FTSE 100 board director pay gap narrows

The gender pay gap for board directors of FTSE 100 companies has narrowed slightly in the last year, according to research by law firm Fox and Partners, published today (18 November).

In 2022, the pay gap between male and female board members was 70%, which has declined to 68%, or £335,953 average pay for women and £1.07 million for men, in 2023.

The average pay for women directors has also increased faster than the pay for male board members, with women’s pay increasing 9% in the last year and men’s pay increasing 3% in the same period.

“Boardroom diversity is moving in the right direction but more work is required to ensure this progress continues,” Catriona Watt, partner at law firm Fox and Partners, told HR magazine.

“The gender pay gap is closing but at a very gradual rate. Pay for women is increasing more year on year than pay for men, but this will need to continue apace to show a marked improvement. 

“The number of female executive directors has also risen 10% in the past year which will play a pivotal role in women being employed in positions of higher influence and pay. It is important for team members at FTSE 100 companies to see women in managerial and leadership positions.”

Nearly all (91%) female board members in the FTSE 100 hold non-executive positions, the research noted. 

According to Watt: “To further narrow the gender pay gap at board level, FTSE 100 companies must appoint women to executive positions which are generally the most highly paid corporate jobs – not just non-executive positions.”

Men are eight times more likely to be CEO in the FTSE 100 than women, according to separate research by executive talent firm Russell Reynolds Associates, published on 11 November. 

More than two thirds of senior executive roles in FTSE 100 companies are held by men, although 79% of FTSE 100 chief HR officers are women. 

HR should examine why men and women are paid differently for similar roles, said Aniela Unguresan, founder of the Edge Certified Foundation, a DEI certification standard.

Speaking to HR magazine, she said: “A board role is more homogenous than the variety of roles that exist in an organisation.

“So what are the objective causes that explain the differences between the different compensation of the board members in a group that is much more homogenous than we see in the rest of the workplace?”

While nomination committees should be trusted to understand what skills are needed on their board of directors, HR should also examine why women are placed in non-executive director roles more commonly, Unguresan suggested.

She continued: “The nomination committees of these boards are doing a very good job in understanding what the skills competencies are, and the profiles that will serve the company best.

“One very interesting follow up question to this study of those nomination committees is: What are the reasons why they have in their boards a higher share of women in non- executive functions? What are the specific skills and competencies that they looked for when they recruited them, as opposed to their male counterparts?”

Female representation on FTSE 350 executive committees fell for the first time in eight years in October, gender parity consultancy The Pipeline found.

HR should invest in women’s career progression, Watt added, to ensure that more women are supported to reach board level.

She continued: “FTSE 100 companies need to continue investing in schemes and infrastructure that promote female opportunities both at boardroom level and beyond. 

“Businesses should invest in mentoring and role-modelling opportunities to make a significant impact on the gender pay gap. 

“Women need to be given the opportunity to gain direct experience that qualifies them for director roles.”

HR Magazine – Honey Wyatt