rehire of former employee

[lexi]

a plan's initial computation period for eligibility purposes starts w/ EE's first hour of service. EE are immediately eligible if they are credited w/ 1,000 hours of service in a 12-month period.

EE starts on jan 1, 2006 and terminates on june 1, 2006 w/ 500 hours of service. EE is re-employed on feb 1, 2009.

upon rehire, does eligibility computation period remain the same (jan1-dec31) or does it become feb1-jan31?

BTW: plan does not go to elapsed time method and there are no retroactive entry upon completing a year of service after rehire. plan does have 5 1-yr break in service rule, which obviously doesn't apply because this EE was never a participant.

any thoughts?

[pmacduff]

I believe you mean rehired February 1, 2008 - but FWIW I say employee starts over from new hire date because they were never a participant.

What exactly are the entry dates?

[lexi]

Entry dates are immediate upon satisfying a year of service w/ 1,000 actual hours of service. I think it's the new re-hire date, too. Just looking for some confirmation. Thanks!

[Guest Jeff Weber]

My two cents.....the employee was never a participant. Based on the new hire date, the computation period is 2/1 - 1/31 for the first year. If less than 1000 hours worked in that peroid, the computation period will become 1/1 - 12/31 going forward, assuming it is a 12/31 plan year.

[Bird]

I'll be contrary and say he's treated as a rehire, and that you would measure on the calendar year in the first year rather than the employment year, at least according to my documents and my interpretation.

Under the determination of years of service for eligibility after rehire, it has the yada-yada about the 5 year break rules and counting or not counting prior service. Then it says "If such former Employee’s Years of Service are disregarded under this paragraph, he or she will be treated as a new Employee for eligibility purposes. " Well, your guy never had a Year of Service to regard or disregard, but if he did, you wouldn't disregard them since there weren't 5 one year breaks. So, applying that logic, I would not treat him as a new employee and would look at the calender year, not the first (re)employment year.