The dispute notification with AMP will centre on a single adviser who notified the company of his intention to trigger the BOLR arrangements in March, with the intention of leaving at the end of October, the FSU said in a statement.
Earlier this month, ifa reported on frustrations from AMP-aligned advisers over the group’s move to lower the multiple of BOLR arrangements to 2.5 times revenue while still keeping in place policies that make it prohibitive to continue earning a living.
For example, AMP has kept restraints on trade meaning an AMP-aligned adviser cannot work for three years once they sell their business back to the company.
Finance Sector Union national secretary Julia Angrisano said the union had triggered dispute resolution procedures after AMP announced the changes without consultation with its advisers or the union.
“Advisers are being told they will receive less than expected for their advice businesses and they are very unhappy with AMP,” Ms Angrisano said.
“These changes have been made by AMP without any notice to its advisers and could constitute a breach of contract.”
Ms Angrisano said the parties had seven days to resolve the dispute after which the matter would move to the Australian Disputes Centre before eventual court action if mediation was unsuccessful.
Further, she said AMP has a contractual obligation to give 13 months’ notice of a change to the valuation methodology but gave no such notice to its advisers.
“These changes are going to have significant adverse impact on AMP advisers seeking to leave the industry in the future,” Ms Angrisano said.
“AMP’s attempt to halve the business value by making unilateral and unfair changes to the BOLR arrangements will have a devastating financial impact on advisers and their families.”
I think you’ll find that the courts won’t uphold AMP’s three year no compete clause if ever challenged. An adviser has a right to earn a living. Just wondering where the Financial Services Council (FSC) is hiding with all of this. Surely it is time for this lame organisation to censor one of its members i.e. AMP (and the rest of the alleged crooks) and / or expel them.
Morally bankrupt business clients , shareholders. , staff , adviser never trust them again . Screw in at 4 times . Screw you out at 2.5 minus discount on there policy on the run .
Leaving the AMP world was the best decision I ever made #noragrets
AMP wants small practices to close but they refuse to relax restraint of trade so planners can work elsewhere. Not even work for a bank as a janitor. It’s not just restraint of trade, it’s robbery of one’s ability to earn an income from the trade they are most trained and experienced for. Come on AMP, if you want to shut us down, don’t stop us feeding our families by restraining us from working elsewhere.
I put my BOLR in last November! Now I am screwed.
I have been with AMP for just on 10 years. This appalling behavior is just business as usual for AMP and their basket of deplorables.
They are morally bankrupt and pathetic organisation. Our business is built on trust – who in their right mind would ever want to partner with this organisation which has no regard for their loyal planners.
Who would have thought the Unions would be helping advisers?
Times change, that’s for sure.
Well done to this adviser for taking a different approach.
finally, an organisation takes action!
I thought AMP had removed the restrictions on client ownership if the adviser goes elsewhere? If this is the case then the “restraint of trade” argument no longer holds true. The adviser can continue earning a living from their existing clients at another licensee. BOLR (and the associated 3 year exclusion) only applies to advisers who are exiting the industry.
Breach of contract. Do not accept the new BOLR terms – especially if you triggered before 8 August 2019.