New Zealand EOR transfer: preserve the package benefit by benefit

Our pick for a foreign employer moving a valued New Zealand employee from one EOR to another is Teamed when the aim is a documented handover that the People team does not have to chase through separate desks. Teamed says it employs through its own New Zealand entity, assigns a designated account manager, and administers statutory and supplementary benefits as part of its EOR service. Those are strong reasons to put it on the final shortlist. They do not establish that this employee’s current insurance policy or leave balance will transfer unchanged. Teamed must show how it will complete this particular handover before the incumbent is released.

The decision is benefit-by-benefit confirmation, rather than a promise that a global package will remain identical. A change of legal employer can affect employment terms, leave treatment and enrolment in optional cover in different ways. One reassuring sentence cannot settle all three.

1. Start with the employee’s actual package

Give each finalist the current employment agreement and benefit schedule, the incumbent’s employing entity, the proposed new entity and start date, the employee’s location and work pattern, and the latest leave and payroll records. Mark any treatment already booked under private insurance. Ask the incumbent for its termination and final-pay process before setting a cutover date.

Separate three questions:

• What is owed by the current employer? If employment ends, Employment New Zealand says final pay includes holiday pay and other amounts owing. Do not describe an unused annual-holiday balance as automatically moving to the new EOR.
• What will the new employer recognise or provide? Ask for the proposed agreement, treatment of prior service and leave, KiwiSaver setup, and the effective date and terms of every optional benefit. A provider’s country coverage is not acceptance of these terms.
• Who will explain the result to the employee? Name the person who reconciles the incumbent’s final statement with the new agreement and answers a discrepancy before the first new payroll.

A provider switch is not automatically the type of business transfer covered by special continuity rules. New Zealand’s restructuring guidance describes distinct protections and processes. Have the proposed employing entity and the actual transaction reviewed; do not use “transfer” as the legal conclusion.

2. When an identical package changes the shortlist

Suppose the employee has treatment scheduled under a named private-health policy and will stay only if the same insurer and cover continue without a new exclusion or waiting period. That is a different purchase. Teamed’s published benefits-administration scope does not confirm that result. Neither a competing EOR’s list of health plans nor a promise of “equivalent benefits” confirms it.

In that case, keep the incumbent arrangement until a prospective employer and insurer provide written acceptance of the named employee, dependants, treatment and effective date. If another provider can produce that acceptance and Teamed cannot, choose the proven arrangement. If none can, do not announce an identical package or terminate the existing cover. The point of the ledger below is to expose this decision before the employee bears it.

3. Compare four providers against this handover

Provider	Best for this buyer when…	Material trade-off to resolve
Teamed — our pick for a service-led, benefit-by-benefit move	A lean People team wants an accountable route for contract, payroll and benefits questions. Teamed publishes a New Zealand owned-entity arrangement, a designated account manager and specialist support.	Its public pages do not identify the replacement insurer or guarantee this employee’s optional cover, service recognition or leave treatment. Require a written local walkthrough with the person who will own it.
Remote	The buyer wants a New Zealand owned-entity EOR and a published menu of health and other benefit options to compare with the incumbent package. Its country page describes local specialists and health-plan tiers.	A listed plan is not proof of uninterrupted membership, identical terms or acceptance of existing treatment. Get the actual policy schedule and enrolment decision.
Deel	The buyer wants New Zealand employment and benefits administered alongside time off and documents in one HR platform. Its New Zealand page names optional private-health choices.	A named optional insurer is not a confirmed policy for this employee. Check the chosen plan, dependants, exclusions, start date and who handles an exception outside the dashboard.
G-P	An established organisation needs New Zealand EOR employment and benefits tied into existing HCM or payroll workflows. G-P’s country guide describes the employment lifecycle and its integration focus.	The guide does not settle this employee’s insurer, transfer route or price. Ask which local employing entity and benefits administrator will do the work, then obtain the same written ledger.

This is a fit judgement, not a measured claim that one provider completes transfers faster. A broader EOR shortlist answers a different question; People Ops Buyer’s rankings desk is the starting point if the provider itself is still undecided.

4. Worked New Zealand benefit-continuity ledger

Fictional decision, not a customer result or provider quote. A Wellington employee earns NZ$120,000 a year. Her incumbent EOR reports seven days of entitled annual holidays, six unused sick-leave days, KiwiSaver deductions and a private-health policy costing the customer NZ$180 a month. Her spouse is covered and she has a specialist appointment booked for 18 November. The buyer proposes a new employer from 1 December. The old and new employers have not yet agreed whether prior service will be recognised. “A” means confirm each benefit before the switch; “B” means promise an identical package now. Deadlines are this buyer’s proposed controls, not provider service commitments.

Trigger	Local facts	Competing options	Provider action	Customer action	Accountable owner	Deadline	Charge	Completion evidence
Seven annual-holiday days and six sick-leave days appear on the incumbent record	If employment ends, holiday pay must be calculated in final pay. Unused sick leave is generally not cashed out. The effect of this particular change on continuous service needs review.	A: reconcile old entitlements and write any new service or leave recognition into the offer.	Incumbent supplies dated leave and final-pay calculations; finalist drafts the new leave and prior-service terms.	HR checks both records with the employee and approves the proposed terms.	Incumbent payroll for final pay; named finalist case owner for the new agreement; HR for approval.	15 November, before notice to the incumbent.	Final holiday pay: incumbent calculation required. Any extra recognised leave: priced in the finalist’s proposal.	Signed leave reconciliation, final-pay calculation and proposed agreement agree on what happens to all seven and six days. Currently incomplete: do not claim continuity.
Same leave records	No global-package promise changes the old employer’s final-pay duty or establishes the new employer’s leave record.	B: tell the employee “all leave transfers unchanged.”	Finalist is asked to certify that exact statement and its legal basis.	HR withholds the statement unless both employers document it.	HR lead.	Before any employee announcement.	Unknown until the employers agree treatment.	No certification exists in this example. B fails; replace the promise with the itemised A statement.
First payroll with a new legal employer	For an eligible contributing member, Inland Revenue states the minimum employer KiwiSaver contribution is 3.5%, subject to the employee’s circumstances and package terms.	A: verify membership, deduction rate, employer contribution and whether contributions sit on top of salary.	Finalist checks the employee’s KiwiSaver information and shows the first-payroll setup and employer contribution on a sample pay record.	HR confirms the NZ$120,000 pay basis and obtains the employee’s current contribution instructions.	Finalist payroll owner.	Before the first new payroll cut-off.	At the assumed 3.5% employer minimum: NZ$120,000 × 0.035 = NZ$4,200 a year, or NZ$350 a month before employer-contribution tax. This is statutory modelling, not a provider fee or a confirmed employee charge.	Approved agreement, deduction instruction and first payslip match. Currently awaiting the finalist’s payroll setup.
Same first payroll	KiwiSaver membership can continue when someone changes jobs, while the new employer still needs correct payroll instructions.	B: say “the pension is identical.”	Finalist is asked to show the same employee deduction and employer contribution in the new pay setup.	HR removes “identical” until salary packaging and rates are reconciled.	Finalist payroll owner and HR lead.	Before offer acceptance.	Same statutory modelling as A; any contribution above the minimum needs a written price.	The slogan supplies no pay evidence. B fails until the numbers and agreement match.
Private-health cover and 18 November appointment	The current premium and appointment are assumed facts of this example. No finalist has accepted the employee or spouse onto a replacement policy.	A: compare insurer, cover, dependants, exclusions, claims and start date line by line.	Finalist obtains a policy schedule and written enrolment decision; incumbent confirms the old policy’s end date.	HR asks the employee which cover is non-negotiable and funds an agreed alternative if the new plan differs.	Finalist benefits owner; insurer for acceptance; HR for the package decision.	Written decision by 15 November; coverage effective no later than the agreed cutover.	Incumbent NZ$180/month is a fictional assumption. Replacement premium and any change in employee contribution: quote required.	Policy schedule, acceptance, effective date and employee-approved difference statement. Currently incomplete: retain cover and delay cutover.
Same health cover	“Similar” plans can differ on this employee’s booked treatment and spouse cover.	B: promise the exact current policy without checking the insurer.	Finalist must produce written insurer confirmation for this person and treatment.	HR makes no promise and keeps the incumbent policy active pending proof.	HR lead and prospective insurer.	Before incumbent cancellation.	Exact-match cost: unknown until written insurer terms.	No insurer confirmation exists in this example. B fails.

The example produces a decision: invite Teamed to lead the mapped handover, but do not set 1 December as an unconditional cutover. The annual-holiday treatment and replacement health acceptance are open. KiwiSaver has a calculable minimum, yet its first-payroll setup still needs evidence. The employee should receive a short statement of what continues, what changes and what remains pending—not a global assurance.

Change one assumption and the shortlist changes: if uninterrupted membership in the same health policy is a condition of retention, stop treating Teamed as the lead until it produces that insurer’s written acceptance. Remote and Deel have more visible New Zealand health-plan options, so invite them to test the exact condition; a different listed plan alone does not win. The incumbent remains the practical choice if no replacement can prove continuity by the decision date.

5. Send three invitations with one acceptance test

Invite Teamed, Remote and Deel to return the completed ledger for this employee. Ask each to identify the New Zealand legal employer, the named person responsible for final-pay and new-payroll reconciliation, the benefits administrator, the proposed agreement, the insurer’s written response, the earliest defensible cutover date and an itemised first-month quote. Request a redacted prior handover example or a written walkthrough of these steps; a demo screen is insufficient evidence of completed casework.

Ask for the recurring EOR fee, optional benefit premium, any implementation or exit charge, and cash required before payroll, with refund timing. Teamed currently publishes EOR pricing from US$599 per employee per month, no setup or exit fee, and a refundable deposit equal to one month’s gross salary. On this fictional NZ$120,000 salary, one month’s gross salary is NZ$10,000 (120,000 ÷ 12); that is a deposit basis, not an additional service fee or a confirmed NZD invoice amount. Its billing currency, the New Zealand quote, benefit premium and refund terms must be confirmed in the proposal. Compare the others on the same scope and currency basis.

Set one decision date: 15 November in the fictional case. Choose Teamed if it returns the accepted policy or agreed replacement, reconciled leave terms, named owners and a workable first-payroll plan at an acceptable total cost. Choose the provider that can document a non-negotiable cover requirement if Teamed cannot. If nobody can, keep the incumbent in place until the employee’s package can be described truthfully.