If you think the gender pay gap in construction is only an equality issue, you are looking at the wrong problem. In London construction, the gap is not just about pay, it is a signal of how the workforce is structured and whether projects can be delivered at all. On complex schemes across the capital, delivery is increasingly constrained not by design or funding, but by the availability of competent people. The gender pay gap exposes a structural imbalance in that workforce.
This is particularly relevant as London construction demand continues to grow while workforce availability remains constrained.
Across the UK, construction reports one of the highest gender pay gaps of any sector, typically between 20% and 24%, compared to a national average of around 12–13%. In London, where high-value projects are delivered by Tier 1 contractors under increasing regulatory pressure from the Building Safety Act, particularly in relation to competence, accountability and the Golden Thread of information, this imbalance becomes more visible. The issue is not equal pay for equal work, it is who occupies the roles that carry responsibility, risk and decision-making authority.
This shifts the gender pay gap from a reporting metric to a delivery constraint.
The gender pay gap in construction is not primarily a difference in pay for the same role, but a reflection of how the workforce is distributed across roles, responsibilities and levels of seniority. It is a structural indicator of who enters the industry, who progresses into technical and leadership positions and who holds accountability for delivery. In this context, the gap becomes a proxy for workforce capacity, signalling whether the industry is accessing its full talent pool or operating with a constrained supply of skills.
The Gap Is Real And It Is Structural
Across the UK, the median gender pay gap for all employees stood at around 12.8% in 2025.
In construction, the gap is significantly higher. Industry reporting consistently places it between 20% and 24%, making construction one of the most unequal sectors in the economy. This difference is not primarily caused by unequal pay for the same role, it is driven by who does which roles.
Men dominate higher-paid positions such as site management, engineering and senior leadership, while women are overrepresented in lower-paid or administrative roles.
The result is a structural pay gap, not a direct pay disparity.
London Reflects And Amplifies The Problem
London follows the same pattern as the national market, but at greater scale.
The capital’s gender pay gap across all sectors is around 10–12%, but within construction, particularly on major projects, the gap remains significantly higher.
This is not surprising. London construction is dominated by large, complex schemes delivered by Tier 1 contractors, where high-value roles remain heavily male-dominated.
In effect, the higher the value of the project, the more visible the imbalance becomes.
This Is Not a Pay Issue, It Is a Workforce Structure Issue
The key driver of the gender pay gap in construction is occupational segregation.
Women are significantly underrepresented in:
- Site-based roles
- Skilled trades
- Engineering positions
- Senior leadership
At the same time, they are overrepresented in:
- Administrative roles
- Support functions
- Lower pay quartiles
This imbalance is reinforced by several structural factors:
- Inflexible working patterns on site
- Long and unpredictable hours
- Career breaks linked to caring responsibilities
- Limited visibility of female role models
Cultural perceptions of construction as a male-dominated industry
These are not short-term issues, they shape who enters the industry, who stays and who progresses.
The Real Impact: A Reduced Talent Pool
Women make up approximately 14–15% of the UK construction workforce and a far smaller percentage of skilled trades. This is not just a diversity statistic, it means the industry is effectively operating with access to only part of the available workforce.
At a time when the UK is forecast to require hundreds of thousands of additional construction workers over the coming years, this represents a significant constraint. The industry is not short of demand, it is short of people and it is not using the full labour pool available to it.
However, where women are present in the industry, their contribution is already visible across engineering, project management, commercial functions and emerging technical disciplines. Many of the most complex projects in London are already being supported and delivered by women operating at high levels of competence, often within systems that were not originally designed with them in mind.
The challenge is therefore not capability, it is progression. For the industry to remain sustainable, there must be a cultural and structural shift that enables greater representation of women in senior technical and leadership roles. This includes not only recruitment, but retention, visibility and progression pathways into positions of decision-making authority.
Unlocking this potential is not simply a diversity objective, it is a delivery requirement.
From Workforce Imbalance to Delivery Risk
This is where the gender pay gap becomes operational. A workforce that does not attract, retain or progress women creates a long-term capacity issue. That capacity issue becomes a delivery risk.
The link is direct:
These pressures are already visible across London. On live construction sites, this constraint is reflected in extended recruitment cycles, reliance on a limited pool of experienced personnel and increased pressure on existing teams. Roles in engineering, site management and specialist trades are often difficult to fill, particularly on complex or safety-critical projects, where competence requirements are higher. This reinforces the link between workforce structure and delivery capacity. Projects are delayed not because they cannot be designed, but because they cannot be resourced. The gender imbalance contributes directly to that constraint.
The Skills Shortage Cannot Be Solved Without Change
Industry bodies consistently identify skills shortages as one of the biggest risks to delivery. At the same time, women remain significantly underrepresented across the sector. These two issues cannot be treated separately.
If the industry continues to attract only a limited demographic, the skills gap will persist regardless of training programmes or recruitment drives. Increasing participation is not a diversity initiative, it is a capacity strategy.
Regulation Is Increasing Pressure
UK law already requires companies with more than 250 employees to report their gender pay gap annually. This has made the issue visible, but not necessarily resolved it. New regulatory developments will go further, with upcoming requirements that are expected to include action plans and increased accountability for closing pay gaps.
At the same time, the Building Safety Act has introduced new expectations around competence, traceability and accountability. These requirements increase the need for a stable, skilled and demonstrably competent workforce. A constrained labour pool makes compliance harder.
Progress Is Slow And Uneven
There has been gradual improvement in the gender pay gap across the UK over the last decade. However, progress remains slow, and in construction it is often static. In some cases, the gap temporarily increases when more women are recruited into entry-level roles, lowering average pay without changing senior representation.
This highlights a key issue, and improving entry numbers is not enough. Retention and progression are critical. Without movement into higher-value roles, the underlying structure does not change.
What This Reveals About the Industry
The gender pay gap is often discussed as a fairness issue. In construction, it is more than that, it reveals how the industry actually operates, who enters the workforce, who stays, who progresses, who holds responsibility and ultimately who delivers projects.
The gap is not just about pay; it is a visible symptom of a deeper structural imbalance in how the industry allocates responsibility, risk and progression.
Conclusion
The gender pay gap in London construction is not just a measure of inequality, it is a measure of workforce risk. An industry that relies on a narrow talent base limits its own capacity to deliver at a time when demand for construction remains high, the constraint is not pipeline, it is people and the gender pay gap is one of the clearest indicators of that constraint.
The challenge is therefore not capability, it is progression. For the industry to remain sustainable, there must be a cultural and structural shift that enables greater representation of women in senior technical and leadership roles. This includes not only recruitment, but retention, visibility and progression pathways into positions of decision-making authority.
Unlocking this potential is not simply a diversity objective, it is a delivery requirement.
From Workforce Imbalance to Delivery Risk
This is where the gender pay gap becomes operational. A workforce that does not attract, retain or progress women creates a long-term capacity issue. That capacity issue becomes a delivery risk.
The link is direct:
- Fewer people entering the industry
- Lower retention rates
- Reduced progression into senior roles
- Increased pressure on existing workforce
- Skills shortages across key disciplines
These pressures are already visible across London. On live construction sites, this constraint is reflected in extended recruitment cycles, reliance on a limited pool of experienced personnel and increased pressure on existing teams. Roles in engineering, site management and specialist trades are often difficult to fill, particularly on complex or safety-critical projects, where competence requirements are higher. This reinforces the link between workforce structure and delivery capacity. Projects are delayed not because they cannot be designed, but because they cannot be resourced. The gender imbalance contributes directly to that constraint.
The Skills Shortage Cannot Be Solved Without Change
Industry bodies consistently identify skills shortages as one of the biggest risks to delivery. At the same time, women remain significantly underrepresented across the sector. These two issues cannot be treated separately.
If the industry continues to attract only a limited demographic, the skills gap will persist regardless of training programmes or recruitment drives. Increasing participation is not a diversity initiative, it is a capacity strategy.
Regulation Is Increasing Pressure
UK law already requires companies with more than 250 employees to report their gender pay gap annually. This has made the issue visible, but not necessarily resolved it. New regulatory developments will go further, with upcoming requirements that are expected to include action plans and increased accountability for closing pay gaps.
At the same time, the Building Safety Act has introduced new expectations around competence, traceability and accountability. These requirements increase the need for a stable, skilled and demonstrably competent workforce. A constrained labour pool makes compliance harder.
Progress Is Slow And Uneven
There has been gradual improvement in the gender pay gap across the UK over the last decade. However, progress remains slow, and in construction it is often static. In some cases, the gap temporarily increases when more women are recruited into entry-level roles, lowering average pay without changing senior representation.
This highlights a key issue, and improving entry numbers is not enough. Retention and progression are critical. Without movement into higher-value roles, the underlying structure does not change.
What This Reveals About the Industry
The gender pay gap is often discussed as a fairness issue. In construction, it is more than that, it reveals how the industry actually operates, who enters the workforce, who stays, who progresses, who holds responsibility and ultimately who delivers projects.
The gap is not just about pay; it is a visible symptom of a deeper structural imbalance in how the industry allocates responsibility, risk and progression.
Conclusion
The gender pay gap in London construction is not just a measure of inequality, it is a measure of workforce risk. An industry that relies on a narrow talent base limits its own capacity to deliver at a time when demand for construction remains high, the constraint is not pipeline, it is people and the gender pay gap is one of the clearest indicators of that constraint.
Because the reality is this: construction is not limited by what can be built, it is limited by who is available, competent and able to deliver it.
If a significant portion of the potential workforce is not fully represented across technical and leadership roles, the system does not fail immediately. It simply operates below capacity, with the impact visible in programme pressure, skills shortages and delivery risk across the industry.
Image © London Construction Magazine Limited
|
Expert Verification & Authorship: Mihai Chelmus
Founder, London Construction Magazine | Construction Testing & Investigation Specialist |
