Impacts of a law fostering training development: Lessons from Quebec's experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: Since the 1980s, numerous studies in Canada have shown weaknesses in the level of involvement by firms in training and have thus raised the question of the role of public policy. In 1995, the Quebec government adopted a unique law in North America in this regard: An Act to Foster the Development of Manpower Training. The “1% Wage Bill Law” was intended to improve the qualifications, skills and performance of workers through training. This article investigates three impacts of this law: the level of investment by firms; the distributional aspect of the law in terms of its capacity to ensure a more equitable investment in training for the different categories of workers in firms; and, finally, the structural aspect in terms of establishing partnerships. From a theoretical perspective, the Quebec experience illustrates that, between the liberal approach and the institutionalist approach (market versus institutions), it is possible to observe a compromise being made by social actors with respect to the regulation process, which at the same time respects the decisional space of firms. Another observation relates to the complementary aspect of institutional forms in labour‐market regulation and to the fundamental role of unions in partnershipbuilding. Sommaire: Depuis les années 1980, de nombreuses etudes au Canada ont révélé un faible degré de participation des entreprises à la formation et ont ainsi soulevé la question du rôle de la politique gouvemementale. En 1995, le gouvemement du Québec a adoptéà cet égard une loi unique en son genre en Amérique du Nord: une Loi fauorisant le de'veloppement de la formation de la main‐d‘œuvre . La G loi du 1 % de la masse salariale “visait à améliorer les qualifications, les competences et la performance des travailleuses et travailleurs grâce 5 la formation. Le présent article examine trois impacts de cette loi: le niveau d'investissement des entreprises; l'aspect r é partition de la loi en termes de sa capacitéà s' assurer que des investissements plus équitables soient consacrés à la formation pour différentes catégories de travailleuses et travailleurs dans les entreprises; et enfin, l'aspect structurel pour ce qui est de l’établissement de partenariats. D'un point de vue théorique, l'expérience du Québec illustre qu'entre l'approche libérale et l'approche institutionnelle (marché contre institutions), il est possible d'observer un compromis de la part des acteurs sociaux en ce qui concerne le processus de réglementation, qui respecte en même temps l'espace décisionnel des entreprises. Une autre observation porte sur l'aspect complémentaire des formes institutionnelles dans la réglementation du marché du travail et sur le rôle fondamental des syndicats dans l‘établissement de partenariats.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".