Time to Pay the Piper: Pension Risk Sharing, Intergenerational Equity and Dissonance with the Conceptual Paradigm of Insolvency Law in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Defined benefit pension plans' funding and risk sharing arrangements do not fit comfortably into the conceptual paradigm of insolvency law's restructuring regime. The insolvency perspective is divided into pre- and post- insolvency proceeding time periods. However, payments of contributions to defined benefit pension plans cannot be so easily attributed to different time periods because of the nature of the risk-sharing arrangements in such plans. As a result, the insolvency courts' decisions concerning such contributions may have transgressed against two fundamental conventions of Canadian restructuring law. This paper examines the reasoning applied by the courts in their rulings concerning the payment of pension contributions from the insolvent employer's assets following the commencement of a restructuring proceeding and how the distinction amongst those payments adopted by the courts is reflected in statutory provisions dealing with bankruptcies and receiverships. The paper will compare the rationales adopted in the courts with the actual effects of permitted payments into a defined benefit plan. The paper argues that, due to the nature of the defined benefit plans, the payments permitted by the courts do not go far enough in achieving the statutory requirements they are intended to fulfill. In conclusion, some possible steps to address this issue will be considered including means to segregate funds paid for post-filing benefit accruals from the pre-filing claims of plan members.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 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".