The authors find, for the most prevalent type of pension plan in Canada, that plan provisions are not a close substitute for mandatory retirement. Special retirement provis ions, which have a strong potential to discourage work, typically do not come into play before age sixty and are far from universal. The p ostponed retirement provision that has the greatest potential to disc ourage work beyond age sixty-five has been deemed an unacceptable sub stitute for mandatory retirement in those jurisdictions (Quebec, Mani toba, Government of Canada) which have banned mandatory retirement.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Contact details of provider: Postal: Canadian Economics Association Prof. Steven Ambler, Secretary-Treasurer c/o Olivier Lebert, CEA/CJE/CPP Office C.P. 35006, 1221 Fleury Est Montréal, Québec, Canada H2C 3K4 Email: Web page: http://economics.ca/cje/ More information through EDIRC
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Prof. Werner Antweiler).
Related research
Keywords:
Other versions of this item:
Cited by: (explanations, Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.)