Pay Rise (Employer-Led Pay Review Strategy)

Pay rises are a core component of reward strategy, yet many UK employers rely on ad hoc decisions made under budget pressure, retention concerns or manager preference. This approach increases legal risk, undermines internal fairness and creates unpredictable labour costs. A pay rise is not just a financial decision; it is a contractual, legal and strategic action that affects workforce planning, employee relations and compliance obligations. Businesses need a structured and defensible method for awarding, documenting and communicating pay rises.

What this article is about
This article provides HR professionals and business owners with a detailed and employer-focused guide to managing pay rises within a lawful and strategically coherent framework. It explains how to design and operate a consistent pay review cycle, how to control equal pay and discrimination risk, how to ensure compliance with the National Minimum Wage and contractual rules, and how to implement and communicate pay rises effectively. The focus is on employer-led pay reviews, not employee requests. The aim is to support organisations in making defensible, fair and commercially grounded decisions that align with workforce planning and business priorities.

A properly governed pay rise system improves retention, reduces equal pay exposure, and gives managers a clear structure for decisions. It also supports financial predictability by linking pay reviews to business planning cycles. With employment tribunals increasingly scrutinising the transparency of pay decisions, employers cannot afford informal or undocumented pay practices. This article sets out the practical steps to strengthen governance, protect against legal risk and support a sustainable reward structure.

Section A: Designing a Lawful & Consistent Pay Review Framework

A structured pay review framework allows employers to award pay rises in a consistent, transparent and legally defensible way. Without a defined framework, managers tend to make decisions based on habit, preference or short-term pressures. This creates inconsistencies that can expose a business to equal pay challenges, grievances and retention risk. A clear framework establishes the basis on which pay decisions are made and ensures that decisions align with workforce planning and budget control.

1. What counts as a pay rise under UK law

A pay rise can take several forms and does not have to be labelled as a “pay rise” to fall within legal scrutiny. It may include an increase to base salary, an uplift to allowances, or an adjustment to reflect market conditions. A contractual annual increment is different from a discretionary increase, and it is important for employers to be clear about the category they are applying because it affects whether consent is needed and whether future entitlement is created.

Contractual increases arise where an employment contract guarantees a specific rise or states that salary will increase annually. These require no further agreement from the employee. Discretionary pay rises, by contrast, are awarded at the employer’s choice and should be supported by objective criteria to ensure fairness. Market adjustments and retention adjustments are typically discretionary but carry greater legal risk if there is no clear evidence explaining why certain employees or roles are prioritised. Temporary uplifts, such as additional responsibility allowances, should be documented with an end date to avoid claims of implied contractual entitlement.

2. Why employers need a structured pay review cycle

A structured pay review cycle gives a business control over timing, budgeting and consistent application of reward decisions. Many employers adopt an annual review, often aligned with financial year planning. Others use a mid-year or rolling review system. What matters is that the cycle is documented and consistently applied.

A defined cycle helps HR and finance build predictable costs into their models. It also reduces the pressure on managers who might otherwise face constant requests for pay adjustments throughout the year. When reviews are tied to an agreed timetable, the organisation can make decisions based on performance, market conditions and affordability rather than emotion or urgency.

A structured cycle also supports legal compliance. By ensuring all employees in comparable roles are reviewed at the same time and under the same criteria, employers reduce the likelihood of unintentional pay disparities or discriminatory patterns emerging.

3. Objective criteria for awarding rises

Employers must ensure that decisions about pay rises are based on objective reasons that can be demonstrated if challenged. Common criteria include performance, skills, qualifications, contribution to organisational goals, market scarcity, and the avoidance of pay compression within teams.

Performance-based rises must be grounded in evidence. This means performance reviews that are accurate, contemporaneous and free from bias. Using competencies or skills frameworks can help bring clarity to the criteria. Market-based rises should be supported by evidence of pay levels in the sector, not anecdotal claims.

Retention risk may justify a pay rise, but only where there is evidence that the employee’s skills are difficult to replace or where there is a clear business impact if the employee leaves. Employers should avoid making reactive counter-offers as a substitute for structured pay policy; doing so undermines fairness and internal relativities.

4. Documenting your pay review framework

A clear and accessible pay review policy protects both the organisation and employees by setting out the principles and process for awarding rises. The policy should outline the review cycle, the criteria used, the decision-making process, the roles of HR and line managers, and the need for documentation at every step.

Manager guidance is essential to ensure consistency. Templates for recommendation forms, justification statements and moderation panels help standardise decision-making. HR should maintain oversight to ensure criteria are being applied consistently across teams and to identify patterns that might indicate risk.

Documentation is critical. Employers should retain evidence of each pay decision, including the data or reasoning relied upon. In the event of an equal pay claim or discrimination allegation, this audit trail is vital. The absence of documentation can make even fair decisions difficult to defend.

Section Summary

A structured and documented pay review framework protects employers from legal risk and creates consistency across the organisation. By defining what constitutes a pay rise, setting a clear review timetable, using objective criteria and maintaining robust documentation, employers can ensure decisions are fair, transparent and defensible. This foundation supports both compliance and effective workforce planning.

Section B: Legal Compliance When Awarding Pay Rises

Employers who manage pay rises without a clear understanding of the underlying legal framework increase the risk of tribunal claims, disputes and internal fairness issues. Pay decisions engage several areas of UK employment law, including equal pay, discrimination, minimum wage compliance and contractual variation rules. A lawful approach requires structured processes, clear justification for decisions and accurate documentation. This section sets out the key legal considerations that HR and business owners must factor into every pay rise cycle.

1. Equal pay and discrimination risk

Equal pay requirements arise under Part 5, Chapter 3 of the Equality Act 2010, which gives the right to equal contractual terms for men and women performing equal work. This applies to like work, work rated as equivalent and work of equal value. Pay rises that result in a disparity between male and female employees performing equal work must therefore be objectively justified.

Broader discrimination rules also apply. Under sections 13 and 19 of the Equality Act 2010, employers must ensure pay rise decisions do not directly or indirectly discriminate based on protected characteristics such as age, sex, disability, race, religion or sexual orientation. Even unintentional disparities can expose employers to significant legal risk. Subjective performance assessments, if not grounded in evidence, can embed bias and result in indirect discrimination.

Employers should conduct periodic pay audits, supported by reliable data, to identify whether disparities exist. Although not mandatory for all employers, audits are strongly recommended, particularly for organisations with decentralised pay decisions or legacy pay structures. Employers must be able to show legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons for any pay differences, supported by documented evidence such as performance data or market benchmarking.

2. National Minimum Wage and contractual considerations

Every pay rise must be assessed for its impact on National Minimum Wage (NMW) and National Living Wage (NLW) compliance. HMRC enforces NMW/NLW rules and can issue penalties of up to 200% of arrears owed. Some payments, such as expenses and certain allowances, do not count toward minimum wage calculations. Employers must therefore ensure the hourly rate remains compliant after any contractual or working hours adjustments.

NMW/NLW must be calculated per pay reference period, not averaged across longer periods. This is particularly relevant for part-time staff, irregular-hours workers and those with variable allowances. Employers must ensure their payroll systems correctly calculate minimum wage across each period.

Contractual variations must also be managed correctly. Under section 4 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, an employer must provide written particulars of any changes to key terms, including salary, within one month. Because a pay rise changes a contractual term, written confirmation is legally required. Employers should avoid wording that may create implied entitlement to future rises unless that is intended. A history of automatic, consistent annual increases may create an implied contractual right through custom and practice if the pattern is regular, certain and well-known.

3. Transparency, record-keeping and audit trails

Legal compliance depends heavily on the employer’s ability to show why a pay decision was made. This requires transparent processes, consistent documentation and secure record-keeping. Employers should retain justification for each pay rise, including performance data, benchmarking evidence and business rationale. Inadequate documentation makes it more difficult to defend pay differences between employees performing equal work.

Audit trails should include moderation notes, sign-off decisions and any appeals or reconsiderations. Employers must also keep pay and working hours records for at least three years for NMW/NLW compliance purposes. A strong audit trail is one of the most effective defences against equal pay or discrimination claims.

4. Pay rises for part-time, casual or irregular-hours workers

Pay rise decisions for part-time, casual and irregular-hours workers must comply with equality rules and minimum wage requirements. Under the Part-time Workers (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2000, part-time workers must not be treated less favourably than comparable full-time colleagues. Pay rises should therefore be calculated fairly, using appropriate pro-rating where relevant.

For irregular-hours workers, employers must ensure that pay rises maintain NMW/NLW compliance across each pay reference period. Allowances, overtime patterns and fluctuating hours can affect calculations, so consistent methods must be applied. Agency workers have the right to equal pay after 12 weeks in the same role, meaning rises must be passed on where comparable permanent roles in the organisation receive increases.

Section Summary

Legal compliance is central to pay rise decision-making. Employers must ensure equal pay and discrimination rules are respected, contractual terms are managed properly, minimum wage obligations are met and decisions are backed by a clear audit trail. By embedding compliance checks into the pay review process, employers reduce legal exposure and strengthen the fairness and credibility of their reward strategy.

Section C: Pay Benchmarking & Market Alignment

Pay rises do not exist in isolation; they sit within a wider labour market where salary expectations shift in response to recruitment pressure, inflation, skills shortages and industry-specific trends. For employers, benchmarking is not optional. Without accurate market data, pay rises can drift away from commercial reality, creating retention issues, pay compression and inconsistencies across roles. A structured approach to benchmarking ensures that pay decisions remain competitive while maintaining internal fairness.

1. Using market data to set competitive pay

Employers should use objective and reliable market data when determining whether pay rises are needed to remain competitive. This includes published salary surveys, sector reports, recruitment data and benchmarking tools. Relying on anecdotal evidence or isolated salary demands leads to inconsistency and may result in overpaying or underpaying staff.

Market data should be reviewed at least annually as part of the pay review cycle. For roles with acute labour shortages, more frequent monitoring may be required. Employers should ensure that any market-based adjustments are applied consistently across comparable roles and supported by documented evidence. Without this evidence, market-based rises may appear arbitrary, increasing the risk of equal pay or discrimination challenges.

Salary inflation remains a challenge in certain sectors, particularly technology, healthcare and specialist engineering roles. Employers must balance competitiveness with affordability. Benchmarks should not automatically dictate pay rises, but they should provide the context for decisions when recruitment or retention pressures arise.

2. Addressing pay compression and legacy pay issues

Pay compression occurs when long-serving employees earn similar pay to new hires in the same role, often because market rates have increased more quickly than internal rises. Left unaddressed, pay compression can damage morale and trigger grievances or retention issues.

Employers should identify compression risk through regular pay reviews and market analysis. Where compression is identified, targeted adjustments may be required to restore internal relativities. These adjustments should be made using objective criteria and supported by documentation explaining why certain groups are prioritised.

Legacy pay issues also need careful management. Some employees may have historically received higher rises due to previous management decisions or structural changes. Employers should not seek to reduce legacy pay, but they should take steps to ensure current pay practices do not perpetuate outdated disparities. Salary banding and job evaluation systems can help prevent inconsistency from continuing.

3. Job evaluation and internal relativities

Internal relativities refer to the logical and fair relationship between salaries for different roles within the organisation. Job evaluation provides a structured method for comparing roles based on responsibility, skills, knowledge and complexity. Employers who rely on job evaluation systems are better placed to defend pay decisions, particularly when faced with equal pay claims.

A properly implemented job evaluation scheme is one of the strongest tools for defending an employer against equal pay claims, as it provides a material factor defence where roles have been objectively assessed and placed within a structured pay hierarchy.

When awarding rises, employers should consider how adjustments affect the balance between roles in the same band or adjacent bands. Large rises for individual employees without regard for role comparison can distort relativities and create future legal and operational problems.

4. Cost modelling and affordability

Cost modelling is essential when planning pay rises. Employers must ensure that increases are financially sustainable and aligned with business performance, revenue forecasts and workforce plans. HR and finance should work together to project the total cost of rises, including knock-on effects such as pension contributions, employer National Insurance and payroll budget adjustments.

Affordability does not justify discriminatory pay practices, but it can inform legitimate business decisions on the scale and timing of rises. Employers should document affordability assessments as part of the audit trail for pay review rounds, particularly where rises differ across departments or roles.

Where affordability is constrained, employers should consider non-pay retention measures, such as development opportunities, improved working conditions or one-off payments. However, these must not replace structural pay adjustments where benchmarking data shows that base pay is materially below market levels.

Section Summary

Benchmarking and market alignment ensure that pay rises are grounded in objective data and commercial reality. By using reliable market information, addressing pay compression, maintaining internal relativities and modelling costs carefully, employers can make pay rise decisions that support recruitment, retention and fair reward structures. A well-anchored benchmarking strategy strengthens both legal defensibility and organisational performance.

Section D: Pay Rise Implementation & Communication

Once a pay rise has been authorised, the way it is implemented and communicated is just as important as the decision itself. Poor communication, unclear documentation or inconsistent messaging can create misunderstandings, fuel grievances and undermine the credibility of the pay review process. A controlled implementation process ensures that contractual obligations are met, internal fairness is protected and employees receive clear, accurate information about their updated pay.

1. Drafting letters and documenting increases

Every pay rise must be confirmed in writing. This is a legal requirement where the rise changes a contractual term such as base salary. Under section 4 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, employers must issue written particulars detailing the change within one month. Pay rise letters should clearly set out the new salary, the effective date, any changes to allowances, whether the rise is discretionary or contractual and any conditions attached to the increase.

Employers should avoid language that implies future entitlement unless this is intended. Wording such as “annual increase” or “standard rise” may create expectations that similar increases will occur in future years. Any rise that could lead to an implied contractual right must be considered carefully, particularly where past practice shows a pattern of regular, certain and well-known annual rises.

Internal documentation should also record the justification for the decision. A short justification form or approval note attached to the employee’s personnel file helps create an auditable record. Where rises are part of a wider pay review cycle, employers should maintain a central record showing how individual decisions aligned with the organisation’s criteria and moderation processes.

2. Communicating pay rises to staff

Communication must be timely, consistent and accurate. Where a structured pay review cycle exists, employees should be informed of outcomes within a defined timeframe to maintain trust and manage expectations.

Employers should provide clear messaging focusing on the new salary, effective date and how the rise fits within the organisation’s overall process. Managers should not disclose comparative information about team members, but they should be prepared to explain the general criteria used in the review.

Consistency in communication is critical. Employers must ensure that messaging does not differ between groups of employees, including those with protected characteristics. Inconsistent communication can be used as evidence of unfair or discriminatory treatment. HR should provide managers with guidance or briefing notes to ensure alignment across the organisation.

3. Managing employee dissatisfaction if rises are declined

Not all employees will receive a pay rise, and some may be dissatisfied. Employers must handle these conversations with care to minimise the risk of grievances, disengagement or allegations of unfairness.

Where a rise is declined, employers should explain the decision objectively, drawing on performance outcomes, market comparisons or affordability constraints where appropriate. Subjective or speculative comments should be avoided. Employers should offer feedback and guidance on how employees can progress ahead of the next review cycle to maintain motivation and transparency.

HR should monitor data to ensure refusal patterns do not disadvantage employees based on protected characteristics. Employees in comparable roles must be treated consistently, with any variations clearly evidenced and justified.

4. Monitoring outcomes and updating pay frameworks

Implementation does not end once pay rise letters are issued. Employers must review outcomes after each pay cycle to ensure the framework remains fair, legally compliant and aligned with business needs.

Reviewing outcomes should involve analysing pay distributions across roles, teams and demographics to identify disparities, pay compression or emerging risks. Employers should take prompt action where issues arise. Pay frameworks must be updated periodically to reflect changes in labour markets, business strategy or organisational structure.

HR, finance and leadership teams should work collaboratively to ensure pay structures remain financially sustainable and competitive. Updating salary bands, job evaluation systems and criteria ensures the framework remains fit for purpose and compliant with ongoing legal obligations.

Section Summary

A well-managed implementation and communication process is critical to maintaining trust and legal compliance. Employers must document increases clearly, communicate outcomes consistently, manage dissatisfaction professionally and monitor the effects of each pay cycle. By doing so, organisations reinforce transparency, fairness and accountability within their reward strategy.

FAQs

Are employers legally required to give pay rises in the UK?
There is no general legal obligation to award pay rises. Employers must, however, ensure pay does not fall below the National Minimum Wage or National Living Wage and that pay decisions comply with the Equality Act 2010. Beyond this, pay rises are discretionary unless explicitly guaranteed in the employment contract.

Can employers give different pay rises to similar staff?
Yes, provided there is an objective and legally defensible justification. Performance, skills, responsibilities, market alignment and retention considerations can justify differences. Employers must be able to evidence these reasons to defend against equal pay or discrimination claims under the Equality Act 2010.

Do pay rises have to match inflation?
No. Employers are not legally required to match inflation or cost-of-living increases. Inflation may be considered as part of benchmarking, but affordability and business strategy remain valid factors. Employers should document their reasoning to maintain a defensible audit trail.

When does a pay rise become a contractual right?
A pay rise becomes a contractual entitlement when explicitly stated in the employment contract or where a consistent pattern of automatic annual rises creates an implied term through custom and practice. This occurs when a practice is regular, certain and well-known across the workforce.

Do pay rises need to be confirmed in writing?
Yes. When a pay rise changes a contractual term, employers must issue written particulars within one month under section 4 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. Even where a written statement is not legally required, written confirmation is best practice to ensure clarity and accurate records.

How should employers handle employees who challenge or appeal a pay rise decision?
Employers should offer a structured and transparent process. This may involve explaining the criteria applied, reviewing performance documentation or checking for inconsistencies. Outcomes should be documented and used to improve future pay processes.

What evidence should employers keep in case a pay decision is challenged?
Employers should retain performance records, benchmarking data, moderation notes, justification forms and related correspondence. Strong documentation is critical when defending equal pay or discrimination claims and when demonstrating compliance during HMRC NMW audits.

Conclusion

A structured, lawful and commercially grounded approach to pay rises is critical for UK employers. Unstructured or inconsistent decision-making exposes organisations to legal and operational risks and undermines internal trust. A well-designed pay review framework ensures that rises are awarded on objective criteria, delivered through a consistent process and supported by clear documentation that withstands scrutiny.

Employers who invest in a robust reward structure benefit from greater retention, stronger internal equity and reduced exposure to equal pay and discrimination claims. By aligning pay rise decisions with market data, job evaluation, financial planning and workforce strategy, organisations maintain competitiveness and transparency. Effective communication, accurate documentation and consistent record-keeping complete the framework, ensuring that every pay rise decision is clear, defensible and aligned with business priorities.

This employer-focused model supports both compliance and commercial outcomes. It positions HR and business leaders to make balanced, evidence-based decisions that maintain fairness across the workforce while protecting the organisation from avoidable risk.

Glossary

Useful Links