Alternative Productivity Structures and Reimbursement Models and their Role in Achieving Occupational Justice for People with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities – A Philosophical Conundrum
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: People with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) experience high levels of unemployment (Canadian Association for Community Living, 2013; Statistics Canada, 2008), yet supported, inclusive employment can promote independence, quality of life, social integration, and capacity-building (e.g., Cohen et al., 2008; Lysaght, Jakobsen, & Granhaug, 2012). Despite the advancement of the individual placement and support model of supported employment, workforce participation rates for this population remain low. Challenges related to limited skill sets or social-behavioural differences reduce opportunities for competitive employment. At the same time, the viability of productivity alternatives such as social enterprise, micro enterprise and volunteerism is limited by perceptions of these options as less inclusive, valued and desirable. Overall, lack of suitable productivity options contributes to social marginalization, and reduces opportunities for the individuals involved to experience rich occupational lives. Purpose: This presentation will report on findings of a study that examined work integration social enterprise as an employment option for people with IDD, and its potential to reduce social marginalization. In this session, we will present findings related to worker compensation models, interpreting these through a lens of occupational justice. Methods: The study used a multiple case study design, with 5 social enterprises in Ontario and Alberta, Canada purposively selected for study (Yin, 2009). Data collection methods included interviews with a variety of stakeholders, observation and document review. Data were reviewed using within and cross-case analyses to describe the nature of social enterprise in this sector, common trends, points of tension, and unique approaches. Results: Findings emerged in 8 theme areas associated with business development decisions. Six different compensation models were identified. Each approach, ranging from training stipends to minimum wage, carried its own implicit and explicit messages concerning worker capacity and the value of work performed. Philosophical, legal and political motivations were linked to wage structures. The tensions raised pointed to fundamental dilemmas around contributive justice (right to work), ethical and fair treatment of vulnerable workers, and worker needs. Intertwined with these issues were practical concerns and strategies related to social integration and financial survival of the enterprise. Conclusions: Occupational scientists see productivity as a fundamental human need. Social dialogue and efforts towards fair and equitable treatment of workers, the social inclusion movement, and the competing economic realities for employers raise critical questions around how paid employment can best be realized for people with disabilities.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle