The gender pay gap hit home for Jo Cribb, co-founder of Still Minding the Gap in Aotearoa New Zealand, when she discovered the role she had recently left was advertised at a far higher salary than she had been earning.

Cribb had been acting in the position for years, receiving only a modest boost to her baseline salary when formally promoted. “They hadn’t offered me what the job was really worth,” she says. “Over four or five years, that adds up to a substantial amount of money.”

Her experience reflects a broader truth: pay inequity rarely stems from individual performance alone. It arises from negotiation norms, structural biases and organisational systems that shape who advances and who is rewarded.

The CA ANZ 2025/26 Remuneration Survey shows the gender pay gap in accounting persists at 14% in Australia and 24% in New Zealand. While equal pay for equal work is legally required, these gaps reflect broader workforce patterns – who progresses, who leads, who is supported in caring responsibilities and who receives bonuses.

What’s particularly striking, Cribb notes, is the perception gap among colleagues. Some assume workplaces are inherently fair because equal pay is legally mandated. Others blame women for the gaps: they aren’t ambitious enough or are too focused on flexibility.

“That is nonsense,” she says. “Women are as ambitious, if not more, than men. Over the last decade, around 60% of graduates have been women. The pay gap isn’t about part-time work or career ambition, it’s structural. It should be about the value of the work, not arbitrary assumptions about the person doing it.”

Systemic barriers

Multiple factors combine to sustain the gender pay gap among CA ANZ members. Only 24% of Australian equity partners and 34% in New Zealand are women, limiting access to higher-paying roles. Career interruptions related to inequal sharing of caregiving also slow progression and reduce earnings.

Teresa Lee from the Gender at Work team at YWCA Auckland stresses that, based on research, traditional factors such as occupation, family responsibilities, education and age account for only a small portion of the disparity in New Zealand's national gender pay gap.

The evidence shows that about 80% of the gap remains unaccounted for by those factors, Lee explains. This points to the influence of behaviours, attitudes and assumptions about women and women’s work, including unconscious bias, alongside other unexplained drivers.

“Employers have the responsibility for decisions around attracting, recruiting, training and promoting staff," she adds. "They have the power to drive change.”

The negotiation divide

Remuneration is often shaped by an individual’s willingness and ability to negotiate. The 2025/26 CA ANZ Remuneration Survey reveals 38% of women would not feel comfortable discussing pay with their employer, compared with 24% of men.

Amy Rogers, pay equality and cultural change expert with Elevate Consulting, says the system itself amplifies these differences.

“Salary may be determined by your ability to negotiate, rather than your contribution,” she explains. “Negotiation is also often open to gender bias.”

The hesitation is not merely about confidence. Lee says younger women frequently fear negative consequences.

“Our research shows younger women are often very fearful of bringing up [pay] because they are scared of negative consequences, like being seen as a troublemaker,” she says.

Transparency is another barrier. Lee says the Let’s Talk Pay Survey shows four in 10 young women do not have enough information about how pay is determined, and 34% disagree there are safe and effective ways to raise pay-related concerns.

Where remuneration frameworks are opaque, managers retain significant influence. Dr Samone McCurdy, insights and capability executive manager at the Workplace Gender Equality Agency (WGEA), highlights this limitation.

“The problem is the policy implementation … particularly when the remuneration policy still leaves a significant proportion of the actual figure to an individual manager,” she says.

Negotiation trade-offs further shape outcomes. “Women are often more likely to trade off pay for flexibility,” McCurdy adds; this could be because of entrenched organisational and/or societal biases. Starting salaries for women are also frequently lower than those for equivalent men, a gap that compounds over time.

The compounding effect

Even small, early-career differences can have long-term consequences. “Small amounts compound so much during your career,” Rogers says, noting that asking candidates for their previous salary only “perpetuates that cycle” of underpayment.

Over time, the impact is stark: women in both Australia and New Zealand retire with significantly less superannuation or KiwiSaver than men.

Rogers emphasises organisations need to tackle the structures that allow inequity to persist. That means reducing reliance on individual negotiation, removing questions about past salaries, publishing clear pay bands, and tightening oversight of discretionary decisions about pay and bonuses.

“It also requires examining promotion pipelines, looking at how well flexible work is supported and ensuring leadership opportunities are accessible to the entire talent pool,” she says.

Fixing the system, not the women

The responsibility to address the gender pay gap ultimately rests with employers, says McCurdy.

“Leaders must adopt a gender-aware approach to management, recognising that equality – including gender equality – is a baseline expectation, on par with workplace safety,” she says.

In recent years, there have been legislative changes in Australia. Employers with 100 or more employees must lodge a report to WGEA containing information on the gender, pay and occupation of each employee annually. In addition, employers that directly employ 500 or more employees are required to select and meet or progress on gender equality targets. Gender equality performance reports must also be shared with boards or governing bodies.

While progress is being made – with WGEA revealing in March 2026 that the number of employers within the target gender pay gap range has increased – significant work remains. The latest Employer Gender Pay Gaps Report shows that more than 50% of employers still have a gender pay gap larger than 11.2% in favour of men.

“These reforms compel executives and boards to intervene meaningfully, ensuring that employees – a core stakeholder group – experience genuine gender equality,” McCurdy adds. “The requirements are public, transparent and enforceable.”

Take aways

Read the full CA ANZ 2025/26 Remuneration Survey findings here.

Plus, learn practical steps to close the gender pay gap – whether you’re a member, employer, recruiter or leader – with CA ANZ’s Narrowing Your Gender Pay Gap Playbook.