Eligibiility requirement of less than one year - hours requirement? (r

[John A]

I have reviewed several prior threads on this topic, but I am still unclear on one question:

Can a plan document have a provision that requires 500 hours in a 6-month period for eligibility, without also having a provision that anyone that completes 1,000 hours in a 12-month period meets the eligibility requirements?

A 12-17-98 post from MWeddell in a thread titled "Years of Service" stated:

"A 6-month period with 500 hours of service eligibility requirement is legally permitted because it's impossible for someone to meet the 410(a) maximum eligibility period of 1 year with 1,000 requirement without meeting a 6-month with 500 hours requirement."

Other threads have seemed to indicate that it is only acceptable to have the pro-rated hours requirement if the plan document also provided language for the 1,000 hour requirement. It seemed well-established from other threads that many plan documents have been approved with the dual provisions.

Does anyone know of a plan document that has been submitted and either rejected or approved that only had the 500 hours requirement without the 1,000 hour language?

Do you agree or disagree with MWeddell's reasoning for the pro-rating being acceptable (without the additional language)?

[Dowist]

Isn't the point that you wouldn't have to have the 1000 hour standard if you had a 500 hour/6 month standard? Because the 500 hour/6month standard will always be more liberal?

The tricky part would be the measurement period - the first 6 months would have to be the first 6 months of employment, and the next 6 month period would be the next 6 months. You could then shift over to a 1/2 a plan year period (with an overlapping period). This would be an unusual drafting exercise.