Talent expectations have shifted and so has the culture insurance can’t ignore

The cost of not revealing pay data is pushing away the younger generation but it’s not too late to turn a taboo into a trend.

Pay transparency is often framed as a regulatory issue, but the most profound change taking place across the insurance sector is cultural. Rather than a compliance box-tick, transparency is triggering a change in expectations, behaviours and social norms that is reshaping how people think and feel about work.

During Intelligent Insurer’s latest virtual panel, ‘Beyond the paycheck: building trust through pay transparency’ (To watch the full discussion, click here), Dan Fletcher, Aon’s director of reward advisory, described this shift as “a global movement”. While the EU’s directive is sharpening the focus in Europe, transparency pressures have been building for years across the US, Canada, South Africa and beyond. This is no longer just an HR initiative, he said. It’s a complete shift in workplace expectations.

The clearest dividing line is generational. Fletcher noted that “younger workers are much more open to discussing how they’re paid, and comparing and contrasting pay against each other.” For them, salary secrecy is no longer professional; it simply feels outdated. 

“Younger workers are much more open to comparing and contrasting pay.” 

Transparency signals honesty. Withholding pay ranges, on the other hand, sends the wrong message. Companies that avoid publishing ranges see “60% fewer applicants,” Fletcher added, because candidates increasingly assume “If they’re not upfront now, what else will they hide?”

But transparency meets cultural friction, especially across Europe. Hong-Wha Ling, chief people officer at VIG Re, highlighted this divide through his own experience: “In the Netherlands, it’s very normal to openly share your pay.” Yet in other European regions where the company operates, discussing salary is still considered intrusive. This creates a difficult balancing act for multinational insurers – the same policy can be welcomed as openness in one country and seen as inappropriate in another.

The tension isn’t only external. Inside organisations, transparency is forcing leaders to rethink what accountability means. Ling argued that many companies expect employees to show ownership and responsibility, but don’t provide the same clarity in return. Without transparency, he said, accountability becomes “one-way traffic”. 

Being open about pay allows employees to understand what the employer offers, what it values and what consistency looks like. This has major implications for inclusion. Ling believes transparency exposes systemic gaps to help them fix them. It forces organisations to question whether different groups have equitable opportunities or whether unconscious bias has crept into decision-making. In her view, transparency “helps to ensure there is no bias” in pay outcomes.

Amy Fahed, senior managing director for total rewards and HR operations at Markel, added that transparency has accelerated progress on pay equity far faster than previous decades of legislation. “Hiring ranges have put people on more equal footing,” she said, closing gaps before they can form.

“In the Netherlands, it’s very normal to openly share your pay.”

Yet the path is not without discomfort. Ling admitted his “love–hate relationship” with transparency. On the one hand, it enables richer and more honest conversations; on the other, it forces HR to educate leaders repeatedly, and it opens questions about fairness that don’t always have simple answers. “The word fairness is difficult to manage,” he said. “It’s not about fairness, it’s about decisions based on structure.”

Fletcher agreed that transparency will increase workloads across HR functions. Recruiters can no longer ask for a candidate’s current salary. Managers will face more queries, and employees will soon have access to comparative data they’ve never seen before. Without explanation and context, this can easily fuel mistrust.

“Hiring ranges have put people on more equal footing,”

This is why communication becomes the cultural backbone. “If communication fails, the rest falls,” Fletcher said. The same applies to strategy. Transparency has so many interconnected parts that insurers must approach it holistically rather than reactively.

For the panel, transparency is no longer a threat to manage but a cultural accelerator. For younger workers, it signals fairness, inclusion and modernity. For global employers, it forces a reckoning with deeply rooted norms. And for leaders, it encourages more consistent, less biased decision-making.

At its core, the rise of pay transparency represents a collision between generations, cultures and long-standing corporate habits. Insurers that treat transparency as a cultural shift—not just a compliance exercise—will be better placed to attract, retain and engage the workforce of the future.

Click here to watch the full panel discussion.

Did you get value from this story?  Sign up to our free daily newsletters and get stories like this sent straight to your inbox.