In this paper we analyze the use of numerical information in the context of job evaluation. The analysis is based on the job evaluation system Steps to Pay Equity, which is recommended by the European Project on Equal Pay supported by the European commission. The main findings can be summarized as follows. Firstly, in Steps to Pay Equity no method is suggested that can be used in order to construct stronger scales than ordinal scales. This implies that rankings of jobs are based on the addition of ordinal scales, which means that the rankings are very unstable for admissible transformations. Secondly, there is no explicit definition or explanation how the weights should be interpreted, something that hampers an assessment about the reasonability of the assigned weights. Thirdly, the convention to classify jobs on predefined levels can give rise to heavy deformations of relevant differences between jobs, which means that received rankings of jobs are unjustified guidance for impartial pay setting. We suggest a possible remedy by illustrating the use of a specific multi-attribute evaluation model.