Module 2 displays a total score as a number. A total score of 1 means that women and men have an equally high risk of earning less than what could be expected based on their function, personal experience and education. The higher the total score, the greater the risk of non-compliance with the equal pay requirement.

In addition to the total score, the robustness of the result is checked to prevent any individual «outliers» having too strong an impact on the total score. A robustness measurement is calculated for this purpose, which indicates the lowest value that the total score will assume each time an individual person is not taken into account. This ensures that the limit value is not exceeded due to the impact of one individual.

If both the total score and the robustness measurement exceed the threshold of 5, the limit value is considered to have been exceeded and will be marked red in the counter. This result does not satisfy either the conditions governing compliance with equal pay in the Confederation’s public procurement system or the obligations arising from Article 13 of the revised Gender Equality Act. The analysis according to GEA must therefore be repeated in four years’ time.

Module 2 also displays the proportion of identified risk pairs as a percentage of all potential pairs consisting of one woman and one man. The higher this figure, the more likely it is that incoherencies exist in your pay practice. It could indicate that the wage being paid is not aligned with the criteria of function value, age, years of service and actual educational level.

Tip: Module 2 provides further pointers as to which functions the risk pairs are to be found in and which people specifically are affected. It also shows which persons – regardless of gender – have a large deviation between expected and effective wage ranking. All of these detailed results can also be exported in the form of an Excel file, saved locally and analysed at length.

FAQ: Equal Pay Analysis with Logib