a tupe affair

[concita]

can anybody let me know what readdress employeees has under the above issue if they disagree with the transfer? What about their pension rights?

[Burbage]

Redress? I don't think you have any.

The point of TUPE is to protect the employment rights, and the pension rights acquired up to the point of transfer, of employees who are being transferred from one employer to another. The new employer is required to offer a pension scheme to transferred employees, and it must meet a minimum standard, which makes it a lot better than usual schemes, but not as good as a final salary scheme. It's not perfect, but it does mean that you don't get treated as a new employee with respect to joining the scheme, or in terms of sick pay, holiday entitlements etc.

The new employer should honour your existing contract, but there may be good reasons for them to offer a new one. If they do, make sure it really is a better deal, and consult your union or a lawyer before you sign anything.

As for 'disagreeing' with the transfer, that doesn't matter at all. The transfer is not your decision, and neither the old employer who's handing you over, or the new one who's never met you, will care what you think. You have no legal power to stop a transfer, and no rights to redress just because you don't like it. What matters, however, is whether you formally 'object' to being transferred.

To formally object, you write to either the new or the old employer to say so. But objecting is the same as resigning, and if you do object, your employment will cease.

It would be very silly to object, especially in the current climate. It is no fun being unemployed, and even less fun if you're 'voluntarily unemployed'. Resigning without a good reason doesn't go down well at the job centre, and may affect any benefits you might have been entitled to. It also annoys banks, lenders and insurance companies, and makes potential employers suspicious. The only good reason for resigning as far as they, you or anyone else is concerned, is because you've found a better job.

TUPE isn't perfect, but it's better than nothing and a lot better than redundancy. If you really dislike your new employer, find another job first, and then resign. Unless, of course, you have independent means and no need to work for a living, in which case I've just wasted my time. In the meantime, either keep your head down and talk to your union or, if you haven't a union, just keep your head down.

[silverfox]

Burbage, don't you have a certain time (three months) after being tupe-Ed to decide to take the redundancy from your former employer?

[expat]

AFAIK Pension is not part of TUPE

[mockney piers]

This happened to me a few years back. I just got my head down, turned up and found myself a new job.

Having also just been made redundant recently and once again found a new job im happy to say the job market was surprisingly buoyant; not that i have a clue what industry you're in.

But best of luck with whatever path you decide upon.

[Burbage]

I don't think so. Tupe's point is to ensure that redundancies aren't made because of a transfer, and employment continues on much the same terms. Employees being transferred don't automatically have a choice, other than to resign.

The three month bit is, I think, the maximum consultation period for normal redundancies, in which volunteers may be sought. But that's a separate issue and, as far as I know, nobody has a right to be made redundant when they choose, and it wouldn't normally apply to people whose jobs were being transferred.

It might be different in specific cases, depending on your contract, and the outcome of any negotiations during the consultation period with either employer. But you'd need to get advice on that, as it's not covered in the TUPE rules and will vary from place to place.

[James Barber]

TUPE is a very specialised area of employment law.

I would recommend you get professional advice.

Whenever, I've led projects involving TUPE in or out, using a full time TUPE HR specialists to guide me, huge care taken to ensure the overall packages are the same or better for the total compensation package for each employee.

The following link gives good basic grounding in TUPE http://www.out-law.com/page-448 which touches on opting out of a TUPE transfer.

TUPE would clearly apply to anyone solely working on a contract or for a particular customer. It gets even more complicated when only some of their time is worknig for a particualr customer. TUPE has been claimed or denied for ranges 20%-80% of the time on a particualr customer.

Good luck.

[concita]

What is AFAIK?

[expat]

As Far As I Know

[concita]

ta

[Siduhe]

My understanding is that obligations relating to provisions about benefits under employees' occupational pension schemes do not transfer under TUPE.

However, there are broadly equivilent provisions under the Pensions Act 2004 (sections 257 and 258). Basically, if the previous employer provided a pension scheme then the new employer has to provide some form of pension arrangement for employees who were eligible for, or members of the old employer's scheme.

It doesn't have to be the same arrangement but has to meet a minimum standard under the Pensions Act. Again, it's very fact specific and you may need specialist advice from a union or solicitor - depending on where your pension arrangements sit and how they are organised, you may not be covered by the Pension Act provisions.

[concita]

my problem is not the transfer itself, but the pension, the new scheme will be detrimental as I have been in the current scheme for almost 30 years and are very close to retire according to the current scheme conditions

[Huguenot]

concita, it depends what sort of pension you're on.

A lot of the comments above are accuarate, but the law did change in 2006 regarding occupational pension schemes. This includes final salary or average salary schemes.

If you're in a personal pension scheme, or stakeholder pension scheme, you don't have anything to hang your hat on.

Details here

[concita]

unfortunately I am in a final salary pension scheme, guaranteed and defined to which I paid in for 20 years and the company made it non contributory for the last 29 years and 10 months.

This scheme would allow me to take my pension without any actuarial deduction on my 60 birthday if I want to stop working then, but because of the transfer, the scheme will be frozen for me and I don't know what rights I have from then on. I was told initially that my pension will be deferred till I will be 65 and I have to enrol in the new scheme in the meantime which will give me nothing as they will contribute very little and will match your contributions only if you are in a very high grade.

[dbboy]

Suggest you contact a qualifoed HR pension professional and seek advice on what your rights are, I didn't, was coerced to sign a new contract and still regret it some 10 years later.

[concita]

Thank you. Unfortunately I have to wait for their legal people to come with something in writing on which I can fight on. At the moment they only announced the transfer, told us nothing of the new contracts and new pensions, but elected reps to question the company on our behalf and report back. They are following the TUPE guide and have given us only short time to negotiate on. Does anybody know if time is important for the negotiations?

How long should have given us by law?

Apparently all was well before year 2006, then the government changed the TUPE law (which was an English interpretation of the European Acquired Transfer Rights, more favoruables towards employees!) and allowed loopholes for employers to play on.

[concita]

I have been offered the possibility to write to the board of the pension trustees to see if they allow me to take the pension, but they will not give me any gold handshake for the 30 years service and will let me loose my job.

The inland revenue I understand does allow early leavers from one scheme to another without people loosing their jobs, but this company is doing things in this way and I will not have any right of redundancy because for the equality act they cannot make me redundant.

Any suggestions