On March 28, 2014, the Canadian Association of Pension
Supervisory Authorities (CAPSA) released new Guideline #8
"Defined Contribution Pension Plans Guideline" to clarify
certain best practices for defined contribution (DC) pension plan
administrators.1 This new guideline is intended to
supplement, and not replace, the requirements set out in CAPSA
Guideline #3 "Guidelines for Capital Accumulation Plans".
Although CAPSA Guidelines are not law, they provide pension plan
administrators with a useful standard of best practices.
The new guideline is notable in that it elaborates on the
responsibilities of DC plan members, such as in respect of
investment selection (if applicable) and selecting from options
provided on termination. It also characterizes member communication
requirements differently depending on the stage of a DC plan
member's career. The new guideline was released with an
accompanying reference document providing information on the
various regulated retirement products available to DC plan members
in the payout phase.
Specifically, the new guideline:
provides a summary of the various CAPSA guidelines already
applicable to DC plans (#3, 4, 5 and 6);
sets out responsibilities of the plan administrator, employer,
plan sponsor, third-party service providers, fund holder and plan
members, all with respect to DC plans;
gives plan administrators guidance regarding the tools and
other communications they should provide to DC plan members at
various stages of the members' careers (during the accumulation
phase, approaching the payout phase and during the payout phase);
provides guidance on what may constitute an adverse amendment
for DC plans.
1 This new guideline was originally released in draft on
July 13, 2012 under the name "Guideline No.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
Unfortunately, reasonable accommodation for employees in the workplace continues to be the source of significant litigation and even today we continue to see outrageous examples of employers behaving badly.
A former teacher at Bodwell High School has learned a valuable lesson from the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal— it is not discriminatory for an employer to offer child-related benefits to only employees with children.
We are now beginning to see reported cases involving charges and subsequent fines laid against employers for failing to provide information, instruction and supervision to protect a worker from workplace violence.
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).