Ex employer refusing to release their pension contribution after I finished fixed term contract. Next step?

[Itchy]

Pensions information in employment contracts
An employer is obliged to provide an employee with a written statement of the terms of their employment within two months of their start date. This information can be incorporated into the contract of employment and should include any terms and conditions relating to pensions or the pension schemes that they must join as a result of their employment.

Drafting pensions clauses
Pension terms and all pensions documents referred to in the employment contract should be drafted with great care. It is important to provide the employer with the flexibility and scope to change pension benefits in the future. It is equally important to ensure that employees’ pension rights are precisely defined and do not extend beyond what the employer intended. Employees should not be afforded contractual rights to contributions or benefits outside what is intended by the employer or allowed for by the scheme. The contract should refer to the pension arrangement chosen by the employer and the identity of the person(s) from whom further information on the arrangement can be obtained. The contract should also give the employer authority to deduct pension contributions directly from the employee’s salary and the power to change pension benefits or contributions in the future. This power will typically be set out in the pensions documentation itself but should be reiterated at every opportunity.

Employment Update: Pensions and Employment Contracts – Tips for…

Correct drafting of the pensions clause in an employment contract sets out clearly what is being provided in terms of pensions in a clear and unambiguous way to the benefit of both the employer and the employee. Incorrect or poorly drafted pension clauses create confusion and frustration for an…

www.mhc.ie

Its gamble. You have a case to say your employment contract is unconditional wrt pension contributions, backed up by communications from HR. Send a solicitors letter and see what the response is.

 

[cremeegg]

The trustees are able to waive the 2 year rule if they want to. It is clear that this is not one of those situations.


Steven
www.bluewater.ie

This is the only relevant issue here.

However if the company induced the OP to take the role on the basis that he would be able to keep the employer pension contribution then he has a case.

It is clear the OP misunderstood, it is not clear wether this was because the company misled him, or because of his own mistaken assumption.

 

[MrEarl]

Companies often renew fixed-term contracts, so perhaps that employer contribution element does apply to others working there. Once a fixed term contractor is working more than 20 hours per week, they can't be excluded from joining a pension scheme, but as above, the employer is perfectly within their rights not to release their contribution.

The offer via email is not a contract. Full terms should have been provided subsequently and any queries resolved and confirmed in writing to form the contract of employment.

Yes, I appreciate all of that Leo, but this company didn't just grant the employee access to the pension scheme, they make a contractual commitment to pay in contributions for the employee's, in the full knowledge that they were only contacting him / her for a 15mth term.

 

[Seagull]

I think it would be a fair assumption that you would be able to keep the pension if HR are pointing out the pension contribution knowing that it's a 15 month contract. If they specifically point it out as a selling point to get someone to sign, then they should be clearly explaining the vesting process.

 

[Leo]

Yes, I appreciate all of that Leo, but this company didn't just grant the employee access to the pension scheme, they make a contractual commitment to pay in contributions for the employee's, in the full knowledge that they were only contacting him / her for a 15mth term.

I haven't seen the terms of the contract of pension scheme detailed here, so we can't assume that. Surely if the written contract stated beyond doubt that the OP would be entitled to all company contributions from day 1, this thread wouldn't even exist and they would have paid out.

 

[Seagull]

It sounds like either sharp practice or incompetence by hr.

 

[Leo]

It sounds like either sharp practice or incompetence by hr.

IT does, but we need to consider our only view is based on one party's interpretation of a conversation that took place over a year ago.

 

[Steven Barrett]

It sounds like either sharp practice or incompetence by hr.

It is quite usual for an employment contract to offer staff membership of the pension scheme without going through all the nuts and bolts of the scheme in the contract. That is why they ask for people to contact HR for details. There will also be something somewhere saying that membership is subject to the trust deeds and rules that will have the 2 year vesting rule in it.

 

[Seagull]

They don't need to go through all the details, but if they have someone they know is on a short contract and they're highlighting how great a benefit it is, then they should be mentioning the small detail that the company contribution only vests after 2 years, meaning that the employee will lose out unless they get a contract renewal. You probably only get to see the rules of the pension plan once you become eligible to join.

 

[Leo]

You probably only get to see the rules of the pension plan once you become eligible to join.

Another assumption we just can't confirm with the detail provided.

 

[Damday]

Another assumption we just can't confirm with the detail provided.

The contract didn't mention anything about a minimum period of employment to retain the pension, just that I'm eligible for their contribution after passing probation and to contact HR for further details. I didn't see a need to request these documents before I signed the contract as HR told me I was eligible for their contribution verbally and via email. 6 months later upon passing probation HR emailed me said documents which had the term in it.

I ran it by a solicitor, he said it boils down to the contract which would cover the employer but felt a judge would side with me, due to them paying the contribution while it was never possible to achieve 2 years service and the email from HR specifically mentioning I qualify for their contribution after passing probation.

Only issue is it'd cost me more than the value of the pension to pursue it : (

 

[Leo]

while it was never possible to achieve 2 years service

It's not uncommon for fixed term contractors to be renewed beyond two years, companies I've worked for regularly do that. Of course your former employer might be different, but they'd just need to show a few examples of them doing it to show contractors can and do retain the employer contribution.

Only issue is it'd cost me more than the value of the pension to pursue it : (

If the solicitor thinks the contract covers the employer even with the contents of the email, then I'm afraid the employer is likely in a much stronger position than you on this one. If there was more doubt, a letter from your solicitor threatening action might encourage them to write a cheque to be done with this, but your solicitor is best positioned to advise whether that is worth the additional expense.

 

[SGWidow]

Damday,

Can you take the employer to the Financial Services & Pensions Ombudsman?

I'm not sure if you can?

I suspect that there is little point in taking the trustees to the Ombudsman as your grievance is with the employer.

Even if you can take the case to the Ombudsman, I'm not sure if it's worth the hassle (from experience of a family member there.)