Bonefishblues wrote:Agreed, thank you. That's very clear, as are the other criteria like the 50% of journeys one.
You must offer a scheme to a group who will not be able to salary sacrifice, so they won't be able to take advantage of the advantages of salary sacrifice. I haven't seen such a scheme, so don't know how they might be constructed. Have you got experience of any?
No, my experience is as posted above - an employer deciding not to offer the scheme to anyone because they didn't want to go to the trouble of offering an alternative for those not eligible for salary sacrifice. If they had tried by some means to circumvent that, those excluded would rightly have objected. Have you experience of an employer offering hire cycles to some employers and not others?
The local council did (Maybe still does) offer a choice of a C2W scheme or a hire scheme where payments matched the expenses permitted for use of the cycle, I don't know much about it other than a conversation with the bike shop that supplied.
The Halfords literature highlights that this can be an issue and asks potential customers (Employers) to contact them to discuss the options, I don't know what they are.
Cycling UK's response to this new guidance was that ways should be devised for the unwaged to benefit, I was pointing out that it's also the low paid that can't take advantage and they should have included them.
I think the low waged will find it hardest of all to take advantage of alternative schemes, which to the best of my knowledge have never been designed for them (I'd like to be proved wrong on that).
I have experience of an employer who refused to launch because of the "not available to all" aspect (who subsequently launched as below, following a change in Reward Manager).
I have experience of multiple employers who offered to all, caveated with the Lower Earnings 'warning', but not of any employer who has ever catered to those in that category, and I've historically worked in many where we did have to watch SalSac to ensure that we stopped deductions to ensure Statutory compliance.
I also have no experience of an employer ever checking on 50% usage - come to think of it, I can't remember any who even pointed it out.
The rules say X, but X isn't adhered to, or checked in my own experience.