Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the absence of change to the income security system, more than 50% of workers moving toward retirement, with salaries on both sides of the median, will have to reduce significantly their standard of living. For the workers who rely strictly on the Old Age Pension and the Quebec Pension Plan, the solution cannot reside in the setting up of large defined benefit or defined contribution plans in their current form. There is only one conclusion, the existing voluntary approach to complementary pension plans and registered retirement savings plans must be replaced by compulsory participation and the locking-up of retirement savings. For the workers not covered by an employer pension plan, the establishment of a compulsory retirement pension plan, similar to the RRSP, is the solution best adapted to the Quebec context and the income security policy. En l'absence de changements au système de sécurité du revenu, plus de 50 % des travailleurs qui se dirigent vers la retraite, dont les salaires se situent de chaque côté de la médiane, vont devoir réduire significativement leur niveau de vie. Ce sont en grande partie des travailleurs de la petite et moyenne entreprise et des travailleurs autonomes. La question de la retraite des deux tiers des travailleurs qui ne peuvent compter que sur la Pension de la sécurité de la vieillesse et le Régime de rentes du Québec ne peut trouver sa solution dans l'établissement généralisé de régimes à prestation déterminée ou de régimes à cotisation déterminée dans leur forme actuelle. Une conclusion s'impose, le caractère facultatif ou volontaire qui caractérise les régimes complémentaires de retraite et les régimes enregistrés d'épargne retraite doit être remplacé par la participation obligatoire et par l'immobilisation de l'épargne retraite. Pour les travailleurs non couverts par un régime d'employeur, la création d'un régime obligatoire de type RÉER est la solution la mieux adaptée en fonction du contexte québécois et de la politique de la sécurité du revenu.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.052 | 0.022 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".