Kicked out of the pension scheme for taking on a permanent contract!

Grumpy_chap

MeteredOut said:

That seems weird. So just an internal transfer within the same legal entity? Same PAYE reference number on your payslip?

For example, some banks have their retail, commercial, investment, international etc sectors in different legal entities.

The OP does not work in a bank.
It is a "bank" role in the care sector where "bank" is the term for contingency workers / agency staff / supplementary staff or whatever term is used in other sectors.

DietIrnBru

Grumpy_chap said:

MeteredOut said:

That seems weird. So just an internal transfer within the same legal entity? Same PAYE reference number on your payslip?

For example, some banks have their retail, commercial, investment, international etc sectors in different legal entities.

The OP does not work in a bank.
It is a "bank" role in the care sector where "bank" is the term for contingency workers / agency staff / supplementary staff or whatever term is used in other sectors.

Welcome to the gig economy of Tory Britain. There’s a rule, get out clause and shaft rule for all occasions to keep the plebes in line.

Hoenir

gazza26 said:

new pension fund 

Are there differing schemes?  Is the 3 months a probationary period? 

barnstar2077

I had the same thing when I was taken on full time from being an agency worker, despite having worked there for two years, I had to have a three month probationary period. 

Some people are taken on directly, without going through an agency, so to make it fair, they make everyone wait three months.  Of course, fair is only fair if it is in the company's favour! 

LHW99

On the other hand ....... at least we have autoenrollment, and that fact seems to be making more people aware that they should have some sort of work pension which garners some level of contributions from them / the employer.

Not necessarily as much as the older work schemes might have been 40 years ago, but back then, many people's work didn't set anything up for the ordinary employee, only those at the higher grades. It left too many retired people dependent solely on SP, hence the need to institute the triple lock (which is now being re-evaluated).

While it won't happen overnight, as more people like the OP start to question their company's HR about their pension payments, hopefully it will encourage better management of the system as people move roles, and perhaps gradually even trigger Government to tighten the rules by reducing timescales for action, and encouraging even greater participation (eg cutting the minimum that has to be earned before employers / employees have to contribute)

caeler

Legislatively speaking we can expect two major changes in coming years to auto enrolment. First to change the starting age from 22 to 18 years old and eventually to remove the lower earnings limit on the qualifying earnings rule. Obviously the later will cost money to fund and means employees contribute more so that one might be a while away. It’s good auto enrolment exists as @lhw99 says. 

dunstonh

DietIrnBru said:

Grumpy_chap said:

MeteredOut said:

That seems weird. So just an internal transfer within the same legal entity? Same PAYE reference number on your payslip?

For example, some banks have their retail, commercial, investment, international etc sectors in different legal entities.

The OP does not work in a bank.
It is a "bank" role in the care sector where "bank" is the term for contingency workers / agency staff / supplementary staff or whatever term is used in other sectors.

Welcome to the gig economy of Tory Britain. There’s a rule, get out clause and shaft rule for all occasions to keep the plebes in line.

Gig economy was first mentioned in 2009 under Labour.