View more on these topics

Hargreaves sets out auto-enrolment freedoms plan

Tom-McPhail-2009-700x450.jpg

Hargreaves Lansdown has called on the Government to reform automatic enrolment to let employees choose their own pension scheme.

In April Money Marketing revealed the Government is exploring radical plans to let employees overrule their employers on workplace pensions.

Supporters say the move would solve the problem of people building up multiple small pots when they switch employers, as well as empowering savers and boosting engagement.

They argue the pension freedoms have pushed responsibility from employers onto individuals and this should be reflected in the system for building up savings.

A briefing note published by Hargreaves Lansdown, and seen exclusively by Money Marketing, sets out why the firm supports the idea.

It says the proposed “provider follows member” model would be fit into a modifided auto-enrolment system “retaining the key advantages of the current system and adapting it to meet the engagement needs of the post pension-freedom world”.

Author – head of retirement policy Tom McPhail – explains new employees would be asked whether they would like their pension contributions paid into an existing scheme.

He notes several potential issues and how they would be overcome. These include paternalistic employers not wanting to accept contributions for past employees, and a negative impact on firms’ willingness to engage with pensions.

For the former McPhail suggests providers and in-house schemes would not be compelled to offer the option and adds employers would still be able to set their own contribution rates to reward staff to remain engaged.

The People’s Pension director of policy and market engagement Darren Philp says: “This is what happens in Australia. Employers should still have a default scheme for auto-enrolment but if someone is engaged, why not let them choose? Something like this is probably a few years away but it is always good if the system allows people to vote with their feet.”

Pension Playpen founder Henry Tapper says: “Employers don’t really own pension schemes any more, do they really have a relationship with a provider like Nest? There are technical problems with sending payments to different providers but if they can get around that it would be a good thing particularly for small firms. Where employees want to get involved with pensions we should let them.”

Critics have argued employers and payroll firms will not be able to cope with facilitating multiple payments to multiple pension providers.

But McPhail says either the Government can create a central clearing house – so employers make a single payment which is then distributed to individuals’ chosen schemes – or payroll firms will simply have to adapt.

He says: “Some payroll providers already allow employers to pay to multiple pension providers. Others will have to incorporate additional fields to allow this. It is hard to imagine that they would be enthusiastic about this, but that doesn’t mean it can’t be done.”

Clarke Robinson & Co managing director Steven Robinson says: “This is a like walking on the moon without oxygen, can you imagine the chaos this would cause? Accounting costs would become enormous, what about all those firms with staff paid weekly with fluctuating hours. We would be better off concentrating on the pensions dashboard, where you can see all your savings in one place.”

Recommended

Directors, limited liability partners and auto-enrolment

By Jim Grant, Senior Product Insight & Technical Support Analyst 6 April 2016 brought in changes to employer duties for directors and partners in limited liability partnerships. Here we explain exactly what’s changed. Before 6 April 2016… Directors of limited liability companies where there were no other directors or employees were exempt from the employer […]

5

John Lawson: We risk a job half-done on auto-enrolment

By some measures, automatic enrolment has been a rip-roaring success. By March this year, 6.1 million people had been auto-enrolled into a pension and 110,000 employers had registered their compliance. Only 10 per cent of those enrolled had opted-out. But is this result really all that surprising? Auto-enrolment harnesses consumer inertia and the high number […]

Jamie Clark Scottish Life 2012
3

Royal London calls on TPR to expand approved auto-enrol list

Royal London is calling on The Pensions Regulator to loosen the criteria for entries to its new list of group personal pension schemes for automatic enrolment. Last month TPR announced it would publish a list of GPP providers who are open to all employers “regardless of projected membership numbers or contribution levels”. Aviva, Standard Life […]

The Natixis Solution: H2O MultiReturns Fund

A product designed to bring some unique attributes to the crowded absolute return global macro space With diversification and risk management top of investors’ wish lists when it comes to alternatives, step forward the H2O MultiReturns Fund. H2O Asset Management is an independent boutique backed by Natixis Global Asset Management and has a 14-year track […]

Survey cover

EEF/Jelf Employee Benefits Sickness Absence Survey 2015

EEF stated in its 2015 EEF Manifesto that the UK’s growth prospects depend on people being fit, working and productive. Keeping people in work and helping people return to work is very important for the manufacturing sector. It means boosting productivity by getting people back into work as early as is possible, as well as fostering workplace cultures and environments that proactively manage individuals’ health conditions so that all can benefit from lower sickness absence outcomes.

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There are 10 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. Jeremy Harris 8th June 2016 at 4:23 pm

    Sounds like an administrative nightmare for employers of any size.

  2. Can’t see anything going wrong with that.

  3. Presumably members will still need advice.

    Who will provide and pay for it.

  4. What a load of nonsense. Shows they think their brand plays better with individuals than companies. If they cannot compete they should shut up shop

  5. Bonkers idea driven entirely by Hargreaves self interest. The administration of AE is a bind at the moment for all SMEs. How would it work for say fifty individual providers for each business (not to also mention that this could mean for 50 employees 50 Direct Debits). What would be the default investment option. How would it be monitored. Why do they think people will be more engaged, they weren’t all engaged previously when everyone made their own arrangements. #muddleheadedthinking

  6. Graham Peacock 9th June 2016 at 12:06 pm

    Folly utter Folly. Baroness Altman pushing back on this when it was raised by Select Committee. AE is about compelling a process because left to own devices the great British Public will make NO choice and rely on the state. How can HL reconcile AE rules compelling employers to do something with employee choice?

  7. Dion Prideaux-Reynolds 9th June 2016 at 12:19 pm

    Complete nonsense and would be a disaster. Keep automatic enrolment simple. This sounds more like a suggestion for commercial gain rather than common sense.

  8. Great idea, unworkable though. Employers still want to ensure the pension they are funding is appropriate/legitimate (scamming worries) and they cannot/would not want to police multiple arrangements

  9. I’m with Paul Howorth, as this is right up HL’s street. As for Australia, I have a friend who allowed their partner to look after their Superannuation investment. The whole lot was put in cash for a long time frame and the resulting pension fund is a joke.

    The majority of people have no interest in their pension fund and if they are in a decent scheme, with a decent default, then the outcome is generally going to be better for them than amateurs running their own pension funds.

  10. Great idea but in principle an administrative nightmare! Just won’t work.

Leave a comment