Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@. Skimlinks & other affiliated links are turned on

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • helmie
    • By helmie 8th May 18, 12:39 PM
    • 11Posts
    • 0Thanks
    helmie
    Without prejudice to terms of my employment
    • #1
    • 8th May 18, 12:39 PM
    Without prejudice to terms of my employment 8th May 18 at 12:39 PM
    I am on a fixed term contract that is governed by rules and regulations in separate documents.

    The employer want to make a change to the pension scheme which means any employee who does not make it to 5 years, loses any employer contribution that were nominally put towards pension, currently worth about 15% of my package if they leave before 5 years are up. As I cannot control if I am offered extensions, and the policy is becoming more and more not to extend to make sure nobody is critical, I am therefor very likely to be forced out before the five year point and lose this nominal employer contribution.

    My actual contract says they can change the rulebook and " it will be applicable to me without prejudice to my terms of appointment''.

    I dont know what this means - it seems pretty prejudical to me if currently I acquire additional employer contributions, and soon I will not, but I dont know what this means legally.

    Does this mean they have to come to a deal with me if they make the terms worse - or can they do what they like'?

    Due to the nature of the job and its location they have me over a barrel, I would have been much less likely to accept under the new terms, but now I have made significant personal arrangements and costs to take the new position, walking away is not an easy option.
Page 1
    • steampowered
    • By steampowered 8th May 18, 1:54 PM
    • 2,840 Posts
    • 2,812 Thanks
    steampowered
    • #2
    • 8th May 18, 1:54 PM
    • #2
    • 8th May 18, 1:54 PM
    I don't understand how this would work.

    Once money has been paid into your pension scheme, it is held by the pension scheme trustees in your name.

    I don't see how the employer could get that money back even if it wanted to.

    Unless the employer is trying to say that it will deduct an equivalent amount from your final salary?
    • helmie
    • By helmie 8th May 18, 2:09 PM
    • 11 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    helmie
    • #3
    • 8th May 18, 2:09 PM
    • #3
    • 8th May 18, 2:09 PM
    At the moment we have a money purchase type scheme, the employer wants to go to a final salary type scheme. Normally this is thought of as a good thing - but they also want to force people on short term contracts into it - where it will be a considerable loss of overall renumeration.

    In a final salary arrangement the money does not go into your personal pot, it goes into a pooled social fund, where rights of eventual access are governed by rules. Instead of giving money to me, they will give it to the fund. If I could work here for 15+ years it would be a great scheme, and many people here are in that situation, however I have an 80% chance of losing out and subsidising the long termers as you earn no rights to payouts until you have worked 5 years.
    • anamenottaken
    • By anamenottaken 8th May 18, 8:44 PM
    • 4,146 Posts
    • 3,628 Thanks
    anamenottaken
    • #4
    • 8th May 18, 8:44 PM
    • #4
    • 8th May 18, 8:44 PM
    I'd check whether the scheme is compliant with current statutory requirements.
    • Dox
    • By Dox 8th May 18, 9:31 PM
    • 936 Posts
    • 718 Thanks
    Dox
    • #5
    • 8th May 18, 9:31 PM
    • #5
    • 8th May 18, 9:31 PM
    At the moment we have a money purchase type scheme, the employer wants to go to a final salary type scheme. Normally this is thought of as a good thing - but they also want to force people on short term contracts into it - where it will be a considerable loss of overall renumeration.

    In a final salary arrangement the money does not go into your personal pot, it goes into a pooled social fund, where rights of eventual access are governed by rules. Instead of giving money to me, they will give it to the fund. If I could work here for 15+ years it would be a great scheme, and many people here are in that situation, however I have an 80% chance of losing out and subsidising the long termers as you earn no rights to payouts until you have worked 5 years.
    Originally posted by helmie
    The phrase here is 'baloney'. Five year vesting periods went out with the ark (well, not quite) and they certainly can't enforce any such provision, final salary or otherwise. If you've been a member of a defined benefit pension scheme for at least two years, you must be given the option to leave your benefits in the scheme.

    You may (but don't have to be) offered this option if you've been a member for less than two years. If you don't have this option, you are entitled to transfer out a cash amount (representing the benefits you have built up) to another pension scheme, albeit within fairly tight timeframes. Otherwise, if the scheme rules permit, you may be able to take a refund of your own personal contributions - not a great idea, because you don't get any benefit from what the employer has contributed.

    There's also the little matter of auto-enrolment regulations, which your employer is either clueless about or deliberately flouting. Either way, it doesn't wash.
    Last edited by Dox; 08-05-2018 at 9:35 PM.
    • helmie
    • By helmie 9th May 18, 7:29 AM
    • 11 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    helmie
    • #6
    • 9th May 18, 7:29 AM
    • #6
    • 9th May 18, 7:29 AM
    I should have said, its an international organisation so though I am employed from the UK, it may not be subject to UK law. Its a great scheme if you have multiple wives etc, but not for me.

    I was really wondering what the "without prejudice to terms of employment" bit meant legally.
    • steampowered
    • By steampowered 9th May 18, 10:20 AM
    • 2,840 Posts
    • 2,812 Thanks
    steampowered
    • #7
    • 9th May 18, 10:20 AM
    • #7
    • 9th May 18, 10:20 AM
    If you are employed in the UK, UK law applies to your employment contract.

    This will include the employer's legal obligation to provide access to a pension scheme.

    What the employer is offering doesn't sound compliant to me, though hopefully someone with more knowledge of pensions law can confirm.

    'without prejudice to terms of employment' means that it does not affect the other terms of your appointment, i.e. the rulebook does not override your employment contract.
    • helmie
    • By helmie 9th May 18, 11:19 AM
    • 11 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    helmie
    • #8
    • 9th May 18, 11:19 AM
    • #8
    • 9th May 18, 11:19 AM
    OK thanks, looks like I am a bit screwed then as pension contributions are defined in the rule book and not the contract.

    However the contract does say they will make deductions into the old scheme and presumably needs ameneded to say deductions to the new scheme. That only effects how my own contributions would work though and not the employers bit.
    Last edited by helmie; 09-05-2018 at 1:48 PM.
    • Dox
    • By Dox 9th May 18, 5:08 PM
    • 936 Posts
    • 718 Thanks
    Dox
    • #9
    • 9th May 18, 5:08 PM
    • #9
    • 9th May 18, 5:08 PM
    I should have said, its an international organisation so though I am employed from the UK, it may not be subject to UK law. Its a great scheme if you have multiple wives etc, but not for me.
    Originally posted by helmie
    Ah - that could change things! Are you on secondment or are you on a local (i.e. overseas) contract?
    Last edited by Dox; 09-05-2018 at 5:27 PM.
    • helmie
    • By helmie 10th May 18, 4:02 PM
    • 11 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    helmie
    It is overseas. They have me over a barrel, once I have moved and signed a year's accommodation rental then I can hardly flounce off. It depends how many of us are prepared to raise a stink.

    Probably for most people it is a good thing slightly better than before, but since it is the same size of eventual cake, just cut differently, it is off the backs of the minority who are getting screwed.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

569Posts Today

6,353Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • RT @Dora_Haf: @MartinSLewis So many people on here saying they're great until you get your PROPER job. What if Your proper job Is ON zero?

  • RT @hslt88: @MartinSLewis I?m a trustee for a youth charity. We only have a limited pool of funds for flexible youth workers for holiday sc?

  • RT @Dan_i_elle_88: @MartinSLewis Loved working zero hour agency care work. Never out of work and I loved having the flexibility! Only left?

  • Follow Martin