Top 86%
in this catalogue (1069 scored practices)
Scores cluster high, so position within the catalogue is often more telling than the number alone.
Transferability / replicability2/3
Posted ranges with a maximum spread and AI-in-hiring disclosure are portable to other jurisdictions and mirror the direction of the EU directive.
Impact on gender equality0/1
No evidence yet that the rules have narrowed gender pay gaps and they are not gender-specific.
Effectiveness0/1
Only weeks-to-months of operation, so effectiveness is unmeasured and legal commentators doubt compliance incentives.
Efficiency0/1
No cost or outcome data were found, though the sources describe employer compliance obligations.
Evaluated outcomes0/1
No evaluation exists; the sources are news and explanatory articles.
Sustainability0/1
Rules sit in statute, but enforcement depends on employee complaints and 'repeated and habitual' violations.
Achievement / evidence1/1
Requirements (25+ employees, $50,000 maximum range, 1 Jan 2026) are corroborated by two independent news sources.
Gender-mainstreaming embedding0/1
Framed as general employment standards and hiring rules rather than embedded gender-equality policy.
Curator validation1/1
Reviewed by C-NAPSE and included as an honest early-stage, weakly enforced case.
Evidoria. Ontario's Job-Posting Pay Transparency Rules (Working for Workers Act, 2026) — Salary Ranges Required, Enforcement Criticised as 'Toothless'. Persistent ID: 3969b2fa-29ab-4068-af5d-5bf995523737.