole bunch of changes while they are at it: • pay transparency, • platform work (including dependent work redefinition), • reduction in unemployment benefits. On top of that, the government is expected to be pushing for even worse changes: • “regional differences” as a reasoning for an “objective difference in remuneration”, • first three days for sickness without any compensation for the sick employees. All of these together show a clear direction and priority of our government: weaken workers rights so employers benefit from it.

But your government is not the final creator of your working reality. That power ultimately lays with you. Your labor is essential in this system: without workers, it all collapses. Just recently, workers in the textile industry were able to secure a 37,5h workweek. Microsoft workers were able to enshrine their benefits, ČMKOS is fighting for a higher minimum wage. Even in Czechia, a country where, maybe, we don’t think fighting for our rights has its place, people are constantly fighting to improve our conditions – and it works, when we dare.

So how do you do it too?

If we reduce it to the barest of bones, your most direct influence will always be in your own workplace: organize with your coworkers. You, as the expert in your own conditions, get to decide what they ought to be. This does not only concern the bare minimum; what is necessary to give you a dignified existence? Why would we, as a society, not be able to provide that?

Of course, it would be great if the minimum the labor law sets is actually good for workers. So make that clear to your politicians: workers rights are not negotiable. Mail them. Speak out to your coworkers. Let your grandma know what this government is gambling with. The bargain they are trying, is unconscionable – it is the trademark of a government for capital, not for the people.

Generations of workers have come before us, and ensured better conditions for us. An 8h workweek, weekends… none of those were given freely. But all of those are no more than logical. Don’t let yourself be blackmailed into the bleak vision of the world they profit from. Join our campaign for a proper implementation of the pay transparency directive. Join ČMKOS’ campaign to protect workers against the švarc system. Join ETUC’s campaign to reinvigorate unions. Join UniGlobals campaign to direct public funds to companies who serve public interests. Your actions matter. Courage is infectious. A better world is within your reach.

In solidarity,

orla & baru

Good evening,

Last time we talked about the response we got from the government on our suggestion to at least comply to the minimum requirements of the directive. Broadly speaking, they argue that it’d be too much of a burden on employers. This argument comes from this line in the directive: Pay transparency measures should protect workers’ right to equal pay while limiting, to the extent possible, costs and administrative burden for employers, paying specific attention to micro, small and medium-sized enterprises. Where appropriate, measures should be tailored to the size of employers, taking into account employers’ headcount.

Now, any honest reader would of course not interpret that as meaning ‘sacrifice worker protections if it inconveniences some employers’ – but apparently it’s all our government needs to do just that.   This is especially egregious when we talk about pay ranges in job ads: this is info any company hiring absolutely knows beforehand, and on top of that, employers – especially those in the ICT sector, which are overwhelmingly international - will have to deal with that anyway. So, if we look at the countries that by now have implemented the directive, how do they do that?

• Greece: Job applicants must receive information regarding the initial salary or salary range applicable to a position before hiring decisions are finalized.
• Italy: Job advertisements and job vacancy announcements must now indicate the initial salary or pay band for the role, and employers are prohibited from asking candidates about their current or previous remuneration, including via third party recruiters.
• Lithuania: … Additionally, if a collective agreement is in place, the employer must provide the relevant terms to the candidate before any contract negotiations or signing. Lithuanian employers are already required to provide the initial pay or pay range in job notices.
• Malta: The new rules regarding transparency at the recruitment stage are per the Directive’s requirements too. Initial pay / range and relevant collective bargaining agreement provisions must be provided in a manner allowing for informed and transparent negotiation on pay before the end of the recruitment process. The prohibition on asking candidates questions about their current pay / pay history and the requirements for gender neutral job advertisements and titles, plus non-discriminatory recruitment processes, are also consistent with the Directive.
• Slovakia: Disclose pay ranges or starting salary at such a time as to ensure informed and transparent negotiations on pay. Including the range in a job advertisement satisfies this obligation. Salary ranges cannot be overly broad. Employers are already required under the Employment Services Act to share the base salary when publishing a job offer.

For good measure here is the relevant line from the Czech implementation: The employer is required to demonstrably inform a natural person applying for a job with the employer of the minimum wage or salary and other monetary benefits and benefits of monetary value to which the applicant would be entitled as an employee from the date the employment relationship begins; the employer shall provide this information no later than before the commencement of negotiations on the conclusion of an employment contract.

It seems that our government is not alone in prioritizing employer comfort over workers rights, Greece even formulates it so weak that one could argue there is no meaningful change. But Lithuania, Italy and Slovakia show that it really is not such an unreasonable demand – some of them even had the requirement before already!

We could speculate on the different economies Czechia, Greece, and Malta have compared to their more courageous neighbors – is it the dependence on near shoring services and relatively cheap centers of expertise? If so, this choice only ingrains the position of Czech workers as second class European citizens, to be rewarded only by ever slinking wages and increasingly less job security.

Would a government for the people not need to take bold action to redirect this course, and make sure Czech workers will have more options and stability? Tell them why it’s important, contact MP’s, join our mailing campaign !

In solidarity,

orla & baru

Good evening,

Over the last couple of months, we invited you to join our letter-writing campaign. We sent that letter ourselves. The Ministry of labor and social affairs - the ones supposedly protecting workers in Czech Republic - replied. And it basically says: No thanks, we’re good.

Those of you who have already joined our letter-writing campaign know what we asked for.

On job ads (§ 30): Require companies to publish not just a salary range for the position, but also the actual salary ranges they currently pay for similar positions. This gives job applicants real information about whether a company is lowballing them. Specify clear consequences for employers who fail to comply. 

On pay systems (§ 109a): Give workers real co-decision power in how pay systems are created. And explicitly require that pay criteria include “soft skills” and other factors that have historically been undervalued in women-dominated jobs.

These aren’t radical demands. They are exactly what the EU directive is trying to accomplish.

The Ministry’s response reveals something we had long suspected. They are not trying to implement the directive . They are trying to do the minimum possible while claiming to implement it.

On the salary ranges in job ads, the Ministry said publishing actual data would be “intrusive”, could lead to “unreasonable interpretation problems” and may cause “misleading conclusions.” The ministry worries about individual factors justifying different pay. But if those factors exist, explain them. If a company cannot explain its pay differences (meaning the real reason is discrimination) then yes, it would be “misleading.”

If it comes to how narrow the ranges in job ads should be, the ministry talks about overly rigid regulations that could ultimately limit labor market flexibility and complicated the recruitment, particularly in industries with “highly dynamic wage trends.”

The ministry says they want to balance compliance with European requirements maintaining an appropriate level of administrative burden for employers and not imposing duties on employers beyond what is necessary to achieve the directive’s goal. But in doing so, they don’t even do the minimum, they make sure the goal of the directive (closing the gender pay gap) won’t be achieved, and they are underperforming compared to European colleagues (for whom it is possible to require salary ranges, curious).

On the co-decision in how pay systems are created, the Ministry said consultation is enough. They also claim, that employers bear responsibility for the system, so they need autonomy to create it. If workers could block the system through disagreement, the employer would be powerless to meet legal obligations. 

Here, their logic is backwards. The directive says criteria must be “agreed with workers’ representatives”. It means the system has to be acceptable to both sides. Giving workers say in this doesn’t prevent employers from creating systems and is not blocking obligations, that’s fulfilling them properly.

Finally, they say expanding workers’ representatives co-decision would be a “systemic change beyond the scope of necessary transposition”. Yes, the directive asks for this, but they have decided Czech labor law shouldn’t change that much. They are keeping the old balance where employers decide and workers advise. They are choosing not to implement it properly because it would require shifting power.

On the pay criteria explicitly include “soft skills”, the ministry responds that the existing law (Labor Code § 110) already covers soft skills. It lists criteria like complexity, responsibility, and strain. Then points out these can include communication, teamwork, problem-solving, adaptability… But those soft skills aren’t in the law. They are something that could be there if you squint. The ministry is essentially saying they trust employers to interpret complexity and mental strain to include care work, communication, emotional labor. They trust employers to see these as equally valuable as technical skills.

But we know what happens when you rely on employer goodwill. Care work stays undervalued. Teaching stays undervalued. Nursing stays undervalued. Not because it’s actually simple, but because it’s coded as women’s work and therefore coded as less valuable. The Czech government’s solution is to hope employers interpret the law generously. The EU directive’s solution is to make it mandatory: soft skills will not be undervalued, period.

The ministry also objects that explicit soft skills protection would create “regulatory complexity” and “administrative burden on employers.”

This is the whole pattern. Every time (salary ranges, worker power, soft skills) the ministry chooses the weak reading. The interpretation that require the least of employers. And then calls it balance, flexibility, proportionality…

The EU learned that soft measures don’t work and barely move the gender pay gap. The real problem is structural. The discrimination stays hidden, women’s labor stays undervalued, and power stays with employers. So the directive says that we need binding measures. Because if we don’t force change, discrimination keeps happening exactly as it has for decades.

The Ministry’s response signals that if we accept their interpretation, fundamentally nothing changes. This is why our letter-writing campaign matters. Parliament still votes on this. MPs can propose amendments. They can push back against the Ministry’s weak interpretation and demand that the directive actually does what it’s supposed to do: make pay transparent and fair.

In solidarity, orla & baru  

Good afternoon everyone,

We are back with another result from our survey, and this one shines a light on yet another dark corner of how we get paid in Czech republic.

We asked: Do you know what you salary increase plan (‘pay progression’) looks like ?

Only 24.4% of you said YES. Three quarters of you have no idea how your pay is supposed to evolve, or why it happens the way it does. Three quarters of workers surveyed don’t know if they are going to get raises, what determines when and by how much their pay goes up. Don’t know what they need to do to earn more.

The directive is actually quite clear on this point. According to Article 6:

“Employers should make accessible to workers the criteria that are used to determine pay levels and pay progression. Pay progression refers to the process of how a worker moves to a higher pay level. Criteria related to pay progression can include, inter alia, individual performance, skills development and seniority.

…Employers shall make easily accessible to their workers the criteria that are used to determine workers’ pay, pay levels and pay progression. Those criteria shall be objective and gender neutral.”

That’s a big deal. Not only should you know you are being fairly compensated now, but you should also have clarity on what is expected of you if you want to earn more. No more secret ladders, no more vague talk about performance without any specifics and results.

And what did the Czech government make of it? Well.. here we go again. The government’s proposal basically says that employers have to create some kind of remuneration system. This system should include how they pay people, and it should sort jobs into different groups based on the value of the work, depending on its complexity, level of responsibility, and physical demands.

And that’s about it. While your company will have to publish the assessment made on the basis of these systems, there is no requirement to actually publish or disclose these systems themselves with you. No explicit mention that you should have access to the criteria for progression. No obligation to explain what puts you in one group versus another or what you need to do to move up. Just a vague instruction for employers to have something written down somewhere.

It is a classic Czech approach. Technically, the employer has to create a system. Practically, you as a worker have no right to know what it is, how it works, or how it applies to you. Which of course defeats the entire purpose of transparency.

Without transparency on pay progression, decisions happen in a grey zone. And in a grey zone, inequalities and subjective decisions thrive and a lot of hidden discrimination happens.

Let’s imagine what it would look like if the law actually meant business.

Employers should be obliged to publish not just what the pay bands are for each position, but also what determines progression within those bands. Is it years of service? New skills? Meeting targets? Something else? All of it should be written down and understandable. And it shouldn’t just sit in some dusty file on the intranet. Employees should be regularly informed about what “step” they are on and what they need to do to reach the next one. And employees should be able to count on these rules: if you can show you did the work, you should be sure you get the ‘reward’. No more hoping for benevolence from distant management or being disappointed because ‘now is just not the right time’.

Finally, these rules shouldn’t be cooked up by the boss behind closed doors. They should be the result of dialogue with unions or workers’ representatives. Because what a “fair progression” looks like should be shaped by the people it actually affects.

That is exactly why it is so critical that we push for truly strong transparency rules in the Czech implementation. Only then will you have a tool to not just assess your pay, but to actively shape it.

And what better way to start shaping than to join our letter-writing campaign. It only takes a few minutes. We have prepared templates and contacts for the people who can still add improvements to the current proposal.

Together we can create a better world <3

In solidarity,

xxx

orla & baru

PS: for Prague people – we are organising a discussion on the directive with you as well ! Invite to follow, but you can already mark the 26th of August in your calendars :)

Good afternoon,

Last week we talked about whether there are pay differences for the same job at your workplaces: about half of you said yes. The follow up question on that in the survey was: did you personally experience it (27% of you said yes), and were you able to resove it (18% of you were). This is kinda nice, about two thirds were able to solve an unfair situation, supposedly by standing up and individually negotiating.

There is more work to be done though, for that last third, for those structurally disadvantaged, for those who don’t have the capacity to fight alone. It also bears repeating that the data from our survey is of course not representative, and that we do have official data on at least gender wage gaps in Czech Republic: one of the worst in the EU, a difference of 18,5%.

So lets look to the brighter future that awaits us according to the directive, and lets see what new tools we ll have to work with.

1. Every worker will be able to request gendered salary data for their position. This means you’ll have insight on whether there is a (gender) pay gap, and on which side of it you stand. With this data, you’ll have a stronger position to negotiate for an increase - if you are being underpaid of course.

2. Companies will have to report on gender pay gaps in their companies. This once again will give you data to individually negotiate, and potentially even sue if there are clear patterns of discrimination. The directive makes it so the burden of proof will now be on the company, not you.

3. This data on gender pay gaps will be available from other companies as well, allowing you to compare your situation with similar companies, hopefull refuting arguments that ‘that’s just how it is in our sector’.

These new rules are mostly geared towards strenthening your individual negotiating power and public accountability. They are a necessary cog in a complex solution. But they still rely on workers standing up for themselves, alone.

Real changes happen when we fight together. Through collective negotiations, you and your co-workers can achieve just about anything. Better conditions for maternity/parental leave, so taking time to raise your kid doesnt set you back ? More flexibility, so you don’t have to choose between being able to attend to your family and work ? Strict salary scales so there is no wiggleroom to discriminate ? Clear conditions for, and collectively agreed on yearly raises ? All possible !

And these data can help you with starting to build the necessary coalitions for that. For the first time you’ll have the numbers, the comparisons, and the (broader) context to show them that this feeling they had is justified - hopefully once and for all removing the compensation conversation from the taboo sphere, enabling you to turn individual frustration into shared leverage.

In solidarity,

xxx

orla & baru

PS: we are still fighting to make sure the directive is implemented meaningfully - join the email writing campaign !

Good afternoon everyone!

Recently we took a little detour from our survey results. We were talking about heat at work, workplace rights and getting organized. Important stuff, but a bit away from what you told us in the survey. Today we are back on track.

In the survey we asked you a question: Is your company actively doing anything to address pay inequalities? We got 65% “no”s.

That number should shake you. Two thirds of you work somewhere that (according to you) is doing nothing about pay discrimination. Nothing.

Before we get angry at companies, let’s be clear about what we are actually asking. “Doing something” about pay inequality could mean: publish narrow pay ranges in the job adds, having clear criteria for how much different positions pay, asking employees if they think pay is fair and doing something with that feedback, explicitly looking at whether men and women are paid equally for the same work and if gaps are found actually fixing them.

These are not radical demands. These are basic practices that any company that claims to care about fairness would do.

So when 65% of you say your company is doing nothing? They are not even doing the basics.

Here is where it gets tricky. Some companies probably are trying. They might be looking at their numbers, thinking “hmm, this doesn’t look right,” and considering changes. But without transparency tools, their efforts are limited. If we cannot compare ourselves to the market because there is no public data on what comparable jobs pay elsewhere, if they cannot be forced to explain their pay decisions, because “market demands” is still enough of an excuse, and if the workers cannot actually see the data to call them out, then their “doing something” is just internal theater. It looks good in the boardroom, but nothing changes for workers.

This is exactly why the Pay Transparency Directive matters. It is not just about giving workers tools to fight for fair pay, but also about forcing companies to actually follow through on whatever commitments they are making. Without external pressure of legal requirements and workers organizing the companies have no reason to prioritize fair pay.

Here is what we are asking

From your companies: If you claim to care about fair pay, prove it. Conduct real audits. Set transparent scales. Listen to your workers. And publish your results.

From the government: We already know what we need. The Pay Transparency Directive. Implemented properly. Not weakly. Not slowly. With teeth. With oversight. With real consequences for companies that do not comply.

From all of you: Speak out and push on the government by joining our letter writing campaign! To make it easy, we have prepared a template and a list of email addresses (English translations are on the 3rd page of the docs). And even easier: mailto links for minimal effort :)

Also, if your company said they are doing something, ask them what. Specifically. Make them explain. Push them to do more. And when the directive will finally be implemented: use it. If they say “no,” ORGANISE! Right now two thirds of you work somewhere ***where they don’t even seem to be trying. **Talk to your coworkers. Build pressure. Because the only reason companies eventually do the right thing is because they have to.

In solidarity,

xxx

orla & baru

PS: for those in Brno, join us for a discussion on the directive Wednesday 29/7, 19h at cafe Falk :)

Good afternoon,

Let’s start with a quote from Isabelle Schömann, deputy general secretary of the European Trade Union Confederation, writing in euobserver last week: “Paying women less than men for the same job or a job of equal value is nothing short of economic violence against women workers.” Strong words. Also accurate ones.

We have been telling you for months that the system runs on secrecy, that nobody knowing what anyone else earns is precisely the point, not a bug. This is not just a Czech story, it is the story everywhere. Across the whole EU women still earn 11.1% less than men on average for reasons that have nothing to do with what they actually do at work (and this is even worse for Czech Republic !). Put a number on that and it gets uncomfortable fast: roughly €3,800 a year per woman. Add up every working woman in the EU and you are looking at over €358 billion a year, quietly moving out of women’s pockets and staying wherever it lands instead.

Czech republic isn’t the outlier. It’s the pattern.

You already know that the Czech Republic fell far short of the June 7 Pay Transparency Directive transposition deadline. It had company. According to the same piece, only four countries (Slovakia, Italy, Lithuania, Malta) had actually finished the job by then. Four. Out of twenty seven. Close to half the EU had not even put a draft law on the table. That is not a coincidence and it is not everyone independently running late. It is what a continent-wide employer lobbying push looks like when it works. Which is almost funny because the directive already bent over backwards for them. No firm enforcement mechanisms, which means that companies can practically opt-out. Reporting duties only kick in at 250+ employees meaning two thirds of EU workers are not even covered. Small employers get five years of runway before they have to do anything. But still they complain, it “creates massive bureaucracy” and is “too complicated”. This was never a really an objection. Unless “complicated” is code for “reveals something we would rather you didn’t see”. In which case, sure, wildly complicated. Simple for us is expensive for them, in a currency they don’t want to spend: control.

Delay is not a neutral wait-and-see position. It has a cost, and women are the ones paying it. Schömann’s piece points out that even a modest 10% narrowing of the gap (which transparency alone could plausibly deliver) would put roughly €672 back into an average woman’s pocket every year. Delay it and the 43 million women within the directive’s reach keep losing a collective €28 billion per year, because apparently it just is “too complicated”.

Nothing about this is a mystery. We know what works. What is missing is the will to actually do it. Which is exactly why we are not letting up. January 2027 is not an abstract future date anymore. It is the moment the government gets to finally do something about this glaring inequality, or the moment they get to enable this daylight robbery for the next decade.

And you can make sure they choose the right option ! Speak out and join our letter writing campaign! To make it easy, we have prepared a template and a list of email addresses (english translations are on the 3rd page of the docs). And even easier: mailto links for minimal effort :)

The letter-writing campaign continues. If you haven’t joined yet, now’s the time!

In solidarity,

xxx

orla & baru

Good evening,

Two weeks ago we touched on article 7 of the directive: the right to request salary information for your position. More specifically we talked about the Czech implementation, and why it’s not sufficient in its current form. We have been talking more about rights all workers will gain and how you can use them, because these changes can give all of us tools to fight inequality.

But directive was born specifically out of a need to do something about the gender pay gap. So today, let’s look back at that: why we do even have this directive, and does it serve that purpose ?

The right to equal pay for equal work has been around for a long time, and unfortunately it is still not reality. The reasons for it are many and deeply enshrined in every aspect of our society. None of them justify it.

To start off, let’s tease out what we even talk about when we talk about the gender pay gap vs equal pay for equal work. The gender pay gap is the difference in women’s average pay vs men’s average pay. Equal pay for equal work refers to equalizing the difference in women’s average pay vs men’s average pay for the same job. The directive states wanting to do something about the first, but ends up only doing something about the latter.

Why does that matter ?

Most people will agree in theory that everyone doing the exact same job should earn the same. This is already not the case, and pay transparency is a necessary step in ensuring that.

An apparently more contentious statement is that women should not be punished for carrying the burdens of maintaining a society: the overwhelming majority of unpaid care and house labor falls on women. This makes them have long breaks in their careers, choose for part time contacts more often, not be able to invest as much time and resources in additional training/networking, be less willing or able to take risks, … This is the greater reason for the gender pay gap, and pay transparency does nothing to even address it.

While the directive does acknowledge that the gender pay gap exists, it doesn’t open roads for addressing it beyond equal pay for equal work. And that is a crying shame.

Because in times of rising fascism, growing conservatism,continued attacks on women’s rights, this directive is a cowardly band-aid. Can we do better ? Yes ! Mail your representatives !

In solidarity,

xxx

orla & baru

Good evening,

Czechia missed the deadline, but our campaign continues :) So let’s spotlight another aspect of the directive: do you know how much your colleague earns for the same position?

Now, of course this is not literal - your salary is private information and the directive does not change that. What it does change, is that it’ll give you the right to request the average salary of someone in your position - anonymized of course, and broken down by gender. And what that gives you, is concrete evidence of whether you or any of your coworkers are being underpaid :)

And that is much needed!

We asked our survey respondents: Do you know how much your colleagues earn for the same position? Only 35.6% said yes. That means 64.4% of you don’t know if your pay is fair. The directive changes that. It says: you have the right to know what your labor is worth.

To be fair, the Czech transposition proposal does include that basic right. Employees can request information about what colleagues earn. That’s… something. But “something” and “useful” are not the same thing.

Here’s where it gets complicated. The directive says workers should have this right. The Czech government implemented it. But in a way that leaves much uncertain.

§ 306b requires employers to calculate and provide salary information. But the Czech proposal doesn’t actually specify how this calculation should work. It just says the Ministry of Labor will create a decree with the rules. Except the decree doesn’t exist yet. Just a general outline.

This matters because the way you calculate averages determines what workers see. Do you include bonuses? Shiftallowances ? Stockoptions ? … ? Only base salary? The methodology is the whole ballgame and it hasn’t been defined. Because without knowing the methodology, you can’t know if the implementation will actually work or if it’s another loophole.

Also. The directive transposition proposal expects that an employee submits a written request, but does not require the employer to provide the requested information in writing. The law says employers have to provide information “in the way that is usual and accessible” at the company. That’s it. In practice? This leaves a lot open - let’s hope our employers act in good faith and actually ensure this right gets respected.

Of course, one might be worried that requesting this information would earn you the label of ‘difficult employee’. For those of us in unionised workplaces, there is some good news here: you can request it through your union instead of on your own. For the rest of us - can we really call it a right to information if it places a target on our backs ?

This law could actually give workers a tool to push back against wage discrimination. Or it could be another law that looks good on paper but doesn’t change anything in practice.

Which one it becomes depends on whether MPs hear from workers like you that this matters. Even though we can’t change every aspect of the final version of the transposition, we can still push for improvements on some key points.

We are inviting you to speak out and join our letter writing campaign. To make it easy, we have prepared a template and a list of email addresses (English translations are on the 3rd page of the docs). And even easier: mailto links for minimal effort :)

The letter-writing campaign continues. If you haven’t joined yet, now’s the time!

xxx

orla and baru

Good afternoon, 

In the last months, we’ve spoken a lot about the pay transparency directive. By now, the Czech government has definitively failed to meet the deadline. Currently, the proposal for the Czech transposition is in the phase where all parties (union confederation, employers organization, …) have had the opportunity to write their commentary, and the government needs to reply to them.

In some way that is good news though, because the proposal, as it now stands, is insufficient. And you can still change that! We are inviting you to speak out and join our letter writing campaign. To make it easy, we have prepared a template and a list of email addresses. For the receivers, we have 3 categories:

• the current government: they obviously are responsible for the current proposal, and should hear from the people they represent what you think about it.

• non-government, possibly sympathetic members of parliament: they can propose amendments to the proposal, so let them know what you want them to change. We identified elected officials from the green party, the pirates and STAN for that.

• council & working group on gender equality: this body ought to give their expert opinion on the proposal, encourage them to not let this slide by

Feel free to add your own personal touch of course!

If you want to avoid copy-pasting – use these mailto links!

• Government

• Pirates

• Greens

• STAN

• Council

This directive will give workers tools to better gage their positions in the labor market, and force companies towards more transparency. In the current climate, especially with the havoc that AI is wrecking in our field, workers are getting more disempowered by the day. A tardy and weak implementation of this directive is sure to solidify that trend, and to gut our standing for the benefit of companies who have shown themselves as opportunistic at best. Make sure your voice is heard, mail those who have the power to change it.

In solidarity

xxx

orla and baru

Czech Republic has one of the highest gender pay gaps in the EU at 18,5% on average, and 28,4% in the ICT sector. This is the result of a whole range of issues that hide in the dark, issues that pit worker against worker, while employers stick together. We are wasting time on job interviews where we only find out at the very end of the ordeal that the salary offered is way off. New hires often earn more than colleagues who have been with the company for many years. Some job categories are systematically being undervalued. In reality, pay has little to do with difficulty, skill or experience.

And this is only possible because of the one-sided gentlemens agreement we have about moneytalk. When nobody knows what anyone else earns, what a job is actualy worth, these decisions look normal, justified. They look like just the way things are.

But they are not. They are choices made by people with power to benefit themselves, at your expense. Companies know exactly what they are doing - this is by design. Because the secrecy means profit, the silence means control, the division among workers means no one feels entittled to push back.

The European Pay Transparency Directive tries to break that system open. It came to be after Covid, a time where the unfair paydiscrepancy between men and women and the devalueing of feminised labor came to the forefront, and it explicitely aims to counter that. It recognizes that unions are an important factor in doing this. It chose pay transparency as the ultimate tool to handle these issues and make it impossible to hide the unfairness.

EU member states committed to transposing the Pay Transparency Directive into their own legal framework by June 7 2026. The Czech government missed that dealine. Now we are looking at a delay until January 2027. Seven months. At least.

Key tools for employees will come at least seven months to a year and a half late, depending on which tool you need. You suspect you are underpaid. You might even know you are underpaid. But you have no legal right to demand proof. Your suspicion is correct, but the law won’t back you. You are negotiating a raise or a starting salary. You negotiate blind while they negotiate informed. Many more months where companies can hide behind lack of transparency, setting salaries however they like, because nobody can see what anyone else earns. This isn’t a theoretical delay. This is the difference between knowing you’re being treated unfairly and being able to do something about it. Between suspicion and proof. Between silence and power.

And it’s happening because the previous Czech government dragged its feet, and this new one isn’t exactly hurrying to compensate for it. Because giving workers the ability to see and challenge pay discrimination is apparently something that requires extra caution and extra consideration /s.

This is not an expression of care from a government towards its citizens.

Second chance

However, since the transposition hasn’t passed yet, this does give us the opportunity to improve on the current proposal. Because the Czech transposition, as it stands now, is weak, minimalistic, and at points even insufficient. Yet again, it places employer interests at the forefront.

Czech Republic can do better. We have the chance to be bold. Other countries already have. And what they’ve implemented aren’t radical ideas. They implemented a directive that can actually move the needle on inequality. Instead, we got minimalism. We got a transposition that is technically compliant while practically being dull.

You don’t have to accept that. Because that would mean accepting that workers don’t have any power at all in a system designed to keep wages low and keep them competing against each other in the dark. This is about whether workers in the Czech Republic will have any actual power as the labor market continues to shift beneath our feet.

AI is already hollowing out entire job categories. Workers are losing leverage by the day. Companies are getting more aggressive, more ruthless, more willing to exploit whatever gaps exist in worker protection. The labor market is becoming increasingly hostile to anyone who isn’t desperate enough to accept whatever they are offered.

It is still not too late for us to shape what the final transposition will eventually look like, and that’s why we are launching a letter writing campaign!

If you care about fair pay, if you think workers deserve to know what their work is actually worth, tell the government! Tell your MP! Tell your union! Call your allies into action! We have prepared an email you can sign and send.

Tell MPs to not accept this proposal as written. Ask them to submit amendments that strengthen job add transparency and worker participation. Force a real debate about what fair pay means. Tell them that in a time of AI disruption and labor market chaos, we can’t afford a law that scrimps on worker protections.

The government missed its deadline, but the process has started. Give workers the tools to fight for fair pay. Make wage discrimination visible. Make a step towards closing the gender pay gap. Let’s make sure they get it right next January.

Good evening,

Last week we talked about the striking difference in perception of pay discrepancy: most men don’t think it’s an issue, while most women do. And unfortunately, women have it right: Czech Republic has one of the biggest discrepancies along gender lines in the EU. It’s clear that there is a lack of awareness by the winning side of this equation. This is not their fault - as a society, we don’t speak openly about these things and employers are allowed to swipe these differences under the rug of ‘confidentiality’ or ‘competitiveness’.

No more though. The first step is to bring it all out in to the open. If we know what employers pay fairly, if we can show our discrimination in numbers, we can hopefully start the discussion on equal footing. So what does the European Directive say about that, and how is the Czech transposition going ?

European Directive

Let us quickly copy paste the relevant paragraphs here:

Article 9:
 1. Member States shall ensure that employers provide the following information concerning their organisation, in accordance with this Article:
 (a) the gender pay gap;
 (b) the gender pay gap in complementary or variable components;
 (c) the median gender pay gap;
 (d) the median gender pay gap in complementary or variable components;
 (e) the proportion of female and male workers receiving complementary or variable components;
 (f) the proportion of female and male workers in each quartile pay band;
 (g) the gender pay gap between workers by categories of workers broken down by ordinary basic wage or salary and complementary or variable components.
 […]
 8. Member States may compile the information set out in paragraph 1, points (a) to (f), of this Article themselves, on the basis of administrative data such as data provided by employers to the tax or social security authorities. The information shall be made public pursuant to Article 29(3), point (c).

Article 29:
 3. Member States shall ensure that the tasks of the monitoring body include the following:
 (a) raising awareness among public and private undertakings and organisations, the social partners and the public to promote the principle of equal pay and the right to pay transparency, including by addressing intersectional discrimination in relation to equal pay for equal work or work of equal value;
 (b) analysing the causes of the gender pay gap and devising tools to help assess pay inequalities, making use, in particular, of the analytical work and tools of the EIGE;
 (c) collecting data received from employers pursuant to Article 9(7), and promptly publishing the data referred to in Article 9(1), points (a) to (f), in an easily accessible and user-friendly manner that allows comparison between employers, sectors and regions of the Member State concerned, and ensuring that the data from the previous four years is accessible if available;
 (d) collecting the joint pay assessment reports pursuant to Article 10(3);
 (e) aggregating data on the number and types of pay discrimination complaints brought before the competent authorities, including equality bodies, and claims brought before the national courts.

All this information would be public, undeniable, easily accessible. A strong basis for any worker to assess (potential) employers and their own situations.

Czech transposition

Credit where credit is due, the Czech transposition of this part seems pretty smooth - see from the explanatory notes (machine translated):

The Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs becomes the monitoring body responsible for analyzing the causes of pay gaps and for preparing reports on pay gaps at individual employers [pursuant to Article 9(1)(a) to (f) of the Directive]. The Ministry will publish data on pay gaps based on the reports through a newly established public administration information system, which will allow for easy comparison across employer size categories, sectors, and individual regions, and will also include historical data for the previous four years. The first publication of the results is scheduled partly in accordance with the Directive’s timeline: employers with 150 or more employees will be included in the reporting system as early as 2028, while employers with 100 to 149 employees will be included in 2031.  Employees of employment agencies who are temporarily assigned to work at a client company will not be reported until 2031 (for the 2030 calendar year).

What will you do with it ?

This new law could mean that from 2028 onwards, you’ll be able to see and show exactly how bad the discrimination is. It means you can avoid companies where women mysteriously never end up in higher paid jobs, and spend your career with an employer who appreciates each worker for what they are actually worth. It means you don’t have to have endless discussions on ‘women just earn less cause they have kids/take care of the household/don’t negotiate/…’ and can just focus on working on solutions. Will you ?

In solidarity,

xxx

orla & baru

PS: this is the last week before the supposed transposition effective date: June 7th. The Czech government is not making the deadline, but we are - our survey is closing. Get your friends/family/coworkers to fill it in before then, it helps spread awareness, and gives us a broader base for the next step of the campaign :)

Hi !

Our survey just gave us a data point that deserves its own spotlight: Do you think there is a significant pay discrepancy between you and coworkers who do the same job?

48,8% of you said yes. But the split is striking:

• 64% of women reported pay discrepancies

• 37% of men said the same

What does this actually tell us?

It tells us that women in Czech workplaces are *aware they are being underpaid relative to their male colleagues. This isn’t abstract, it’s lived experience. Women are comparing, they are noticing, they know something is off.

But here’s what’s equally important: most men don’t see it. They are in the same jobs, getting paid more, and they are not even aware of the discrepancy. For them, the system is working fine. For women in the exact same role, it is the daily reality of being paid less.

This is the privilege of invisibility.

When you benefit from inequality, you often don’t have to think about it. You don’t compare your salary to your female colleague doing the same work. Why would you? Your paycheck looks fine to you. You have no reason to suspect anything’s wrong. The system doesn’t feel broken when you are on the winning side.

But for women? It is impossible to ignore. They are doing identical work, meeting identical standards, and getting paid less for it. They have to notice because the gap directly affects their lives, their rent, their savings, their future.

The real problem isn’t that women are bad at spotting injustice. It’s that men, through no fault of their own, but still, aren’t experiencing it as a problem.

And that’s exactly why pay transparency matters so much.

Here’s where the directive comes in - differently than we’ve framed it before.

Right now, this awareness is lopsided. Women know. Men don’t see it. Employers are betting on that asymmetry, that women will feel gaslit or uncertain enough not to act on what they suspect.

But what happens when transparency becomes law? When salary data is public and undeniable? Everyone would have to see it. The numbers would be right there. Suddenly the invisibility is gone.

And when everyone can see the problem when it’s not just women’s lived experience but objective fact: it becomes much harder to ignore. Much harder to accept.

A weak directive keeps that asymmetry intact. Women keep suspecting, men keep not noticing, and nothing changes.

A strong directive with real transparency forces everyone into the same reality: the data is there, the discrepancy is undeniable, and we all have to deal with it.

What we need from you:

Keep filling out the survey. And when you do, think about this: if you’re a man reading this, have you ever compared your salary to a female colleague in the same role? Have you ever had to?

If you’re a woman, how much energy does it take to live with that suspicion every day?

xxx

orla & baru

PS: Fill out the survey. Share it. This data is ammunition.

Hi hello good evening,

The weather has been dreary, and so is the Czech implementation of the pay transparency directive. But ! Let’s have a look at a small win we had last year :)

Last year the flexi novella made explicit something that should never have been doubted: workers can share their own salaries with whomever they like. Did you know this very common contract clause was never legal ?

But now that the legal restraint has been removed, would people actually be talking more about their salaries ? Or was this law merely a legal implementation of a stronger sentiment have about their salaries ?

In our survey, 84,4% of you said you knew it’s ok to share this information, but how many of you actually do ?

People generally feel apprehensive to sharing their salary information. Because societally, we link some personal values to the number on our payslip: did you work hard enough ? Did you really do your best ? Is this your best ? Are you worthy ?

We’d like to investigate these feelings, and encourage you to be open about this information.

Why don’t we share our salaries ?

Well, there are a lot of unspoken rules: don’t brag, be humble - but also, if you earn more than your colleague - don’t say, its our little secret. If you earn little - you might feel its a reflection on you as a person - cause salary is an objective indicator of value in our meritocratic society, right ? - so let’s keep it hushhush… And is talking about money at all superficial ? Or even greedy ?

These questions tie in to really big questions: what do we deserve ? What should society look like ? Is it fair that people earn poverty wages for doing something we’d really like them to do ? Could you lose the privilege you have obtained ?

How do we escape these big questions ?

Understandably, the existential dread of sharing your salary might be pretty major. All what we are, all what we can hope for is quantified, in a random metric of which we don’t even know the scale.

Companies and society have a chokehold on us - don’t talk about your earnings, lest you be found greedy/arrogant/poor/lacking.

And this is completely one-sided: companies constantly compare what the market values of our positions are - they make sure they never overpay.

But it need not be that way. Some countries have salary information already publicly available for anyone ! I know, it’s unheard of ! This is among other things (that we will touch on in our upcoming newsletters) what the directive aims to tackle: have publicly available info on what certain jobs are worth according to the jobmarket. What companies are remunerating fairly ? And personally, you might investigate a little bit deeper: is it fair to be paid below a livable wage ? If you’d know, with certainty, what jobs are worth, would you stand up for fair compensation ?

Pay transparency

Pay transparency is not just in the law though. In principle, the 2025 flexi novella freed our hands: if we are willing to come out with our salaries, if we are willing to step away from the stigma, we could fix this matter in no time :) Let’s use it and have honest and open conversations. Let’s start talking about our own salaries !

This week, talk to at least 1 coworker about your own salary. How does it feel ? Embarrassing ? Empowering ? Do you think it gave them important information ? Did you learn anything ? Is this fair ?

In solidarity,

xxx

orla&baru

PS: don’t forget to talk to your friends, family, and coworkers about the pay transparency directive ! The changes, properly implemented, could really mean a lot: better salaries, better tools to fight inequality, more certainty and power in the hands of workers. It’d be really helpful if they filled out the survey :) It runs till the 7th of June

Hi !

Hope you have had a great week, let’s jump in to the next deep dive :)

Have you ever been caught by surprise during the job application process on salary expectations ?

When job advertisements don’t mention the salary, it can happen that you stand for an (unpleasant) surprise at the end of the road. About 50% of you said you have been in this situation. But more remarkable: for women this percentage is 79% while from the male respondents only 35% replied yes !

Is this a representative survey ? No. Does it fall in line with what we expected and give us an excuse to talk about one of our petpeeves ? Yes ! Lets talk about the myth of ‘women earn less cause women don’t negotiate’ :)

For a long time, there has been this idea that women don’t earn as much as men do, cause they don’t ask for it. Already without looking at the numbers of it, you can notice this very patriarchal idea of the woman as a meek creature, a silly goose who just can’t fully function in the hard world of Business. But sure, lets entertain the idea, and look at the Numbers ™.

Studies done show that women did indeed used to negotiate less - 30 years ago. This since has turned, and women now tend to negotiate more than men, both for hiring and for promotions (54% vs 44%). And still they get turned down more - women still earn on average 18,5% less than men in Czechia (even 28,4% less in our own ICT sector).

But what is very noticeable, is that this difference is especially big in higher paid jobs, and the difference grows with seniority. These higher paid jobs, usually have a much wider salary range, and are regulated less by unions - which gives sexist (and other) bias free range.

You see, those silly geese were just accurately ascertaining their reality. Lets stop blaming the victims of the system, and actually try to fix it.

So here we are again, at the pay transparency directive. If we ever hope to solve the gender pay gap, we NEED at the very least strict salary ranges in jobads, clear and equal to everyone even before they have to decide to go for it. No lower limit, no crazy range of 10%. Just tell us what the work is worth to you, and hire accordingly.

Let’s look back to last weeks newsletter to see what the current proposal does about this: The employer is required to demonstrably inform a natural person applying for a job with the employer of the minimum wage salary and other monetary benefits and benefits of monetary value to which the applicant would be entitled as an employee from the date the employment relationship begins; the employer shall provide this information no later than before the commencement of negotiations on the conclusion of an employment contract.

This is woefully weak, completely unfit for purpose - a minimum wage that doesn’t have to even be tied to reality (technically the minimum wage fulfills the requirement and will always be true), no range, and it doesn’t even have to be public/in the jobadd itself (so no way to check what other applicants get told).

This is not legislation proposed by a government who cares to solve an issue, this is legislation that spits in the face of the stated purpose.

Now how can you help push the government to strengthen their proposal ?

• talk about it ! Tell you friends, family, coworkers, … why this legislation is important !

• spread our survey ! The more people fill out our survey, the more interesting our results are, and the more people we can talk to as well !

• become a member ! Unions have been in this fight for a long time, and through unions you can make a changes you dare not hope for individually.

We hope to see you soon - in the trenches, at a beer, with a fire burning (in your heart).

xxx

orla and baru

Often we spend the 1st of May remembering past victories.

A confident labor movement does not stop there. We need to look forward: what could a better future look like?

A future where we work to build the lives we want. Where we work for the benefit of all. Where we perform meaningful work, where our time, our skills and our effort are respected. A world formed by the connections in our lives. Imagine a turnaround from our individualized and fragmented society. Imagine a better world.

What we must do today is to find the struggles necessary to get there.

The arbitrariness and the absurdity of our current system touch everyone.

The absurdity that those who know their craft the best, often have the least say in how the work gets done. Every day in our working lives, we experience our labor being directed top down by people who dont understand it.

The arbitrariness that our tools are being chosen by those who never use them. We are told that we are being paid the exact value of our work by those on top. By people who don’t appreciate it, people who look down on us and our labor. How can we trust them to value our work fairly, when its in their interest to devalue it?

We can’t! These judges of value, these “brilliant” allocators have consistently devalued the work of women. By a lot. It shows that they will never pay what we deserve, they will pay what they can get away with.

The ICT Union invites you to join other workers in a campaign to end this crying shame. Today, we demand fair pay. It won’t be won overnight, but we have an opportunity now. We can strike while the iron is hot.

Right now a change in the labor law is coming up.

The Czech parliament will implement the European directive on pay transparency, which aims to give workers tools to combat these inequities. Czech lawmakers will decide how strong your right to fair pay will be.

You can pressure them to act in the interests of workers, not employers.

A year ago, employers lobbied for the labor code flexinovela, which tried to strip us of our established labour rights. The labour movement forced the government to abandon their worst ideas.

Who do you trust to fight for workers’ rights?

You and your coworkers can make a difference. Fight for victories to be proud of! Be part of the labor movement, join your union <3

Happy sunny afternoon everyone :)

A while ago you showed interest in the work we are doing with the ICT Union. Right now, much of our sectoral work is about the Czech implementation of the European directive on Pay Transparency. In very broad lines, that directive aims to give workers some tools to fight for fairer pay, with the explicit goal of doing something about the gender pay gap. Depending on how the Czech government will implement this directive, those tools will be more or less sharp.

We have a survey (still open ! Invite your friends to fill it out !), and based on what interests you the most, we’ll be sending out what the Czech proposal says about it, and what we propose as a better alternative for workers. Lets dive in to the first one:

Should job adds show payranges?

A perfect 100% of you said yes ! And of course ! Of course your potential employer should let you know why you are putting so many hours in their ever-lengthening recruiting process. Of course they need to be upfront about remuneration, so you don’t accidentally low ball your means for sustenance in the hopes of seeming agreeable. Of course your pay should be dependent on your skills & job, not on whatever your previous employer deemed ok. That makes so much sense!

Even the European Union is explicit on this in their directive:

The lack of information on the envisaged pay range of a position creates an information asymmetry which limits the bargaining power of applicants for employment. Ensuring transparency should enable prospective workers to make an informed decision about the expected salary […] Transparency would also ensure an explicit, non-gender-biased basis for pay setting and would disrupt the undervaluation of pay compared to skills and experience. Transparency would also address intersectional discrimination where non-transparent pay settings allow for discriminatory practices on several discrimination grounds. […] […] Employers should not be allowed to inquire or proactively try to obtain information about the current pay or prior pay history of an applicant for employment.

Here the EU recognizes clearly, that without payranges in job advertisements, job negotiations are an imbalanced process where workers are at a big disadvantage, a process that strengthens discrimination of all kinds. Now, what has the Czech government made of this ?

(1) The selection based on qualifications, necessary requirements, or special skills falls within the employer’s authority, unless a special legal regulation12provides fora different procedure; this does not affect the requirements imposed by special legal regulations on a job applicant as an employee.

(2) In connection with negotiations prior to the establishment of an employment relationship, an employer may request from a natural person applying for a job with the employer, or from other persons, only data that is directly related to the conclusion of an employment contract. Information regarding wages or salary and other monetary payments and payments of monetary value arising from the current or previous employment relationship of the individual applying for a job shall not be considered data under the first sentence.

(3) The employer is required to demonstrably inform a natural person applying for a job with the employer of the minimum wage salary and other monetary benefits and benefits of monetary value to which the applicant would be entitled as an employee from the date the employment relationship begins; the employer shall provide this information no later than before the commencement of negotiations on the conclusion of an employment contract)

This sounds bad right ? Where is the range ? What do they mean, ‘no later than before the commencement of negotiations’ ? But its even worse - all the way in the end they refer to the civil code, explicitly putting all the blame on the worker for not being informed enough. Here Czechia is not only not following the spirit of the directive, but also not even doing the bare minimum.

To be fair, we are happy to see that they got 1 point right - employers wont be allowed to ask you about previous salary details. That at least would be a meaningful difference - if employers comply.

Let’s now imagine what it could be - what would actually level the playing field in job negotiations ? We propose: • narrow jobranges in the jobadvertisements: 1 range for the position itself, and 1 range of actual wages paid for similar positions at that employer over the past year. This way, they cannot get away with giving a ridiculously low minimum, or a range so broad that it lost all informative value. No, instead they’d have to actually inform you on what they intend to, and actually pay - exactly as the directive intends ! • this range should be communicated in writing upfront - even if the applicant arrives through word of mouth/connections/… This makes sure that you know what you get into before you start, and you cant be labeled as difficult for asking. It puts the proof of burden on the employer. • clear sanctions for employers who do not comply. Because, unfortunately, without enforcement mechanism, employers might see this more as a suggestion than a duty.

But let’s also be honest - legislation will only get us so far. more fundamentally we need a mindshift in Czech society. We need to learn to talk about money. We need to take shame and (self-)worth out of the moneyconversation. We need to talk about what we need, and what we all deserve. And then we need to do something to make that happen :)

Do you have any other ideas ? Let us know in our survey :)

xxx

orla and baru