Nigel Bolton, a pensions partner, told HR magazine "the majority of employers" would be against the move, quoting increased cost and complexity as the main issues. He also queried how the current system could cope with this type of change.
"Auto-enrolment was always intended to provide pensions for low earners," he said. "But a quirk of the current coalition is that the tax-free threshold has increased from approximately £6,500 to £10,000 over the last four to five years. This means a large number of employees have fallen out of the auto-enrolment catchment net."
Shadow secretary of state for work and pensions Rachel Reeves outlined Labour's plans to reduce the threshold to £5,772, almost half the current figure of £10,000. It would see 1.5 million people who work part-time or with the low incomes enrolled onto workplace pensions schemes.
However, not everyone automatically enrolled will stay on the scheme. Bolton pointed to a potentially high opt-out rate for those earning less than £10,000 per year.
"Three percent by 2018 will be a significant payment for those on a low wage, especially if like the last few years, inflation outstripped earnings increases," he said.
Capita Employee Benefits head of DC consulting Gary Smith told HR magazine the concept of getting more people saving is "laudible" but questioned the logistics behind the idea.
"This would be an unwelcome extra cost for employers, many of whom are working to tight margins," he said.
"In addition to this, the levels of savings would be so low if people didn't opt out they may just take out all their contributions as a lump sum at 55. This would negate any attempt to lower reliance on state pensions."
