In discussions surrounding pay transparency, the focus generally lies on the obligations imposed on individual employers: the criteria for determining remuneration, salary ranges, employees’ right to access pay-related information, and the monitoring of gender pay gaps.

For corporate groups, however, the legal framework is more nuanced. Italian Legislative Decree No. 96 of 7 May 2026, implementing Directive (EU) 2023/970, introduces a principle of particular significance: comparisons between employees performing the same work or work of equal value may extend to employees of different companies where remuneration is determined by the same statutory or contractual source, or by company-level collective agreements or internal regulations that apply across several companies within the same corporate group.

Accordingly, the legal separation between group companies does not necessarily entail corresponding autonomy in relation to their remuneration policies.

Membership in the same corporate group does not, in itself, make all employees comparable. The decisive factor is the existence of a common source governing pay decisions.

The Directive itself makes clear that comparisons may extend beyond the boundaries of a single employer where remuneration is determined by a single source capable of establishing those employment conditions and, where necessary, restoring equal treatment.

From this perspective, the analysis cannot be confined to identifying the entity that formally enters into the employment contract. Rather, it must determine who effectively defines the group’s remuneration policies, including salary bands, job grading frameworks, bonus and salary increase criteria, incentive schemes, retention policies, and rules governing intra-group mobility.

Where such decisions are made or approved centrally, the group’s governance structure becomes relevant for assessing compliance with the principle of equal pay.

The centralisation of HR functions is undoubtedly an important tool for achieving organisational efficiency. Shared job architectures, harmonised salary bands, common performance management systems, and group-wide compensation committees promote consistency in HR management and facilitate internal mobility.

At the same time, however, these governance models may broaden the scope of potential comparisons between employees of different group companies.

This does not mean that every difference in remuneration is incompatible with the law. Pay differentials may be entirely lawful, provided they are based on objective and verifiable criteria, such as the relevant geographic labour market, the actual level of responsibility exercised, the skills required for the role, working conditions, or individual performance.

For corporate groups, therefore, the key issue is not merely the adoption of a pay policy that complies with applicable legislation. Rather, it is the establishment of a governance framework for remuneration decisions that clearly distinguishes between decisions taken at group level and those left to the autonomy of individual group companies.

The Law Firm remains at your disposal should you require any further information or assistance on this topic.