Why pay transparency rules demand a strategic rethink

The first full year of Ontario’s mandatory pay transparency framework has produced a measurable compliance surge – but employment lawyers say the harder work is still ahead.

Since Jan. 1, 2026, when the requirements of the Working for Workers Four Act (WFW4), 2024 came into force, Ontario job postings disclosing salary information have jumped from 49 per cent to 71 per cent, according to Indeed’s Pay Transparency Tracker. That 22-point climb reflects genuine organizational movement – but the numbers tell only part of the story, according to Aleksandra Pressey, Partner at Williams HR Law in the Greater Toronto Area – who will be at HRFest Canada 2026 on Nov. 11 moderating the panel, “Hiring in 2027 – Legal, Transparent and Actually Human.”

“Pay transparency was definitely loud and out there, and something that a lot of organizations had heard about,” says Pressey. “But I think there was a lot of misunderstanding in terms of what it meant – a lot of confusion between pay transparency obligations, pay equity obligations, and equal pay for equal work obligations.”

Ontario joins five other Canadian provinces that have enacted (British Columbia, Prince Edward Island, New Brunswick, and Nova Scotia) or proposed (Newfoundland and Labrador) some form of pay transparency legislation, according to Employment Hero, with Indeed’s Pay Transparency Tracker following job postings on Indeed with explicit pay information.

The opportunity hiding inside the pay transparency obligation

Under Ontario’s new rules, employers with 25 or more employees must include the expected salary range in every publicly advertised external job posting. The range may not exceed $50,000, and employers are exempt from disclosing compensation above $200,000. The legislation also requires disclosure of AI use in hiring, while a companion provision under the Working for Workers Five Act, 2024 established a 45-day candidate notification rule, requiring employers to inform every interviewed applicant of a hiring decision within 45 days of their most recent interview.

While pay transparency rules set a standard of compliance, a compliance-only mindset undersells what the rules can do, says Pressey. Rather than framing them as risk management, she encourages HR leaders to treat them as an opening for long-overdue internal work. As HRD Canada has examined in its coverage of Ontario’s new pay transparency and AI disclosure requirements, the gap between technical compliance and genuine readiness remains significant for many employers.

“Pay transparency is actually an opportunity, first of all, to look internally and see what exactly your expected pay ranges are for any type of role,” Pressey says. “And then hopefully be aligned with that before you have to make any sort of communication outside, in terms of candidates – and it helps to somewhat set candidates' expectations… to ensure that the employer and the potential future employee are on the same page.”

That internal alignment can expose uncomfortable realities. Some employers are finding that publicly posted pay ranges sit well above what long-tenured employees currently earn – a dynamic that creates retention risk alongside compliance risk.

“You’re posting for a job, you’re saying here’s the potential salary range, and then you have incumbents who might be a lot closer to that lower end than the high end, despite sometimes many years of service,” says Pressey.

The compliance checkbox isn’t enough

The panel Pressey is moderating at HRFest Canada 2026 takes its name from a tension she says she encounters frequently: organizations treating disclosure as a process step rather than a cultural commitment.

Ontario’s AI disclosure requirement is a clear example of where compliance can outpace practice, according to Pressey. Employers must now state in job postings whether AI is used to screen candidates, but Pressey says that obligation often breaks down at the team level. HRD Canada has tracked the compliance picture since Ontario’s AI hiring law came into force, finding that consistent practice across hiring teams remains elusive for many organizations.

“You say you’re not using AI in your recruitment processes, or you’re only using it to this limited amount – and you might not necessarily know that your frontline manager who’s on your hiring panel is actually using AI heavily in some way, shape, or form,” says Pressey. “Because you haven’t inquired, you haven’t properly set expectations, or you don’t have appropriate policies in place.”

The result is a credibility gap between what an organization publicly declares and what actually occurs, she says.

Focus on opportunities, not penalties

With maximum Ontario Employment Standards Act (ESA) fines doubled to $100,000 per offence under the WFW4 Act, the financial case for proactive compliance has sharpened. But Pressey urges organizations to resist treating penalty exposure as their primary motivator. As HRD Canada has reported, the new recruitment rules requiring employers to follow up with candidates are creating process discipline challenges even for well-intentioned organizations.

“Initially when pay transparency legislation was announced, there was a lot of concern and fear about having to do this, and I think what's important is to shift that mindset and just focus on, ‘Here are all the benefits of this,’” says Pressey. “Yes, if you don't do it or if you're doing it incorrectly, there could be some type of penalty, but also you could be leaving a lot on the table – that’s the more productive way to consider it.”

Pressey notes that the increase in maximum fines doesn’t necessarily mean a bigger risk for organizations. “The reality is, is that there could be some penalties, but a lot of times the ministry does more or less give people a chance,” she says. “It’s definitely something that employers should be aware of, but it doesn't necessarily mean that’s the fine that you're going to get if you're offside – but it’s an obligation that should be taken seriously.”

The deeper challenge is structural – a reactive hiring culture cannot adapt quickly enough to meet the pace of legal and labour market change; and geopolitical uncertainty, anticipated generational shifts in the skilled workforce, and evolving candidate expectations are all pressing against HR departments that are already stretched, says Pressey.

“Taking some of that time to really consider what the future is going to look like is going to be very, very helpful, but I also recognize it’s easier said than done – HR has a lot on the go right now,” she says. “Sometimes it’s really difficult to find that time and actually take a step back when you need to fill certain seats now or yesterday.”

The “Hiring in 2027: Legal, Transparent and Actually Human” panel is part of HRFest Canada 2026 on Nov. 10 and 11 at Rebel in Toronto.