The corporate legal adviser said that there was concern over senior management not only having to report to several sets of trustees, but also concern over the time being taken by management who were serving as trustees.
Partner Jonathan Fenn said that one problem facing employers was that when undergoing restructuring they needed to consult with different sets of trustees, which might have opposing sets of views.
He also cited a growing focus on cutting costs as leading to the merger of final salary schemes that share the same employer.
He is currently working on the mergers at two listed companies that will enable the merged schemes to cut back on adviser costs, gain greater purchasing power in fund management and access to alternative asset classes.
The savings from such a merger would be offset by the legal and actuarial costs of the move in year one, but should break into profit two or three years after the merger.
Fenn said only the very largest schemes would achieve a profit in the first year after a merger, as the costs could reach several hundred thousand pounds.
Barriers to scheme mergers can be a big disparity in the funding level of both schemes. However, concerns here can be overcome if the sponsoring employer has a strong covenant or if the assets are kept segregated.
Big companies that have carried out such mergers include Thames Water, which combined four schemes into one in 2005.
