Pensions and equivalent pay for agency workers: what has changed as of 2026?

Under the former hirer’s remuneration rules, employment agencies were required to remunerate agency workers based on the employment conditions of the hirer. Pension contributions were excluded from these conditions. With the new equivalent pay principle, the pension component must now be included. If the hirer provides a higher employer pension contribution than the agency, the difference must be compensated through wage supplementation to the agency worker. Naturally, agencies will seek to pass on these additional costs to the hirer.

As of 2026, the StiPP pension scheme has been significantly improved. Previously, the uniform contribution rate for the Basic Scheme was 12% of the pensionable base, of which 4% could be deducted from the employee’s salary. During the first six months of employment, an even lower contribution rate could apply, fully paid by the employer. From 2026 onwards, the uniform contribution rate increases to 23.4% of the pensionable base, with 7.5% permitted to be charged to the employee. For employees, this change results in a substantially higher pension accrual at retirement. For employers, however, it nearly doubles their contribution. Consequently, the compensation payable by hirers will increase as well.

The requirement of equivalent pay may further increase pension costs. If the hirer’s employer pension contribution exceeds StiPP’s employer share of 15.9%, this higher contribution must be reflected in the equivalent pay calculation. For example, in the Metalektro sector, the standard employer contribution is 17.09%.

Complexity increases further where either party is not affiliated with a sectoral pension fund (which applies a standard total contribution), and instead uses its own pension arrangement with a commercial pension provider. In such cases, the pension premium typically consists of defined contributions, risk premiums and administrative costs. The question then becomes: which components should be included in the comparison?

Another complexity arises from StiPP’s definition of pensionable earnings, which are aligned with the wage components subject to employee insurance contributions (the so‑called SV‑wage). If the agency worker’s base salary falls below StiPP’s maximum pensionable salary, the pension compensation itself becomes pensionable. This means that, retrospectively, the comparison may have been made using too low a pension premium under StiPP. For this reason, a correction may be applied when determining the pension compensation, taking into account that the compensation itself is pensionable.

Implications for hirers

It is clear that improvements to the StiPP pension scheme, combined with the equivalent pay requirement, will increase the cost of engaging agency workers. In addition, the hirer may be required to provide wage compensation for the pension component if it offers its own employees a more generous pension scheme than StiPP’s.

Hirers must therefore remain alert to the pension compensation calculated by the agency. Comparing employer pension contributions is not always straightforward, and the fact that the compensation itself may again be pensionable justifies applying a correction.

Want to know more?

If you would like more information about pension compensation under the equivalent pay system or would like the agency’s calculation reviewed, please contact your regular Forvis Mazars advisor or reach out directly to Paul van Ravenzwaaij of Pellicaan Advocaten by email or by telephone: +31 (0)88 627 22 39. They will be pleased to assist you.