IF YOU WORK FOR A LIVING – YOU SHOULD MAKE A LIVING: THE DEBATE ON A LIVING WAGE IN MANITOBA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Encabezados por Living Wage Canada ( http://www.livingwagecanada.ca/ ), muchos abogados estan aprendiendo como calcular el sueldo digno para sus comunidades y acceder a recursos para empezar campanas. El sueldo digno es diferente del sueldo minimo legal. El segundo se establece arbitrariamente, sin tener en cuenta el costo de la vida, y es lo minimo que los empleadores tienen que pagar por ley. El sueldo digno tiene en consideracion cuanto necesita una familia de cuatro personas (dos padres, dos hijos) para vivir. En combinacion con una estrategia completa que incluye aumentos constantes del sueldo minimo, mejoramientos en los niveles de asistencia social al empleo y a la renta y una consideracion seria de la renta basica, el sueldo digno desempenaria un papel importante en restaurar nuestra economia y la disminuida clase media. En particular, el sueldo digno podria ofrecer a las familias de bajos recursos un puente hacia la seguridad economica si es combinado con otras politicas como las de Intermediarios del Mercado de Trabajo y las iniciativas de compras del sector publico.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".