Top 89%
dans ce catalogue (1069 pratiques notées)
Les scores se concentrent dans le haut de l’échelle ; la position au sein du catalogue est donc souvent plus parlante que le chiffre seul.
Transferability / replicability1/3
The case shows how a member state with long-standing pay surveys can stall transposition, a risk other governments with existing regimes may face.
Impact on gender equality0/1
No pay-gap effect can be attributed to a paused legislative process.
Effectiveness0/1
Sweden missed the 7 June 2026 deadline and the Commission declined a 'stop the clock' on 22 May 2026.
Efficiency0/1
The stated aim was to lower administrative burden, but no cost figures were published to test that claim.
Evaluated outcomes0/1
No evaluation exists; the decision is a policy pause, not an implemented measure.
Sustainability0/1
The bill is paused with no Riksdag proposal planned, so the new obligations lack a continuity path.
Achievement / evidence0/1
Nothing was enacted: the start date moved from 1 July 2026 to 1 January 2027 and then the process was halted on 26 March 2026.
Gender-mainstreaming embedding1/1
Sweden's existing annual pay surveys (lönekartläggning) remain in force, so the gap is the directive's added reporting and worker-access rights.
Curator validation1/1
Dates cross-checked across several independent legal and HR sources; included as a cautionary case.
Evidoria. Suspension par la Suède de la transposition de la directive sur la transparence salariale (2026) — cas d'alerte. ID persistant: bb3765b0-f08f-4bec-8dd8-0f6cb7355c45.