FTSE 100 Gender Pay Gap: Women Earn Significantly Less Than Men

The persistent gender pay gap in FTSE 100 boardrooms reveals a significant disparity where women continue to earn considerably less than their male counterparts. Data from the legal firm Fox & Partners highlights that female directors earn an average of £335,953, while their male counterparts earn an average of £1.07 million. Although this gap has slightly decreased from 70% to 68%, the rate of change has been agonizingly slow. While the number of female executive directors has increased by 10% in the past year, 90% of female directors still occupy non-executive roles. These positions typically attract lower pay compared to executive roles, further exacerbating the pay disparity. The disparity is even evident within the same roles, where male directors earn 35% more in executive roles and 50% more in non-executive roles than female directors. Executive pay averages at £3.15 million for male directors and £2.33 million for female directors, while non-executive directors see an average of £191,381 for men compared to £127,593 for women.

Gender Disparity in Executive Roles

The gender disparity within executive roles remains a critical issue in addressing the overall pay gap. Despite the increased number of female directors, the majority still find themselves in non-executive roles, which not only offer fewer financial rewards but also less influence within the organization’s strategic direction. This distribution of roles creates a facade of gender parity without genuinely tackling the underlying issues of pay inequality. Catriona Watt from Fox & Partners stresses that appointing women predominantly in non-executive roles perpetuates the pay disparity in high-ranking positions. This sentiment is also supported by findings from the search firm Russell Reynolds, which points out the lower representation of women in executive roles.

The lack of female representation in executive positions highlights a structural problem within corporate culture, where leadership roles are often tailored to favor male counterparts. This reality underscores the need for significant policy changes and proactive measures to promote women into executive roles. The appointment of more women to non-executive roles may increase visibility but fails to address the fundamental issue of pay inequality. True gender diversity and equity in the boardroom require moving beyond tokenism and implementing measures that ensure equal pay for equal roles.

The Need for Effective Measures

The persistent gender pay gap in FTSE 100 boardrooms reveals a substantial inequality, with women consistently earning much less than their male colleagues. Data from the legal firm Fox & Partners shows that female directors receive an average of £335,953, while male directors earn an average of £1.07 million. Despite a slight decrease in the gap from 70% to 68%, progress has been painfully slow. While the number of female executive directors increased by 10% in the past year, 90% of female directors remain in non-executive roles, which typically offer lower salaries compared to executive positions, worsening the pay gap. Even within identical roles, male directors earn 35% more in executive positions and 50% more in non-executive positions than their female counterparts. On average, male executive directors earn £3.15 million, while female executive directors earn £2.33 million. Similarly, non-executive male directors earn £191,381 on average, compared to £127,593 for women in the same roles.

Explore more

Trend Analysis: AI in Real Estate

Navigating the real estate market has long been synonymous with staggering costs, opaque processes, and a reliance on commission-based intermediaries that can consume a significant portion of a property’s value. This traditional framework is now facing a profound disruption from artificial intelligence, a technological force empowering consumers with unprecedented levels of control, transparency, and financial savings. As the industry stands

Insurtech Digital Platforms – Review

The silent drain on an insurer’s profitability often goes unnoticed, buried within the complex and aging architecture of legacy systems that impede growth and alienate a digitally native customer base. Insurtech digital platforms represent a significant advancement in the insurance sector, offering a clear path away from these outdated constraints. This review will explore the evolution of this technology from

Trend Analysis: Insurance Operational Control

The relentless pursuit of market share that has defined the insurance landscape for years has finally met its reckoning, forcing the industry to confront a new reality where operational discipline is the true measure of strength. After a prolonged period of chasing aggressive, unrestrained growth, 2025 has marked a fundamental pivot. The market is now shifting away from a “growth-at-all-costs”

AI Grading Tools Offer Both Promise and Peril

The familiar scrawl of a teacher’s red pen, once the definitive symbol of academic feedback, is steadily being replaced by the silent, instantaneous judgment of an algorithm. From the red-inked margins of yesteryear to the instant feedback of today, the landscape of academic assessment is undergoing a seismic shift. As educators grapple with growing class sizes and the demand for

Legacy Digital Twin vs. Industry 4.0 Digital Twin: A Comparative Analysis

The promise of a perfect digital replica—a tool that could mirror every gear turn and temperature fluctuation of a physical asset—is no longer a distant vision but a bifurcated reality with two distinct evolutionary paths. On one side stands the legacy digital twin, a powerful but often isolated marvel of engineering simulation. On the other is its successor, the Industry