Gransnet forums

News & politics

Companies hard hit by Covid-19 may have to put dividends on hold if they are facing a cash squeeze but have large pension shortfalls, the UK regulator has warned.

(11 Posts)
PippaZ Fri 11-Jun-21 21:18:45

Could anyone tell me why this wouldn't/shouldn't be the case and why it has to come from the regulator.

MawBe Fri 11-Jun-21 21:48:10

Is this a record for the longest thread title?
It’s longer than the opening post!

PippaZ Fri 11-Jun-21 21:49:55


PippaZ Fri 11-Jun-21 22:12:57

It would be nice if you answered instead of sneering MawBe. The headline was taken from the FT. I'm sure you will let them know what you think. My question did not need to be longer.

MawBe Sat 12-Jun-21 07:26:01

Not sneering- just in awe

PippaZ Sat 12-Jun-21 07:51:32

That's not a bad thing to feel occasionally. We all do smile However, I am more "in awe" that this had to be said by the regulator. I would have thought/hoped that a company we be legally obliged to pay the required sum into the pension scheme before the paid dividends. I feel, and have felt for years that companies should not be able to play fast and loose with the company pension scheme.

PippaZ Sat 12-Jun-21 07:53:56

I hate posting from my Kindle! It should be "would be legally obliged", of course.

Whitewavemark2 Sat 12-Jun-21 07:58:55

I thought that was what they already had to do.

Or maybe I’m muddling it with bankruptcy?

PippaZ Sat 12-Jun-21 08:17:25

I wonder how many people think that or rather assume it must be the case. I could never understand how there could be huge holes in pension schemes when companies go bankrupt. It seems they can use that money (I think but don't know) but surely it should be ringfenced. I would have thought it was not the companies money so they would have been misusing it but although some multi-millionaires pay up it often destroys what people thought their retirement would be.

Can anyone clarify?

Ilovecheese Sat 12-Jun-21 11:19:22

The answer is greed.

PippaZ Sat 12-Jun-21 11:33:06

But the law usually moderates illegal greed; it doesn't seem to be here - unless I'm missing something.