Types of workplace pension arrangements

The auto-enrolment regime, which was introduced in October 2012, requires employers to enrol all eligible jobholders automatically into a qualifying pension scheme (and enrol all non-eligible jobholders who opt in) and to pay a minimum level of employer contributions on behalf of those jobholders. The duty was phased in gradually from 1 October 2012, and started with the largest employers. For further information, see Practice Note: Auto-enrolment—an introduction.

The obligation on employers to designate and facilitate access to a stakeholder pension scheme (as set out in the Welfare Reform and Pensions Act (WRPA) 1999, s 3) ceased to apply from 1 October 2012, when the obligation to enrol workers automatically into a qualifying scheme came into effect (PenA 2008, ss 87, 1489 and SI 2012/2480).

Whether to comply with legal obligations or out of a concern to offer a competitive benefit package to their workers or executives, employers will need to think about what types of pension benefits they will offer.

Types of pension arrangements for employees

Employees may contribute to more than one pension scheme or arrangement, but

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Powered by Lexis+®
Latest Pensions News

Pension Schemes Bill: Employer surplus-payment provisions pass Grand Committee scrutiny unchanged

At the third day of Grand Committee on the Pension Schemes Bill on 19 January 2026, the House of Lords undertook an extensive examination of Clauses 9 (Power to modify scheme to allow for payment of surplus to employer) and 10 (Restrictions on exercise of power to pay surplus), with debate focused on a series of amendments that tested how far the new surplus release regime should be constrained in primary legislation. In particular, peers tabled amendments seeking to change the terminology from ‘surplus’ to ‘assets’, to require surplus to be shared with members, to mandate benefit enhancements including inflation protection, to strengthen member notification or consultation (including trade union involvement) in the surplus release process, to constrain the Secretary of State’s regulation-making powers, to embed actuarial and endgame requirements in statute, and to alter insolvency priorities where employers had previously extracted surplus. The government response, delivered principally by Baroness Sherlock, consistently resisted the amendments to prescriptive statutory rules governing the use of surplus or the processes surrounding its release, and instead defended the Bill’s reliance on trustee discretion, fiduciary duties, actuarial certification, and regulatory oversight by the Pensions Regulator.  All amendments were either withdrawn or not moved following government opposition, and Clauses 9 and 10 were agreed without amendment.

View Pensions by content type :

Popular documents