noted that organisations had a sacred duty to their employees to provide the best possible workplace pension to them.
Speaking at the Pensions and Benefits Show 2013, Webb said: "We've started with the biggest firms with HR and pension departments and of course you would expect them to do a good job and they deserve the credit. "The opt out rates are lower than expected and even within that region of very good there are some stunning examples of employers who've gone the extra mile, engaged with their employees, done communications, done videos, done talks and people have responded very positively. "I think we're at a critical mass in many workplaces where pretty much everyone is staying in and if someone asks ‘What are you doing?' overwhelmingly they are talking to people staying in, and I think the norm is staying in."
However, he urged employers to provide the best quality pension they could because staff were relying on them.
"Employers have got an almost sacred duty for your employees because they can't do it," he continued. "It's a bit like if you are going to buy car you would think it was strange if someone else chose and said this is the only car you can have or you don't have one. "That is how AE works - employers choose for employees and I would urge every employer in the room to drive a hard bargain, to shop around and to make a good choice to make sure that your employees are getting a low cost good value and quality pension."
TPR TO 'PROACTIVELY INVESTIGATE' INDUSTRIES WITH GREATEST RISK OF NON- COMPLIANCE
14 June
The Pensions Regulator (TPR) is expanding its compliance unit to enable it to ‘proactively investigate’ companies and industries with a high risk of failure to comply with auto- enrolment duties reports Professional Pensions . TPR head of industry liaison Neil Esselmont told delegates at the Pensions and Benefits Show that the watchdog would target its actions based on the risk and potential impact of non-compliance. But where there were reasonable grounds to investigate, he said the regulator would use its power to audit companies' records going back six years and impose fines of up to £10,000 a day or pursue a criminal prosecution. Esselmont said the regulator was expanding its compliance and intelligence units for this reason. He added, however, that ensuring compliance would be more of a ‘handle-turning exercise' for the large volumes of smaller employers with staging dates from the middle of 2014. He said: "We are going to be looking proactively for the areas of greatest risk, and that is first of all the risk of non-compliance, and secondly looking at the outcome for the individuals in question. "If an industry has a large number of employees who are all not going to be automatically enrolled, that would be looked at very differently from a company or an industry where there might be a few technical errors." Esselmont added: "We do have a statutory duty under law to enforce this, so if we become aware, through a whistleblower, or intelligence passed to us relating to possibly fraudulent activity, or where statistically we can see a particular industry is getting a track record of not being compliant, then we will proactively go and investigate."
CIPP Policy News Journal
16/04/2014, Page 428 of 519
Made with FlippingBook - Online magazine maker