Bibliographic record
Abstract
The temporary work industry has undergone considerable expansion in Canada and in Quebec in the last decade. Becoming an important mechanism in the functioning of the labour market, it provides not only increased numerical and functional flexibility for companies, but is also a favoured means of access to the labour market for many workers, including young workers. Personnel leasing falls within the framework of tripartite labour relations between the employee, the agency and the client company. This type of relationship is not without its particular difficulties, the solution for which is often hard to find since the personnel leasing activity, as such, is not regulated in Quebec. The question is to determine, considering the precise nature of the tripartite relationship, whether the employees’ recognized rights can be exercised, in practice, in such a way as to achieve their specific purpose.Many studies, particularly those of a legal nature, have revealed the difficulty of identifying the real employer, as well as the inability of labour laws that are better adapted to binary labour relations, to appropriately take into account the specific situation that results from this type of tripartite relationship. Other work illustrates the disparity in the treatment of agency employees, the limitations raised by personnel leasing on freedom of employment and mobility, and even the high rate of occupational injuries observed in agency employees, mainly affecting young workers.The legal consequences of the lack of regulation of this type of activity are well known and well documented. The advancement in knowledge is now reliant on empirical studies in order to better understand the actual working conditions of agency employees, as well as the practices of leasing agencies.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.002 |
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".