TUPE rights

lisyloo

Hi

Recently I went through a tupe consultation.
One of the items agreed was that there would be no detriment to our pension.
The company have now decided to make our pension payments 3 days later (22nd not 19th) which generally in investment terms is detriment.
Can anyone confirm what are my rights and what legislation should I refer to if gentler tactics do not succeed.

Thanks

sammyjammy

Seriously? Its done monthly, it was done monthly, once the first three days is gone you are in no different situation. I fail to see what the problem is.

lisyloo

In investment terms payment later is detrimental as in general investment increase over time (I am checking my actual losses).

There are also pension regulations (UK law) about when payments need to be made by which may have been breached.

Are you saying that employers can just flout the TUPE process?
Do you think everyone would be ok receiving their pay 3 days later with no notification?
I think there would be uproar.

or merely that you personally don't think it's a big deal (a large amount of my renumeration goes into my pension plus I think breaching agreements IS a big deal).

I am asking about my rights under TUPE not for opinions about whether this matters or not.
When a large propertion of my income is paid DOES matter to me and would matter to the vast majority of people, there is also the matter of my employer tkaing the p*** and flouting a agreement.

ssparks2003

So how detrimental is these 3 day lag likely to be?

LilElvis

Ask the trustees for a copy of the scheme rules.

gettingtheresometime

I'm another one who doesn't understand where the detriment comes in.


I assume (which admittedly is always dangerous) that the detriment means %ages contributed to the scheme by the employer and employee.


I don't see how you can argue that the investment 3 days later will have any negative impact on your pension pot as the price of the units purchased on the 19th may be higher or lower than that on the 22nd.


Surely over a period of time there would be an smoothing effect of the change of purchase date.


Perhaps you could explain further where you see the issue

Xbigman

TUPE protection is not as strong as most people think. Even if there is a specific agreement a strong business case can over rule almost anything.

A three day delay in payments would not be seen as detrimental if the company had a reason to do it. Even if it is just for administration purposes that would be good enough.




Darren

antrobus

lisyloo wrote: »

The company have now decided to make our pension payments 3 days later (22nd not 19th) which generally in investment terms is detriment.

Contributions deducted from your salary should be paid to the pension provider by the 19th of the following month from which they were collected from pay or the 22nd of the following month if contributions are paid electronically to the pension provider. This requirement appears in the Pensions Act 1995 and it also features in the Pension Regulator's code of practice.

https://www.pensionsadvisoryservice.org.uk/pension-problems/pension-security/paying-contributions-on-time

Presumably, your employer has now opted to pay the contributions "electronically to the pension provider" as opposed to by cheque which takes three days to clear.

But paying on the 22nd is in accordance with the law.

P.S. I don't think there is any 'detriment'.

Savvy_Sue

lisyloo wrote: »

Are you saying that employers can just flout the TUPE process?
Do you think everyone would be ok receiving their pay 3 days later with no notification?
I think there would be uproar.

I think if I'd been TUPEd, I'd accept it if I found that the new employer paid three days later than the original employer, even with very little notice, given that the alternative is probably not having a job at all.

I don't think this would be seen as a material change.

Lavendyr

Is the date of the pension payment in your contract?

xapprenticex