Please note: The Auto-enrolment sub-board is now closed. If you have a question around pensions, please post in the Pensions, Annuities and Retirement Planning board.
Probably a silly question but regards to law
Options
Hold_on
Posts: 17 Forumite
So I am currently at a large company that does a work place pension, I am considering going to another company with offices based in the UK (London). I remember I asked before I went on holiday about the benefits, and specifically pension. They said I need to have worked there for 2 or 3 years to have one. Now, that struck me as way too long and odd but ignored it. I've come back from holiday and now as things are moving along, I started thinking about it again.
I called the workplace pension .gov number and told them what I have said above. They said as you are working in the UK (even if the company has it's main offices abroad), they have to offer one. Is that correct?
I'm quite dense at this stuff, I just don't want to go to a company that will ignore a law because my thinking is if they ignore that what else will they ignore?
Thanks in advance
I called the workplace pension .gov number and told them what I have said above. They said as you are working in the UK (even if the company has it's main offices abroad), they have to offer one. Is that correct?
I'm quite dense at this stuff, I just don't want to go to a company that will ignore a law because my thinking is if they ignore that what else will they ignore?
Thanks in advance
0
Comments
-
If they are a big company, and they have an existing pension scheme, it must be a qualifying workplace scheme (there are many rules governing this which I'm not going to go into detail here). If it satisfies this condition and they want to continue to use their scheme, it must also satisfy the following auto-enrolment criteria:
(1)must not require the worker's consent to join
(2)must not require the worker to provide any information or
(3)make any choices to join or remain a member, eg submit an application form or choose a type of fund
(4)must allow a worker to join it from their first day of employment.
If they don't meet these conditions, they need to use a new scheme. If they do not, then they are breaking the law, and they probably don't realise it.
Unless the new employer has a DB scheme or a hybrid, then there is an exception to this rule, and they do not need to enrol you until September 2017 (end of the transitional period).Stephen Covey once said that "when you teach once, you learn twice". That is the primary reason for my participation on the forums as an IFA.
Although I strive to provide accurate information in my posts, there may be the odd time when I fail. Yes I know it's hard to believe but even Your Hero can make mistakes. Apologies in advance.0 -
If they are a big company, and they have an existing pension scheme, it must be a qualifying workplace scheme (there are many rules governing this which I'm not going to go into detail here). If it satisfies this condition and they want to continue to use their scheme, it must also satisfy the following auto-enrolment criteria:
(1)must not require the worker's consent to join
(2)must not require the worker to provide any information or
(3)make any choices to join or remain a member, eg submit an application form or choose a type of fund
(4)must allow a worker to join it from their first day of employment.
If they don't meet these conditions, they need to use a new scheme. If they do not, then they are breaking the law, and they probably don't realise it.
Unless the new employer has a DB scheme or a hybrid, then there is an exception to this rule, and they do not need to enrol you until September 2017 (end of the transitional period).
Thanks.
So to confirm my situation. I am at a huge company which I believe had a pension scheme in place already and then auto enrolled last year.
This new company is a huge company where the HQ is based but has offices worldwide and is owned by an even bigger company, and by big I mean huge who also have offices worldwide. But their London office specifically for the company I am working for has about less than 50 people from what I'm told. The HR who I have been dealing with is based at the HQ so may not be up to date with UK law etc.
The current pension scheme from what I understand starts after 2/3 years there. But again, that is with the bank in Asia. So they should still be following laws here and have something in place right? And how do I find out if they are exempt for now?0 -
Thanks.
The current pension scheme from what I understand starts after 2/3 years there. But again, that is with the bank in Asia. So they should still be following laws here and have something in place right? And how do I find out if they are exempt for now?
Yes they have to comply with the UK laws.
Find out what type of scheme they have. If it's a Defined benefit (DB) scheme then they are probably exempt for the time being until "2/3 years'" time (2017). Or just ask them directly about auto-enrolment and if their scheme meets the criteria and see what their response is.Stephen Covey once said that "when you teach once, you learn twice". That is the primary reason for my participation on the forums as an IFA.
Although I strive to provide accurate information in my posts, there may be the odd time when I fail. Yes I know it's hard to believe but even Your Hero can make mistakes. Apologies in advance.0 -
Yes they have to comply with the UK laws.
Find out what type of scheme they have. If it's a Defined benefit (DB) scheme then they are probably exempt for the time being until "2/3 years'" time (2017). Or just ask them directly about auto-enrolment and if their scheme meets the criteria and see what their response is.
Well I asked them and she said she'll have to get back to me with all the details as I said I would need to transfer etc. But she assured me that they comply with all laws required and the pension is most likely done with the parent company despite this company considering itself a standalone one in general.
The pension she referred to (the one after a couple or so years) was one in which the employee does not contribute, only them.
I hope I'm not taking a huge risk here but I feel a bit more confident if I have the law on my side.0 -
No reason for it to be a huge risk, it's just a routine question for HR to be asked about benefits.
Just say what they give as their reasoning once they have had a chance to check and you'll probably find that what they are doing is fine for the type they use.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.5K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.9K Spending & Discounts
- 235.6K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173.2K Life & Family
- 248.2K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards