Back to all templates
Compensation & pay-equity intake

Salary Review Request Form Template

Capture employee salary review requests with structured intake — current role, last review date, key achievements, new responsibilities, market data, and internal-equity context. Designed for the modern pay-transparency landscape with EU Pay Transparency Directive, US state pay-transparency laws, and Brazilian Lei 14.611/2023 baked in.

Free — included in every plan

Salary Review Request Form Template

Live preview — try the fields below.

No fields to preview.

Who this template is for

Salary review requests are entering a new era. The EU Pay Transparency Directive (Directive 2023/970, applicable June 2026 with member state transposition through 2025-2026) requires employers with 100+ employees to publish pay-band data, report gender pay gaps semi-annually, and grant employees the right to request salary information for equivalent roles. US state pay-transparency laws have proliferated since 2021 — California SB 1162 (effective 2023, requires job postings to include pay ranges and the EEO-1 component 2 pay-data reporting), New York State Wage Transparency Act (effective 2023), Colorado Equal Pay for Equal Work (effective 2021, the trendsetter), Washington (2023), Illinois (2025), Massachusetts (2025), Hawaii (2024), Maryland (2024), New Jersey (in progress) — and the FTC banned non-competes in 2024 (though challenged in court). Brazilian Lei 14.611/2023 (igualdade salarial) requires companies with 100+ employees to publish gender pay equity reports semi-annually through the Portal Emprega Brasil, with the Ministério do Trabalho actively enforcing through fiscalização. This template structures the request itself — employee identity (name, work email, current title, department), date of last salary review (the baseline for proportional adjustment analysis), key achievements since last review (the manager-facing performance narrative), new or expanded responsibilities (the role-evolution justification often more powerful than pure performance), market data supporting the request (which compensation benchmarks the employee references — Radford / Mercer / Pearl Meyer / Levels.fyi / Glassdoor / Pave / OpenComp / PayScale for US, Croner-i / Mercer Spain / Hudson Salary Guide for Spain, ABRH-Brasil / Hays Brasil / Robert Half Brasil / Catho for Brazil), and the optional internal-equity context the employee chooses to share. It is the structured intake your HR comp team, manager, and skip-level manager use before the comp-committee review — not the freeform Slack message that produces an emotional negotiation rather than a data-driven decision.

From employee request to comp-committee-ready in one structured flow

Employee submits the request with their identity (name + work email + current title + department for routing). Date of last salary review establishes the baseline — most companies follow an annual review cycle but request-driven reviews can occur at any time, particularly tied to role changes, promotions, market shifts, or pay-transparency-disclosure events that surface internal inequities. Key achievements since last review captures the structured performance narrative — major projects delivered, business outcomes driven, customer wins, technical impact, leadership contributions; the field is intentionally text-heavy because the comp committee reads narrative not bullets. New or expanded responsibilities captures the role-evolution justification — increased team size managed, expanded scope of responsibility, new product line ownership, geographic expansion, the difference between 'doing the same job better' (which is a performance discussion) and 'doing a different/bigger job' (which is a role-change-justified salary discussion). Market data supporting the request captures which compensation benchmarks the employee references — Radford McLagan / Pearl Meyer / Mercer Comptryx / Levels.fyi / Pave Levels / OpenComp / PayScale / Glassdoor (US); Croner-i / Mercer Spain / Hudson Salary Guide / Hays Spain / Page Group Salary Survey (Spain); ABRH-Brasil / Hays Brasil / Robert Half Brasil / Catho / FundiPE Salary Guide (Brazil) — including the specific role, level, geography, and percentile referenced. On submission, the workflow auto-routes through the comp review process. Manager receives the request with a one-click 'support / partially support / refer to comp committee' option and is expected to add their narrative context (typically a paragraph on why they support or do not support the request, with specifics). HR comp team reviews against the internal pay band structure, internal equity analysis (how the requested salary compares to peers in similar roles), and the company's compensation philosophy. For EU employers subject to the Pay Transparency Directive, the workflow generates the documentation needed for the semi-annual gender pay gap reporting and the equivalent-role pay information disclosure. For US employers in California, NY, Colorado, Washington, Illinois, Massachusetts, Hawaii, Maryland, the workflow respects the state-specific pay range disclosure requirements (the requesting employee is entitled to the pay range for their role under most state laws). For Brazilian employers with 100+ employees under Lei 14.611/2023, the workflow generates the data feed for the semi-annual igualdade salarial report submitted through the Portal Emprega Brasil. Final approval routes to the comp committee (typically VP-level for individual contributor requests, executive-level for senior IC and management requests, board-level for executive requests). The audit trail captures the full progression — request submission, manager recommendation, HR comp team analysis, equity analysis, market benchmark validation, final decision, and the implementation date for the next pay cycle.

What's included

Every field exists because some HR comp team has been burned by its absence — usually at the comp-committee review where the manager argues for a 15 % raise based on 'they're a top performer' without specific achievements or market data, or at the pay-equity audit where the salary-history of similar employees reveals an unexplained gap that traces back to a request that was approved without structured documentation.

Comp teams using salary review request forms

  • EU employers preparing for Pay Transparency Directive (June 2026)

    EU employers with 100+ employees facing the Pay Transparency Directive (Directive 2023/970, applicable June 7, 2026 with progressive thresholds — 250+ employees report annually from 2027, 150+ from 2031, 100+ from 2031) which requires gender pay gap reporting, pay-band transparency for job postings, the right for employees to request salary information for equivalent roles, and joint pay assessments when the gender pay gap exceeds 5 % unexplained. The form's structured intake captures the data needed for the directive's reporting — by role category, by gender, by tenure, by performance — and produces the documentation auditors will request. Most large EU employers are running their pay-transparency-readiness program through 2024-2026, with the comp committee now meeting bi-weekly to align on the bands, the publication strategy, and the salary-review process changes needed for compliance.

  • US employers in pay-transparency states

    US employers operating in California (SB 1162, effective 2023 — job postings must include pay ranges, 100+ employer reporting under EEO-1 component 2), New York State (Wage Transparency Act, effective 2023), Colorado (Equal Pay for Equal Work, effective 2021), Washington (2023), Illinois (Pay Equity Reporting, effective 2025), Massachusetts (Pay Transparency Act, effective 2025 — applies to 25+ employer for postings, 100+ for reporting), Hawaii (2024), Maryland (Wage Transparency Act, effective 2024), New Jersey (in progress 2025), Vermont (2025), and a growing list. The form respects the per-state pay-range disclosure requirement when an employee requests the pay range for their role (which is the employee's right under most state laws), and generates the EEO-1 component 2 pay-data reporting feed for federal contractors and certain other employer categories. Pairs naturally with compensation management platforms (Pave, OpenComp, Mercer Comptryx, Radford McLagan, AssembleHR, Lattice Compensation, Carta Total Compensation).

  • Brazilian employers under Lei 14.611/2023 igualdade salarial

    Brazilian employers with 100+ employees subject to Lei 14.611/2023 which requires semi-annual gender pay equity reports through the Portal Emprega Brasil, with the Ministério do Trabalho actively enforcing through fiscalização. The law was passed in 2023 with the first reporting cycle in 2024, and the Ministério has been progressively tightening enforcement and the reporting requirements through 2024-2026. Companies that fail to report or that show unexplained gender pay gaps face fines starting at 3 % of the company's payroll (subject to caps and graduated penalties). The form's structured intake captures the data feed for the semi-annual report, including the role category, level, gender breakdown, and the salary-band analysis. Brazilian comp tools commonly used: ABRH-Brasil compensation survey, Hays Brasil salary guide, Robert Half Brasil salary survey, Catho compensation data, Mercer Brasil compensation studies, Aon Hewitt Brasil, plus internal HRIS comp modules in Senior Sistemas, TOTVS RH, Convenia, Sólides.

  • Tech and high-growth startup compensation programs

    Tech companies and high-growth startups running structured compensation programs with leveling frameworks (engineering levels L3-L9 a la Google/Meta/Amazon; product manager APM/PM/Sr PM/Group PM/Director/VP/CPO; sales SDR/AE/Sr AE/Strategic AE; design IC/Sr/Staff/Principal/Director). The form captures the level and competency framework references that drive the compensation discussion — engineers requesting a salary review typically include the level-promotion case (moving from L4 Sr Engineer to L5 Staff Engineer is a different conversation than 'doing the L4 job better'). Pairs with leveling-aware compensation platforms — Pave, OpenComp, Levels.fyi for external benchmarking, AssembleHR for internal band management. The form's market-data field naturally references the tech-specific benchmarks (Levels.fyi for senior IC roles, Pave for venture-backed startup benchmarks, Radford for established tech companies, OpenComp for the modern open-pay-bands approach).

  • Public sector and regulated industries (banking, healthcare)

    Public sector employers (US federal under OPM GS-schedule, EU public administration under specific civil service laws, Brazilian Administração Pública with specific tabelas salariais by órgão e cargo) and regulated industries (US banking under OCC + FRB + FDIC, EU banking under EBA + ECB + national regulators like Banco de España + BdF, Brazilian banking under BCB) where compensation is constrained by external rules. The form's structured intake captures the role within the applicable salary grade/band, the specific performance criteria, and the documentation needed for the regulatory compliance review. For US federal contractors, the form integrates with the EEO-1 component 2 reporting flow.

  • Multi-country compensation programs

    Multi-country employers with employees across US, EU, LATAM, and APAC running structured compensation programs. The form respects the per-country regulatory framework (EU Pay Transparency Directive, US state laws, Brazilian Lei 14.611/2023, UK Equal Pay reporting, Mexican LFT Art. 86 igualdad de salario) while maintaining the company's global comp philosophy. The market-data field captures the per-country benchmarks (Radford for US, Mercer for global enterprise, Hays for European mid-market, ABRH for Brazil) and the geographic differentials the company applies. Pairs with global compensation management — Mercer Comptryx, Pave Global, AssembleHR Global, plus the per-country HRIS modules (BambooHR Compensation, Workday Compensation, Personio Compensation Bands, Factorial Compensation, Holded Compensation).

Tailor it to your compensation philosophy

Every company has a different compensation philosophy. Configure the role-and-level field with your specific leveling framework — engineering ladder (L3-L9, IC track + manager track), sales career path (SDR / AE / Sr AE / Strategic AE / Director / VP), product manager ladder (APM / PM / Sr PM / Group PM / Director / VP / CPO), design ladder (IC / Sr / Staff / Principal / Director). Configure the market-data references to match the benchmarks your comp committee uses — Radford McLagan (the dominant comp benchmark for tech, used by Workday Comp and most large tech companies), Mercer Comptryx (broader industry coverage, used by enterprise non-tech), Pearl Meyer (executive comp focus), Pave Levels (modern venture-backed startup benchmark, the data behind a lot of 'levels' compensation transparency), OpenComp (open-source pay-bands approach), Levels.fyi (crowdsourced tech IC compensation), Glassdoor (broader but less reliable for specific roles), PayScale (mid-market focus), Salary.com (legacy benchmark provider); for Spain Croner-i, Hudson Salary Guide, Hays Spain Salary Survey, Page Group Salary Survey, Mercer Spain, Aon Hewitt Spain; for Brazil ABRH-Brasil salary survey, Hays Brasil, Robert Half Brasil Salary Guide, Catho compensation data, Mercer Brasil, Aon Hewitt Brasil. Add the internal-equity-context field that captures how the requested salary compares to peers in similar roles (the company decides whether the employee can see this data or whether HR shares it on request) — this is the core question for pay equity. Configure the approval-routing based on your comp committee structure — typical pattern is direct manager → comp business partner → director or VP → comp committee for amounts above a threshold. For executive-level requests, the routing goes to the board compensation committee under SOX-compliance public company governance or Lei das S/A Art. 152 for Brazilian public companies. For EU employers subject to the Pay Transparency Directive, configure the data-capture for the gender pay gap reporting feed. For US state pay-transparency, configure the per-state pay-range disclosure logic. For Brazilian employers under Lei 14.611/2023, configure the data-capture for the semi-annual igualdade salarial report.

Salary review FAQs

The EU Pay Transparency Directive (Directive 2023/970, formally adopted May 2023, with member state transposition deadline June 7, 2026) creates four major obligations: (1) job postings must include the pay range or starting salary for the role; (2) employees have the right to request information on the average pay levels by gender for the same or equivalent roles; (3) employers with 100+ employees must report gender pay gaps publicly (250+ employees report from 2027, 150-249 from 2031, 100-149 from 2031); (4) when the unadjusted gender pay gap exceeds 5 % and the employer cannot justify it on objective gender-neutral criteria, a joint pay assessment is required. The form's structured intake captures the data needed for these obligations — by role, by level, by gender, by tenure — and produces the documentation the employer needs for compliance. The directive applies in all 27 EU member states; transposition in member states is in progress through 2024-2026 with some countries (Sweden, Belgium, Spain) having earlier or stricter rules already in place. For Spain specifically, the Real Decreto 902/2020 already requires gender pay equity audits and pay registers — the new EU directive harmonizes and extends. For the salary review process specifically, the directive requires that compensation decisions be defensible against the equal-pay-for-equal-work principle, which means the structured intake of objective justifications (achievements, responsibilities, market data) becomes legally required documentation rather than just good practice.
US state pay-transparency laws have proliferated since 2021 with three categories of obligations: (1) pay range disclosure in job postings — California SB 1162 (effective 2023 for 15+ employees), New York State Wage Transparency Act (effective 2023), Colorado Equal Pay for Equal Work (effective 2021, the trendsetter), Washington (2023, 15+ employees), Illinois (Pay Equity Reporting + Transparency, effective 2025 for 15+ employees), Massachusetts (2025, 25+ employees for postings, 100+ for reporting), Hawaii (2024, 50+ employees), Maryland (2024, all employers), New Jersey (in progress 2025), Vermont (2025); (2) pay-data reporting — California SB 973 (annual EEO-1 component 2 pay data reporting for 100+ employees), Illinois Pay Equity Reporting (annual), New York pay-data reporting; (3) employee right to request pay range — most state transparency laws give employees the right to receive the pay range for their current position upon request, which the form's workflow respects. For the salary review process specifically, these laws mean that the comp committee's analysis must be defensible against the equal-pay principle, that the pay range for similar roles must be discoverable by the employee on request, and that the data behind the decision must be auditable. The form's structured intake produces the documentation. For federal contractors, the EEO-1 component 2 pay-data reporting flows from the employer's compensation records and the form's data captures the per-role pay-band data the report requires.
Lei 14.611/2023 (Lei da Igualdade Salarial, passed in 2023) requires Brazilian companies with 100+ employees to publish semi-annual gender pay equity reports through the Portal Emprega Brasil (the Ministério do Trabalho's digital portal for compliance reporting). The report must show the gender pay gap by occupational category (CBO 2002 codes) and include the specific actions the company is taking to reduce any identified gaps. The Ministério do Trabalho has been progressively tightening enforcement since the law passed — the first reporting cycle was March 2024, with subsequent cycles every 6 months. Companies that fail to report or that show unexplained gender pay gaps face fines starting at 3 % of the company's payroll (subject to caps and graduated penalties under the LISOS — Lei sobre Infrações e Sanções no Orden Social). The form's structured intake captures the data needed for the semi-annual report — by CBO occupational code, by gender, by salary band, by tenure — and generates the data feed for the Portal Emprega Brasil submission. The law applies in conjunction with the existing CLT principle of igual trabalho, igual salário (CLT Art. 461) and the constitutional principle of equal pay (Art. 7 XXX CF/88). For the salary review process specifically, this means that compensation decisions must be defensible against the igualdade salarial principle, that the gender pay gap data must be reported semi-annually, and that the documentation of the decision must be auditable in case of fiscalização.
Pay-transparency-driven discoveries — an employee learning that a peer earns X % more for similar work — are one of the major triggers for salary review requests in the modern pay-transparency era. The right approach is structural: (1) accept that pay-transparency-driven requests are legitimate and treat them with the same rigor as other requests; (2) educate employees on the company's compensation philosophy (band-based, performance-differentiated, geography-adjusted) so they understand the framework, not just the headline numbers; (3) ensure the salary bands and the decision documentation can defend the differences — different levels, different geography, different tenure, different performance, different historical merit increases compounding over time can all produce legitimate gaps even within a band; (4) when the analysis reveals an unjustified gap, fix it proactively rather than waiting for the employee to escalate or for the regulator to find it (the EU Pay Transparency Directive specifically requires the joint pay assessment when the unadjusted gap exceeds 5 % unexplained); (5) communicate transparently about the decision — even when the answer is 'no raise this cycle,' the structured reasoning ('your role is at the 60th percentile of the band, your performance rating supports the current placement, the peer you mentioned is at a different level with different tenure') is far more defensible than 'we'll review at the next cycle.' Companies that do this well produce higher retention and lower legal exposure than those that handle pay-transparency requests defensively.
On submission, the workflow can create the review record in your comp management platform with the structured data attached. For Pave (the modern venture-backed startup standard with strong leveling and benchmark data, used by Pave Levels), the submission creates a salary review request with the level, market data, and peer comparison context. For OpenComp (open-source pay-bands approach), similar integration. For Mercer Comptryx (enterprise standard with the Mercer survey data), the integration captures the Mercer survey reference for the role, level, and geography. For Radford McLagan (the dominant tech benchmark), the integration cites the Radford survey for the comp committee analysis. For AssembleHR, Carta Total Compensation, Lattice Compensation — equivalent integrations. For the HRIS side, Workday Compensation, BambooHR Compensation, Personio Compensation Bands, Factorial Compensation, Holded for Spain, Convenia / Sólides / Senior Sistemas / TOTVS RH for Brazil — the salary review feeds the structured comp data the HRIS maintains. For EU compliance, the integration generates the data feed for the Pay Transparency Directive reporting. For US state pay-transparency, the integration respects the per-state disclosure requirements. For Brazilian Lei 14.611/2023, the integration generates the data feed for the semi-annual Portal Emprega Brasil submission. The audit trail captures the full progression — request submission, manager recommendation, comp team analysis, equity analysis, market benchmark validation, final decision, and the implementation date for the next pay cycle. This documentation is what the EU pay transparency auditor, the EEOC, the Brazilian Ministério do Trabalho, or the Spanish Inspección de Trabajo would request in an investigation.

Related templates

Performance review form — built for the way reviews actually work in 2026

Performance review form template with self-assessment, manager review, OKR-based goal tracking, and calibration support.

View template

Exit interview form — capture departure signal that's actually actionable

Exit interview form template with structured departure reasons, manager-attribution suppression mitigation, post-exit 30-60 day follow-up, and aggregated

View template

Vacation Request Form Template

Replace email chains and PTO spreadsheets with a structured vacation request form. Capture dates, coverage, manager approval, and policy acknowledgment with

View template

Ready to build forms that work for you?

Create your first form in minutes. Your submissions will thank you.

Be first in lineLimited early accessSet up in 2 minutes