Solving Salary Disparity Problems in Multidisciplinary Engineering Teams

by

Table of Contents

Salary disparity in multidisciplinary engineering teams represents one of the most pressing challenges facing modern organizations. When engineers from different disciplines—mechanical, electrical, software, civil, and others—work together on complex projects, pay inequities can undermine collaboration, erode trust, and ultimately compromise project outcomes. In 2025, pay disparity remains a critical challenge in workplaces worldwide, affecting employee morale, organizational culture, and legal compliance. Understanding the root causes of these disparities and implementing comprehensive strategies to address them is essential for building high-performing, equitable engineering teams.

The Current State of Salary Disparities in Engineering

The engineering profession continues to grapple with significant compensation inequities across multiple dimensions. In March 2024, the gender pay gap in science was 13.1%, while in engineering the gap was 9.5%. These disparities extend beyond gender to encompass race, ethnicity, experience level, and geographic location, creating a complex web of compensation challenges that organizations must navigate.

According to data from the U.S. Census Bureau, women engineers’ average salary is between 77% and 111% of men’s average salary. Overall, women engineers in most states have average salaries that are between 80% and 89% of those of men engineers. The situation becomes even more complex when examining intersectional factors. Hispanic or Latino and Black or African American women engineers earn less than their male and White counterparts. For instance, Black women earn about 93% of White women’s salaries and 92% of White men’s salaries.

Recent research reveals troubling trends in the engineering sector. The gender pay gap in the U.S. has doubled from 2.9% in April 2022 to 6% in April 2024. This widening gap suggests that despite increased awareness and advocacy for pay equity, systemic issues continue to perpetuate compensation disparities in technical fields.

Understanding the Root Causes of Salary Disparities

Addressing salary disparities effectively requires a deep understanding of their underlying causes. These factors often interact in complex ways, creating compounding effects that can significantly impact compensation outcomes for different groups within engineering teams.

Market Demand and Discipline-Specific Variations

Different engineering disciplines command varying salary levels based on market demand, industry growth, and skill scarcity. Software engineers and data scientists often receive higher compensation than civil or environmental engineers, even when working on the same multidisciplinary project. This creates inherent tension within teams where members with comparable experience and responsibility levels receive substantially different pay based solely on their technical specialty.

The gender earnings gap has slightly narrowed, or remained the same, across most of the select disciplines from 2013 to 2023, including all the disciplines with the highest number of engineers employed. However, in petroleum and environmental engineering, two disciplines with low numbers of engineers employed, the gender earnings gap widened from 2013 to 2023, in favor of men, by 4% and 1% respectively. These discipline-specific variations complicate efforts to establish equitable compensation frameworks across multidisciplinary teams.

Geographic and Cost-of-Living Disparities

Location plays a significant role in engineering compensation, but not always in ways that benefit employees. Engineers in high-cost markets may have higher nominal salaries but lower quality of life when housing and living expenses are factored in. This creates challenges for distributed teams where engineers in different locations perform similar work but receive different compensation based on local market conditions.

Regional variations also affect pay equity in unexpected ways. In most western states, including Oregon and Utah, women engineers are close to achieving gender parity in mean earnings or earning more than men engineers. In Nevada, for instance, while women represent only 10% of engineers, they earn, on average, $100,000, while men earn about $91,000. However, these regional successes remain exceptions rather than the norm.

Unconscious Bias and Subjective Decision-Making

Mountains of research conclude unconscious biases often impact hiring, compensation, performance and promotion decisions, perpetuating gender and racial pay gaps. These biases manifest in multiple ways throughout the employment lifecycle, from initial salary offers to performance evaluations and promotion decisions.

Research has identified specific mechanisms through which bias affects compensation. Employers in engineering and computer science fields appear to offer higher starting salaries to applicants who present as self-assured, and those applicants are mostly men. This new research is the first to identify a link between confidence and a pay gap at the start of engineering and computer science careers. The impact is substantial: Women earned $61,000 in their first jobs compared to $65,000 for men, despite having the same degrees and grade point averages. According to the subjects’ answers to questions about their capabilities, the researchers concluded that 2% of the pay gap between men and women could be explained by a gap in self-confidence.

Pay disparities in the workplace amongst men and women, or different races or ethnicities, can be the result of direct and indirect bias. Examples of indirect bias include assuming women perform certain jobs or duties instead of men; presuming women are not interested in advancement or promotions; making subjective pay determinations that are not based upon job-related factors; or basing an individual’s compensation solely on prior wage or salary history.

Lack of Transparent Compensation Structures

One of the major obstacles is that many organizations lack transparency around their own compensation practices. When employees don’t understand how pay decisions are made or what factors influence compensation, disparities can persist undetected for years. A lack of clear pay bands can lead to massive discrepancies within roles. And when employees lack visibility into how their pay is determined, the result is often feelings of unfairness and mistrust.

The absence of standardized compensation frameworks creates opportunities for subjective decision-making that can perpetuate existing inequities. A recent study by the City of Boston found that in industries where there was high compensation “ambiguity” — meaning limited knowledge of the negotiating range and appropriate standards of compensation — recent women MBAs received salaries that were 10% lower than male classmates with the same skills and experience. In industries where salary ranges and standards were clear, male and female MBAs earned the same.

Historical Salary Dependencies

Many organizations base new hire salaries on previous compensation, which perpetuates historical inequities. When women or minorities have been systematically underpaid in previous positions, this practice carries those disparities forward into new roles. While some jurisdictions have banned salary history inquiries, the practice remains common in many areas, continuing to disadvantage groups that have historically faced compensation discrimination.

Negotiation Gaps and Self-Advocacy Differences

Sterling and her colleagues have a hunch as to why women end up with smaller paystubs. Women are less likely to negotiate a salary than men. This negotiation gap, combined with differences in self-confidence and self-advocacy, contributes to initial salary disparities that compound over time through percentage-based raises and promotions.

The impact of starting salary differences extends throughout an engineer’s career. So begins a salary gap that only widens over time, shrinking women’s savings and extending their debt burden. “The transition from school to work is unique in that if people can get on the right track, it propels you,” Sterling says. Which means that when women start out $4,000 behind their male counterparts, catching up is nearly impossible.

The Business Case for Addressing Salary Disparities

Beyond ethical and legal imperatives, addressing salary disparities delivers tangible business benefits that directly impact organizational performance and competitiveness. Understanding these benefits helps build support for pay equity initiatives across all levels of the organization.

Enhanced Employee Morale and Productivity

Fair pay practices boost employee engagement and productivity, as employees feel valued. When engineers perceive that compensation decisions are fair and transparent, they can focus their energy on technical challenges rather than concerns about pay inequity. When employees perceive that they are being paid fairly compared to their colleagues, they are more likely to feel valued and motivated in their work. In contrast, unjustified pay disparities can lead to resentment, decreased productivity, and higher turnover rates.

When employees feel they work for a fair and equitable employer, it’s easier to feel connected to the company and its mission. A sense of integrity and trust ripples throughout the organization, improving employee productivity, collaboration, and morale. This is particularly important in multidisciplinary engineering teams where collaboration and knowledge sharing are essential for project success.

Improved Talent Attraction and Retention

In today’s competitive job market, workers increasingly prioritize fair compensation and inclusive workplace practices. Organizations that demonstrate a commitment to pay equity are better positioned to attract and retain diverse, high-quality candidates. This competitive advantage becomes increasingly important as engineering talent shortages persist across many specialties.

Pay equity is a critical factor in attracting and keeping top talent. When employees perceive fair and equitable compensation practices, they are more likely to be motivated, engaged, and loyal to your organization. Indeed, according to a recent study by Syndio, companies that implement pay equity are 5x more likely to retain their best talent. For organizations competing for scarce engineering talent, this retention advantage can significantly reduce recruitment costs and preserve institutional knowledge.

Pay discrimination is illegal under federal laws, and violations can lead to costly discrimination lawsuits handled by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). Proactive pay equity efforts help organizations identify and correct disparities before they result in legal action. By proactively identifying and addressing pay disparities, companies can mitigate the risk of potential lawsuits and reputational damage arising from pay discrimination claims.

Pay disparities based on gender, race, or other protected categories are illegal based on employment discrimination laws, posing a significant legal risk for organizations if they do not take steps to analyze pay equity and remediate any identified differences. The legal landscape continues to evolve, with pay transparency laws expanding across the U.S., making it essential for companies to stay updated. These laws require employers to disclose salary ranges and benefits in job postings.

Enhanced Organizational Performance

A report shows that companies with gender-diverse executive teams are 39% more likely to achieve above-average profitability. Pay equity initiatives support diversity efforts by ensuring that diverse talent is not only recruited but also fairly compensated, creating conditions for long-term retention and advancement.

Equitable compensation practices demonstrate a company’s commitment to fairness, reinforcing a positive and inclusive workplace environment. This cultural foundation supports innovation and collaboration, particularly important in multidisciplinary engineering teams where diverse perspectives drive creative problem-solving.

Improved Corporate Reputation

Establishing a track record of fair pay practices can bolster an organization’s brand image and corporate social responsibility efforts, leading to increased customer loyalty and positive public perception. In an era where corporate values increasingly influence consumer and investor decisions, demonstrating commitment to pay equity can provide competitive advantages beyond talent acquisition.

Conducting Comprehensive Pay Equity Audits

The foundation of any effective pay equity initiative is a thorough, data-driven audit of current compensation practices. A pay equity audit is the first step to identify pay discrepancies. This involves analyzing compensation data to uncover differences in pay for employees in similar positions, controlling for job-related factors like experience, education, and performance evaluations. Organizations must approach this process systematically to ensure accurate identification of disparities and their root causes.

Establishing the Audit Framework

To improve or implement a pay equity audit, follow these steps: Form a diverse committee representing various departments, including HR, legal, finance, and operations. This cross-functional team should establish the audit’s scope, objectives, and methodology while ensuring leadership buy-in. This collaborative approach ensures that multiple perspectives inform the audit process and that findings receive appropriate organizational support.

The audit committee should define clear objectives, including which employee groups to analyze, what compensation elements to include (base salary, bonuses, equity, benefits), and what legitimate factors justify pay differences (experience, education, performance, market conditions). Conduct a pay equity analysis and assess results to identify gaps. Ensure you have a solid job architecture to enable more consistent judgments about the value of jobs.

Data Collection and Analysis

A pay equity analysis is a comprehensive audit of an organization’s compensation data to identify and address any wage gaps based on sex or gender, race, or other protected characteristics. The purpose is to ensure that employees are paid fairly and equitably for their work, regardless of their background. The analysis involves collecting and examining compensation data, such as base pay, bonuses, and benefits, across various job categories and demographic groups.

Organizations should gather comprehensive data including employee demographics, job titles and descriptions, compensation history, performance ratings, education and credentials, years of experience, and geographic location. Reviewing payroll records helps identify patterns of wage discrimination, enabling organizations to address issues proactively. Modern HR technology platforms can streamline this data collection process and provide analytical tools for identifying patterns.

Conducting a comprehensive pay equity analysis requires researching more than just general compensation data. To ensure that you are setting fair pay across your organization, it’s important to look at data specific to your industry for a true apples-to-apples comparison. By taking your industry into account, you can understand how roles within your company compare to those within similar organizations in the same sector. Research what others in your field pay employees by experience level, role, department, location, and company size.

Identifying Legitimate vs. Illegitimate Pay Differences

Pay disparity, or pay inequity, occurs when employees performing similar or comparable work are paid differently for reasons that aren’t justified by neutral, job-related factors such as their skill, tenure, qualifications, or working conditions. The audit must distinguish between justified pay differences based on legitimate business factors and unjustified disparities that may reflect bias or discrimination.

Pay disparity refers to any difference in employee compensation, which may or may not be justified. For example, differences due to experience or performance are acceptable. Pay inequity, however, specifically denotes unjustified differences in pay for equal work, often due to discrimination based on gender, race, or other protected characteristics.

For multidisciplinary engineering teams, this analysis becomes particularly complex. Organizations must account for legitimate market differences between engineering disciplines while ensuring that within each discipline, compensation is equitable across demographic groups. Statistical regression analysis can help isolate the impact of protected characteristics on compensation after controlling for legitimate factors.

Frequency and Ongoing Monitoring

Regular audits are critical, especially with new pay equity laws requiring compliance. Pay equity is not a one-time achievement but an ongoing commitment requiring continuous attention. Pay equity management is not a one-time event – it requires ongoing attention.

A perfect example of this is the large salary offers we witnessed in many industries during the Great Resignation, as inflation soared and companies struggled to attract and retain their people. Due to heightened demand, many teams saw new hires earning much higher salaries than employees in the same role who had been with the company for years. This is a timely example of why HR professionals need to regularly review salary data, even after a comprehensive audit has been done.

Nadia Vatalidis, VP of People of Remote.com, takes pay equity a step further by looking for gaps between her current workforce and new hires. She says, “We knew all our new hires would be reviewed during the offer stage when we hire them, but we also wanted to ensure the whole company gets reviewed and that we proactively analyze and review any pay gaps that might exist.” Her team reviews their data quarterly to guarantee that performance and compensation are reviewed equitably.

Developing Fair and Transparent Compensation Policies

Once disparities have been identified through comprehensive audits, organizations must develop and implement compensation policies that promote equity and prevent future disparities from emerging. These policies should be clear, objective, and consistently applied across all engineering disciplines and employee groups.

Establishing Clear Salary Bands and Ranges

Salary bands provide structure and transparency to compensation decisions while allowing flexibility for legitimate differences in experience, performance, and market conditions. Organizations should establish clear salary ranges for each position level, with defined criteria for placement within those ranges. Ensure you have a solid job architecture to enable more consistent judgments about the value of jobs. Be consistent with rewards delivery and ensure the strategy is clear.

When it comes to creating a data-based approach to compensation, it’s important for the Finance and Executive teams to determine where they want to position the organization within the overall market. To do so, you need to select a percentile compared to the rest of your industry that best represents your desired level of compensation. Percentiles are a representation of a company’s compensation rank within the overall market, and can range from 10th percentile (lowest pay) to 90th percentile (highest pay).

For multidisciplinary engineering teams, organizations may need to establish different salary bands for different engineering disciplines to reflect legitimate market differences, while ensuring that within each discipline, placement in salary bands is based on objective, non-discriminatory criteria. The key is transparency: employees should understand how their discipline’s compensation compares to others and why those differences exist.

Standardizing Hiring and Promotion Decisions

Some steps you can take include: Calibrating compensation decisions to ensure everyone follows the same framework, even when awarding pay raises within salary bands. Conducting regular pay equity audits to highlight outlier salaries and promote consistency. Standardization reduces opportunities for bias to influence compensation decisions.

For larger employers with a separate compensation department, consider requiring that manager compensation requests/recommendations be reviewed and approved by the Company’s compensation department. Promote Wage Transparency/Standardize Compensation: Although not required by law, employers may consider publishing salary ranges by level. Standardize discretionary compensation such as bonuses and equity and remove discretion in compensation decisions from individual managers.

Organizations should develop structured interview processes with standardized evaluation criteria, establish clear performance metrics tied to compensation decisions, create objective criteria for promotions and salary increases, and implement approval processes that require justification for deviations from standard compensation practices. Review your compensation policies and practices. Make sure that they are based on objective criteria, such as job title, experience, and performance, and that they do not discriminate on the basis of gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, or location.

Eliminating Salary History Inquiries

Basing compensation on previous salary perpetuates historical inequities. Organizations should eliminate salary history questions from their hiring process and instead base offers on the value of the position, candidate qualifications, and internal equity considerations. Many jurisdictions have enacted salary history bans, but organizations should adopt this practice regardless of legal requirements to prevent carrying forward historical disparities.

Communicate with your employees that you’ll no longer entertain salary negotiations. Instead, your teams can plunge their energy into upskilling to ensure they progress throughout your organization in line with your compensation philosophy. While this approach may seem rigid, it can actually promote equity by ensuring that compensation is based on objective factors rather than negotiation skills that may vary across demographic groups.

Addressing Geographic Compensation Challenges

With the rise of remote work and distributed engineering teams, organizations must develop clear policies for geographic compensation differences. The rise of remote and flexible jobs has made it increasingly challenging to provide pay equity. There’s an ongoing debate about paying equal salaries to people based in different locations due to variations in the cost of living.

Organizations should decide whether to adopt location-based pay (adjusting compensation for local cost of living), role-based pay (paying the same for the same role regardless of location), or a hybrid approach. Whatever approach is chosen, it should be clearly communicated and consistently applied. The key is ensuring that geographic adjustments are based on objective cost-of-living data rather than subjective factors that might introduce bias.

Implementing Pay Transparency Initiatives

Transparency is a powerful tool for promoting pay equity and building employee trust. When compensation practices are open and understandable, employees can have confidence that pay decisions are fair, and organizations face accountability for maintaining equity.

The Business Case for Pay Transparency

Pay transparency is when employers disclose information about how employee compensation is determined. The goal is to provide clarity on how pay decisions are made, which helps build a culture of trust. This transparency serves multiple purposes: it helps employees understand their compensation, provides accountability for fair practices, and can actually improve organizational performance.

Because fair compensation makes good business sense. It builds respect and trust throughout your workforce and with the wider industry. For multidisciplinary engineering teams, transparency helps team members understand why engineers from different disciplines may receive different compensation, reducing resentment and promoting collaboration.

Levels of Pay Transparency

Wage information can be shared within organizations internally, publicly, or both. Shared information may include salary ranges, how pay is determined, or the promise to let employees discuss wages without repercussions. Organizations can implement transparency at different levels depending on their culture and readiness.

Basic transparency includes publishing salary ranges in job postings, explaining the factors that influence compensation decisions, and protecting employees’ right to discuss their compensation with colleagues. Intermediate transparency adds internal publication of salary bands for all positions and clear documentation of how employees progress through salary ranges. Advanced transparency includes sharing aggregate compensation data by demographic group and publishing pay equity audit results.

Communicating Compensation Philosophy

Above all else, communicate the precise triggers for a salary change. In an equitable pay organization, these could include: Updating a salary band due to benchmarking. A promotion from one salary band to another due to a role change. Performance-related improvement within a salary band in recognition of employee development. Finally, state how regularly you plan to review your compensation philosophy to ensure it remains relevant and continues to align with company goals.

Organizations should develop clear, written compensation philosophies that explain how pay decisions are made, what factors influence compensation, how different engineering disciplines are valued, how geographic location affects pay (if applicable), and how employees can advance through salary ranges. This documentation should be readily accessible to all employees and regularly referenced in compensation discussions.

Encouraging Open Dialogue

Encourage employees to communicate with one another regarding compensation without the fear of retaliation. Encourage employees to ask the employer questions about their compensation without any concern of retaliation or an adverse employment action. Creating a culture where compensation discussions are normalized rather than taboo helps surface potential inequities and demonstrates organizational commitment to fairness.

Promote a culture of transparency and accountability. Encourage employees to speak up if they believe they are being paid unfairly, and take action to address any reports of pay discrimination. Organizations should establish clear processes for employees to raise compensation concerns and ensure that these concerns are investigated promptly and thoroughly without retaliation.

Complying with Pay Transparency Laws

The legal landscape around pay transparency continues to evolve rapidly. Illinois (January 1, 2025): Employers with 15+ employees must include salary ranges and benefits in job postings, even for roles reporting to Illinois supervisors. Minnesota (January 1, 2025): Employers with 30+ employees are required to provide salary ranges and benefits information in all job postings. Massachusetts (July 31, 2025): Employers with 25+ employees must include pay ranges in job postings and share the same for promotions and transfers.

Organizations should stay informed about pay transparency requirements in all jurisdictions where they operate and consider adopting transparency practices that exceed legal minimums. Update job postings to comply with state-specific salary disclosure requirements. Train managers to communicate pay policies clearly and consistently. Finally, conduct audits to confirm compliance and ensure your pay transparency policies align with your overall pay equity strategies.

Training and Education on Unconscious Bias

Even with the best policies and systems in place, human decision-makers can introduce bias into compensation decisions. Comprehensive training programs help managers and decision-makers recognize and mitigate these biases, supporting more equitable outcomes.

Understanding Unconscious Bias in Compensation

Unconscious biases are automatic mental associations that influence our judgments and decisions without our awareness. In compensation contexts, these biases can lead to systematically different treatment of employees based on gender, race, age, or other characteristics unrelated to job performance or qualifications.

Common biases affecting engineering compensation include affinity bias (favoring people similar to ourselves), confirmation bias (seeking information that confirms our preexisting beliefs), the halo effect (allowing one positive trait to influence overall evaluation), and attribution bias (attributing success to internal factors for some groups and external factors for others). Understanding these biases is the first step toward mitigating their impact.

Developing Comprehensive Training Programs

Train managers on how to create a culture of pay equity. The Task Force recommends that employers train any supervisor or manager who has input regarding employee’s compensation about unconscious bias and the law’s pay equity requirements, under both federal and state law. Train supervisors and managers on how to make valid compensation decisions or recommendations that are based on objective, job-related factors and not on an employee’s gender, race or ethnicity.

Effective training programs should include education on relevant pay equity laws and regulations, recognition of common unconscious biases and how they manifest in compensation decisions, strategies for making objective, data-driven compensation decisions, and practice scenarios that allow managers to apply learning in realistic situations. Train managers to communicate pay policies clearly and consistently.

Provide training and education on pay equity. This will provide context and ensure that everyone is informed on the importance and effects of pay equity. Training should not be a one-time event but rather an ongoing process that reinforces key concepts and adapts to emerging research on bias and equity.

Implementing Structured Decision-Making Processes

Training alone is insufficient to eliminate bias; organizations must also implement structured processes that reduce opportunities for bias to influence decisions. Consider who influences pay in your organization. From managers and HR leaders involved in performance reviews to interview teams, everyone must be trained to follow the same approach to achieve parity.

Structured processes include using standardized evaluation criteria for all compensation decisions, requiring written justification for compensation recommendations, implementing multi-level review processes for significant compensation decisions, and using data analytics to identify patterns that might indicate bias. These processes create accountability and make it more difficult for unconscious biases to influence outcomes.

Measuring Training Effectiveness

Organizations should assess whether bias training is actually improving compensation equity. This can be done by analyzing compensation decisions before and after training, surveying employees about their perceptions of fairness, tracking the diversity of employees receiving promotions and raises, and monitoring pay equity metrics over time. If training is not producing measurable improvements in equity, organizations should revise their approach.

Remediating Identified Pay Disparities

When pay equity audits identify unjustified disparities, organizations must take prompt action to correct them. The remediation process requires careful planning to address current inequities while establishing systems to prevent future disparities.

Developing a Remediation Plan

Develop and implement a remediation plan to address identified disparities. This may include immediate pay adjustments, revisions to compensation policies, and adjustments to hiring and promotion practices to prevent future inequities. The remediation plan should prioritize the most significant disparities while establishing a timeline for addressing all identified issues.

Assuming the organization has the budget to adjust compensation, pay disparities are relatively simple to solve. Companies should conduct a pay equity analysis using sound statistical methodology, then adjust pay disparities for underpaid employees. However, organizations must balance the need for prompt remediation with budget constraints and the need to maintain internal equity.

Implementing Pay Adjustments

When making pay adjustments to address disparities, organizations should prioritize transparency and clear communication. Employees receiving adjustments should understand that the increase reflects a correction of a pay inequity rather than a performance-based raise. This distinction is important for maintaining trust and demonstrating organizational commitment to equity.

Organizations should consider whether to make all adjustments immediately or phase them in over time, how to communicate adjustments to affected employees, whether to disclose the remediation effort broadly or handle adjustments individually, and how to ensure that adjustments don’t create new inequities. Legal counsel should be involved in these decisions to ensure compliance with applicable laws and minimize legal risk.

Communicating Remediation Efforts

Share appropriate findings with stakeholders, including leadership, managers, and employees. Transparency builds trust, though legal counsel should guide the level of detail shared to protect sensitive information and minimize legal exposure. The communication strategy should balance transparency with privacy and legal considerations.

Organizations might communicate that a pay equity audit was conducted, that disparities were identified and corrected, and that ongoing monitoring will ensure continued equity. The level of detail shared about specific findings should be determined in consultation with legal counsel, but the overall message should demonstrate organizational commitment to fairness.

Preventing Future Disparities

Remediation is not complete until systems are in place to prevent new disparities from emerging. Establish a regular audit schedule and continuous monitoring system. Integrate equity considerations into ongoing compensation decisions and regularly evaluate the effectiveness of implemented changes. This ongoing vigilance ensures that pay equity remains a priority rather than a one-time initiative.

Achieving pay equity is an ongoing process, and it is important to regularly review and update your policies and practices to ensure that they remain effective. By staying proactive and continuously improving your pay equity efforts, you can create a fair and equitable work environment for your global teams.

Supporting Career Development and Advancement

Pay equity extends beyond base compensation to encompass opportunities for advancement and professional development. Pay disparities are only one contributing factor to unadjusted pay gaps, which also have root causes in opportunity inequity — when employees don’t have equitable opportunities to advance. For example, a company could achieve gender pay equity in role-to-role comparisons, but still have an overall gender pay gap across the company due to having more men than women in higher-paying positions (which can stem from inequitable hiring, promotions, and retention).

Ensuring Equal Access to Development Opportunities

Organizations should ensure that all engineers, regardless of gender, race, or other protected characteristics, have equal access to training programs, mentorship opportunities, challenging assignments, and professional development resources. These opportunities are critical for building the skills and experience that lead to promotions and salary increases.

Women in tech are still significantly underrepresented in senior leadership roles. By actively promoting women and providing mentorship opportunities, companies can ensure that female professionals have the chance to advance and earn competitive salaries. Mentorship programs can be particularly valuable for helping underrepresented groups navigate organizational culture and build the networks necessary for advancement.

Addressing Promotion Disparities

Organizations should regularly analyze promotion rates across demographic groups to identify potential disparities. If certain groups are consistently promoted at lower rates, organizations should investigate the root causes and implement corrective measures. This might include revising promotion criteria to focus on objective performance metrics, implementing structured promotion processes with clear criteria, providing training for promotion decision-makers on bias recognition, and establishing accountability for promoting diverse talent.

For multidisciplinary engineering teams, organizations should also examine whether promotion opportunities are equitably distributed across engineering disciplines. If certain disciplines have clearer advancement paths or more opportunities for leadership roles, this can create long-term compensation disparities even if base pay is equitable.

Creating Flexible Work Arrangements

Offering remote work, flexible hours, and parental leave options can help women stay in the workforce, especially during critical career periods. The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the shift to remote work, and maintaining this flexibility is key to retaining female talent in the tech sector. Flexible arrangements benefit all employees but can be particularly important for those with caregiving responsibilities, who are disproportionately women.

Organizations should ensure that employees who utilize flexible work arrangements are not penalized in compensation or advancement opportunities. This requires conscious effort to combat biases that equate physical presence with productivity or commitment. Performance should be evaluated based on results rather than hours in the office.

Addressing the Confidence Gap

Research has identified confidence differences as a factor in compensation disparities. “Confidence is not the same as competency,” says study coauthor Sheri Sheppard, a Stanford professor of mechanical engineering. “If you’re judging somebody based on projected confidence, you’re losing out on hiring individuals who are going to be doggone good at the work.”

Rather than expecting employees to become more confident, organizations should revise evaluation processes to focus on demonstrated competence rather than self-promotion. This might include using work samples and technical assessments in hiring, basing performance evaluations on objective metrics, and providing structured opportunities for employees to showcase their work. Organizations can also provide coaching and development programs that help all employees effectively communicate their accomplishments.

Leveraging Technology for Pay Equity

Modern technology platforms can significantly enhance organizations’ ability to identify, address, and prevent pay disparities. These tools provide analytical capabilities and automation that make pay equity efforts more efficient and effective.

Pay Equity Analysis Software

Pay equity software like Syndio’s leading PayEQ ® solution gives compensation teams more control over their pay equity analyses so they can conduct them more frequently, along with deeper insights so they can address root causes in pay policies to prevent new disparities from arising. Specialized software can automate much of the data collection and analysis process, making regular audits more feasible.

AI tools quickly identify and resolve pay disparities, saving time and reducing errors. Real-Time Insights: Advanced platforms provide immediate data, empowering leaders to make informed decisions that align with pay equity strategies. These tools can identify patterns that might not be apparent through manual analysis and provide recommendations for remediation.

Integrated HR Systems

Robust reporting capabilities offered within HR tech solutions make it easy for organizations to complete regular audits of their compensation. These types of audits not only ensure pay equity, but also expand to ensure that you’re staying competitive in the industry, leading to higher retention rates. Integrated systems that combine compensation data with performance management, recruiting, and other HR functions provide a comprehensive view of how pay equity intersects with other talent management processes.

The use of checklists and software can make the audit process go smoother. For example, HCM software should already capture demographic, salary, and job description data, making it easier to gather and analyze. When data is already centralized in HR systems, conducting pay equity analyses becomes significantly more efficient.

Compensation Benchmarking Tools

The next step in ensuring fair pay is purchasing compensation data, which provides necessary insights to help you identify any discrepancies between your current pay and the market rate for similar positions in their area. Implementing a paid compensation data tool – such as Radford or PayScale – will give your team access to market compensation data, leveling, and benchmarks for each position within the organization so you can build out compensation ranges (including cash and equity) to better inform your decisions.

For multidisciplinary engineering teams, access to discipline-specific compensation data is particularly valuable. These tools help organizations understand market rates for different engineering specialties, ensuring that compensation differences between disciplines reflect legitimate market factors rather than bias or historical inequities.

Analytics and Visualization Tools

Generate interactive dashboards and reports to visualize pay equity metrics and track progress over time. With real-time data insights and automated workflows, organizations can proactively address pay disparities and create a more equitable workplace. Visualization tools make it easier to communicate pay equity data to stakeholders and identify trends that require attention.

By accessing and drawing insights from people data, you’ll be better equipped to make the right decisions. Look at your base salaries through a variety of filters, such as gender to understand how compensation differs throughout your company. The ability to slice compensation data by multiple dimensions—discipline, gender, race, location, experience level—provides insights that inform more targeted interventions.

Building Organizational Accountability

Sustainable pay equity requires organizational accountability at all levels. Leaders must demonstrate commitment to equity, and systems must be in place to ensure that commitment translates into action.

Leadership Commitment and Modeling

But the real opportunity for organizations today goes beyond reacting to laws. It’s about building a culture of respect, where people understand and trust how they’re valued. Whether the motivation is cultural, legal, or ethical, fair pay practices should always be a priority for growth-oriented organizations that put people first. Leadership must visibly champion pay equity efforts and allocate resources necessary for success.

Leaders should publicly commit to pay equity goals, participate in bias training alongside other employees, review pay equity metrics regularly, hold managers accountable for equitable compensation decisions, and allocate budget for pay equity adjustments. Create a Culture of Equality: Embrace and publicize the pay equity issue as an issue that impacts men as much as it impacts women and acknowledge their role in closing the wage gap.

Establishing Metrics and Goals

Organizations should establish specific, measurable goals for pay equity and track progress over time. Metrics might include the percentage of unjustified pay disparities identified in audits, time to remediate identified disparities, representation of diverse groups at different compensation levels, promotion rates across demographic groups, and employee perceptions of pay fairness. These metrics should be reviewed regularly by leadership and used to guide continuous improvement efforts.

Assess the effectiveness of new practices and refine as needed. Pay equity initiatives should be evaluated based on outcomes, not just activities. If metrics are not improving, organizations should be willing to revise their approach.

Integrating Pay Equity into Performance Management

Managers should be evaluated on their success in promoting pay equity within their teams. This might include metrics on pay equity within their department, diversity of employees receiving promotions and raises, completion of required bias training, and adherence to standardized compensation processes. When pay equity becomes part of how managers are evaluated, it signals organizational commitment and creates accountability.

External Reporting and Certification

Some organizations choose to publicly report on their pay equity efforts or seek external certification. Tools like Pay Equity Audit and Certification streamline this process by conducting comprehensive audits, providing customizable reports, and offering a formal certification to showcase equitable pay practices. External reporting creates additional accountability and can enhance organizational reputation.

Public commitments to pay equity can also help attract talent. Recognizing the importance of pay equity and equality, and choosing to act with transparency, builds trust from the start. It will make your company more attractive to today’s top talent, who are increasingly valuing fair pay practices and transparency when deciding where to work.

Addressing Unique Challenges in Multidisciplinary Teams

Multidisciplinary engineering teams face specific pay equity challenges that require tailored approaches. The diversity of technical specialties, varying market demands, and different educational backgrounds create complexity that organizations must navigate carefully.

Balancing Market Differences with Internal Equity

One of the most challenging aspects of compensation in multidisciplinary teams is balancing legitimate market differences between engineering disciplines with the need for internal equity. Software engineers may command higher market salaries than mechanical engineers, but when they work together on the same project with similar levels of responsibility, significant pay differences can create tension and undermine collaboration.

Organizations should be transparent about how market factors influence compensation across disciplines, consider whether all market differences are truly necessary or whether some compression is appropriate for team cohesion, ensure that within each discipline, compensation is equitable across demographic groups, and provide opportunities for engineers to develop skills in higher-demand areas if they choose. The goal is not necessarily to eliminate all compensation differences between disciplines, but to ensure that those differences are justified, transparent, and don’t create barriers to effective collaboration.

Valuing Different Types of Expertise

Multidisciplinary teams require diverse types of expertise, and organizations must ensure that all types are appropriately valued. There can be a tendency to overvalue certain technical skills (particularly those in high market demand) while undervaluing others that are equally critical to project success. Organizations should develop frameworks for evaluating the value of different types of expertise that consider contribution to project outcomes, scarcity of skills within the organization, difficulty of acquiring the expertise, and strategic importance to organizational goals.

Managing Team Dynamics Around Pay Differences

Even when pay differences are justified and transparent, they can still affect team dynamics. Team leaders should be trained to address compensation questions and concerns, facilitate discussions about how different roles contribute to team success, recognize and value contributions from all team members regardless of discipline, and create a culture where collaboration is valued over individual compensation. The goal is to ensure that pay differences don’t create a hierarchy of value that undermines the collaborative nature of multidisciplinary work.

Ensuring Equitable Project Assignments

Access to high-visibility projects and challenging assignments affects both skill development and compensation over time. Organizations should ensure that these opportunities are distributed equitably across demographic groups and engineering disciplines. This requires conscious attention to assignment processes and willingness to challenge assumptions about who is “right” for particular opportunities.

Pay equity is not only an ethical imperative but also a legal requirement. Organizations must understand and comply with applicable laws while implementing best practices that go beyond minimum legal requirements.

Federal Pay Equity Laws

The U.S. has had federal laws directed towards reducing pay disparities since the Equal Pay Act (EPA) of 1963 and Title VII (1964) were signed into legislation. ‘Equal pay for equal work or work of equal value’ has been a right in the European Union since 1958. These foundational laws establish the basic principle that employees performing substantially equal work must receive equal pay regardless of gender, race, or other protected characteristics.

Pay inequity is illegal under laws like the Equal Pay Act, which mandates equal pay for men and women performing substantially equal work. Organizations must ensure that their compensation practices comply with these federal requirements, which apply regardless of state or local laws.

State and Local Pay Equity Laws

States have enacted more robust pay equity laws, salary history bans, and pay scale disclosure laws, a movement mirrored in the EU and other countries. Now, all 50 U.S. states prohibit pay discrimination, with similar trends in salary transparency and history bans spreading worldwide. Organizations operating in multiple jurisdictions must navigate a complex patchwork of state and local requirements.

State laws may impose requirements beyond federal law, including broader definitions of equal work, stricter standards for justifying pay differences, prohibitions on salary history inquiries, requirements to disclose salary ranges in job postings, and mandatory pay equity reporting. Organizations should work with legal counsel to ensure compliance with all applicable laws in jurisdictions where they operate.

Some jurisdictions provide legal protections for organizations that conduct pay equity audits. Massachusetts: For instance, the Massachusetts Equal Pay Act (MEPA) encourages employers to evaluate their pay practices. Audits offer a legal defense if disparities are corrected. Oregon: Similarly, conducting pay equity audits allows employers to defend against discrimination claims if they demonstrate progress in closing gaps.

These protections incentivize proactive pay equity efforts by providing some legal cover for organizations that identify and correct disparities. However, organizations should work with legal counsel to ensure that audits are conducted in ways that maximize legal protections while minimizing risk.

Documentation and Record-Keeping

Proper documentation is essential for both demonstrating compliance and defending against potential claims. Organizations should maintain records of compensation decisions and the factors that influenced them, pay equity audits and remediation efforts, training provided to managers on pay equity and bias, policies and procedures related to compensation, and communications with employees about pay equity initiatives. These records should be maintained in accordance with applicable record retention requirements and should be organized in ways that facilitate analysis and response to potential claims.

Creating a Sustainable Pay Equity Culture

Achieving pay equity is not a one-time project but an ongoing commitment that must be embedded in organizational culture. Sustainable pay equity requires systems, processes, and cultural norms that continuously promote fairness and prevent new disparities from emerging.

Embedding Equity in Organizational Values

Pay equity should be explicitly included in organizational values and mission statements. This signals that equity is not a peripheral concern but a core organizational commitment. When equity is embedded in values, it provides a foundation for decision-making across all organizational functions and creates a framework for holding leaders accountable.

The Task Force recommends that employers consider adopting some or all of the below Action Items to promote a culture of pay equity within the employer’s organization. These Action Items are not required by law and may not be feasible for all employers. However, adopting some, or all, of these action items may assist in promoting a culture of pay equity in the workplace.

Continuous Improvement and Learning

Organizations should approach pay equity as an area for continuous improvement, staying informed about emerging research and best practices, learning from other organizations’ successes and failures, regularly evaluating the effectiveness of their own initiatives, and being willing to revise approaches that aren’t producing desired results. Regularly reviewing and updating compensation policies. A proactive approach ensures pay equity remains a continuous priority rather than a one-time initiative.

Celebrating Progress and Maintaining Momentum

Pay equity work can be challenging and progress may be incremental. Organizations should celebrate milestones and successes to maintain momentum and demonstrate that efforts are producing results. This might include sharing metrics that show improvement in pay equity, recognizing teams or leaders who have made significant contributions to equity efforts, highlighting individual stories of employees who have benefited from pay equity initiatives, and communicating how pay equity supports broader organizational goals.

Engaging Employees as Partners

Employees should be engaged as partners in pay equity efforts rather than passive recipients of organizational initiatives. This might include soliciting employee input on compensation policies, creating employee resource groups focused on equity issues, providing channels for employees to raise concerns about pay equity, and involving employees in developing and implementing solutions. When employees are engaged as partners, they become advocates for equity and help sustain cultural change.

Practical Action Steps for Organizations

Organizations ready to address salary disparities in their multidisciplinary engineering teams can begin with these concrete action steps:

  • Conduct a comprehensive pay equity audit analyzing compensation data across all engineering disciplines and demographic groups, controlling for legitimate factors like experience and performance
  • Establish clear salary bands for each engineering discipline and position level, with transparent criteria for placement within those bands
  • Develop and document a compensation philosophy that explains how pay decisions are made and what factors influence compensation across different engineering specialties
  • Implement structured hiring and promotion processes with standardized evaluation criteria to reduce opportunities for bias to influence decisions
  • Provide comprehensive training for all managers and decision-makers on unconscious bias, pay equity laws, and objective decision-making
  • Eliminate salary history inquiries from the hiring process and base offers on position value and candidate qualifications rather than previous compensation
  • Increase pay transparency by publishing salary ranges in job postings, explaining compensation factors to employees, and protecting employees’ right to discuss compensation
  • Remediate identified disparities promptly with a clear plan for addressing both immediate inequities and systemic issues that allowed them to develop
  • Establish regular audit schedules to ensure that pay equity is maintained over time and new disparities are identified quickly
  • Create accountability systems that include pay equity metrics in leadership dashboards and manager performance evaluations
  • Ensure equal access to development opportunities across all demographic groups and engineering disciplines to support equitable advancement
  • Leverage technology tools for pay equity analysis, compensation benchmarking, and ongoing monitoring
  • Engage legal counsel to ensure compliance with all applicable pay equity laws and to guide audit and remediation processes
  • Communicate openly with employees about pay equity efforts, creating channels for questions and concerns
  • Monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of pay equity initiatives, revising approaches as needed based on outcomes

The Path Forward

Addressing salary disparities in multidisciplinary engineering teams is both a moral imperative and a business necessity. With employee turnover on the rise, pay equity has a business necessity, in addition to being a key factor in governance, risk, and compliance. Organizations that prioritize equitable compensation practices not only create trust but also enhance employee satisfaction, retention, and reputation.

The challenges are real and complex. Market differences between engineering disciplines, geographic variations, unconscious biases, and historical inequities all contribute to compensation disparities that can undermine team cohesion and organizational performance. However, these challenges are not insurmountable. With commitment from leadership, comprehensive policies and processes, ongoing monitoring and adjustment, and a culture that values equity, organizations can create compensation systems that are both fair and effective.

Recently, the civil engineering industry has been increasingly focused on this initiative to pay fairly, and I am hopeful that we will continue to see strong efforts toward closing that gap. This optimism should extend across all engineering disciplines. While progress has been uneven and challenges remain, the increasing focus on pay equity—driven by legal requirements, employee expectations, and business imperatives—creates momentum for positive change.

The engineering profession faces critical challenges that require the best talent working collaboratively across disciplines. Organizations that create equitable compensation systems position themselves to attract and retain that talent, foster the collaboration necessary for innovation, and build cultures where all engineers can thrive. The investment in pay equity is an investment in organizational excellence and long-term success.

For organizations just beginning this journey, the path may seem daunting. However, every step toward greater equity—whether conducting that first audit, implementing salary bands, providing bias training, or remediating identified disparities—moves the organization closer to a compensation system that reflects its values and supports its goals. The key is to begin, to remain committed through challenges, and to continuously improve based on data and outcomes.

Multidisciplinary engineering teams represent the future of technical innovation, bringing together diverse expertise to solve complex problems. Ensuring that all team members are compensated fairly, regardless of their discipline, gender, race, or other characteristics, is essential for realizing the full potential of these teams. Organizations that prioritize pay equity will find themselves better positioned to compete for talent, drive innovation, and achieve their strategic objectives in an increasingly competitive landscape.

For more information on compensation best practices, visit the Society for Human Resource Management or explore resources from the U.S. Department of Labor’s Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs. Organizations seeking guidance on implementing pay equity initiatives can also consult with WorldatWork, a professional association focused on compensation and total rewards. Additional insights on engineering compensation trends are available through professional engineering societies such as the National Society of Professional Engineers and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers.