I was always told that if a plan required less than one year of service (ie six months of service) then they could place no requirement on the hours worked. I confess I never took the time to do the research.

But I am reading a document that says "An Employee must complete 1000 Hours of Service within the 6 month time period following the Employee's Employment Commencement Date. If the Employee does not complete the stated Hours of Service during the specified period of time, the Employee is subject to the One Year of Service Requirement."

I'm not comfortable with the law firm that drafted the document because a previous MPP document they did reportedly allowed in-service withdrawals.

Is this provision ok?

Yes, the provision is fine. Just as an example, the Corbel prototype document has the same provision.

Dan
yes, as Pension in Paradise indicated.

what the rule really should be is
you can have any hours requirement you want, as long as you also have a provision that a person would be eligibile if they work 1000 hours in a 12 month period.

but I had learned like you, if you dont have 12 months you cant have an hours requirement. It takes a bit to 'unlearn' things.