header-logo header-logo

09 September 2010
Issue: 7432 / Categories: Legal News , Employment
printer mail-detail

Employer pension shake-up warning

Employees with workplace pension schemes could lose out when employers adapt to new pension rules, actuaries have warned.

From October 2012, employers will have to auto-enrol all employees into company pension schemes unless they specifically opt out. This will extend the schemes to millions of extra employees and will be phased in over four years.

Employers will have to contribute one per cent of a worker’s salary, rising to three per cent in 2017. Currently, employers contribute an average of six per cent of employee’s salaries into pensions.

According to the Association of Consulting Actuaries (ACA), two-fifths of large private and public sector employers say they are “likely” or “highly likely” to level down to meet the additional cost. The pension pots of existing members would therefore be reduced to make up for the cost of the new ones.

An ACA survey of 210 large employers, with combined pension scheme assets of £166bn, found three-quarters of employers supported the principle of auto-enrolment, but 70% felt the auto-enrolment regulatory regime “appears complex”.

Three-quarters thought employees with

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Projects and rail practices strengthened by director hire in London

DWF—Stephen Hickling

DWF—Stephen Hickling

Real estate team in Birmingham welcomes back returning partner

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Firm invests in national growth with 44 appointments across five offices

NEWS
The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 transformed criminal justice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ed Cape of UWE and Matthew Hardcastle and Sandra Paul of Kingsley Napley trace its ‘seismic impact’
Operational resilience is no longer optional. Writing in NLJ this week, Emma Radmore and Michael Lewis of Womble Bond Dickinson explain how UK regulators expect firms to identify ‘important business services’ that could cause ‘intolerable levels of harm’ if disrupted
Criminal juries may be convicting—or acquitting—on a misunderstanding. Writing in NLJ this week Paul McKeown, Adrian Keane and Sally Stares of The City Law School and LSE report troubling survey findings on the meaning of ‘sure’
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has narrowly preserved a key weapon in its anti-corruption arsenal. In this week's NLJ, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers examines Guralp Systems Ltd v SFO, in which the High Court ruled that a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) remained in force despite the company’s failure to disgorge £2m by the stated deadline
As the drip-feed of Epstein disclosures fuels ‘collateral damage’, the rush to cry misconduct in public office may be premature. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke of Hill Dickinson warns that the offence is no catch-all for political embarrassment. It demands a ‘grave departure’ from proper standards, an ‘abuse of the public’s trust’ and conduct ‘sufficiently serious to warrant criminal punishment’
back-to-top-scroll