Concertation sociale et négociation collective au Québec en temps de crise
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le Quebec semble avoir echappe aux effets de la crise economique et financiere de 2008-2009 en maintenant inchange son niveau d’emploi. Cet article analyse en profondeur le role qu’ont joue a cet egard les acteurs syndicaux et patronaux au sein des institutions de concertation sociale de cette province. Ces dernieres constituent une exception a l’echelle nord-americaine et rapprochent le modele quebecois de relations industrielles de certains systemes europeens. Les mesures d’emploi qu’ils ont utilisees ou mises en place ont contribue a eviter bon nombre de licenciements collectifs. Le maintien de l’emploi durant cette periode doit aussi etre interprete a la lumiere d’une transformation majeure de la structure economique du Quebec dans laquelle des pertes massives d’emplois dans les secteurs manufacturiers ont ete compensees par des creations d’emplois dans les secteurs des services. L’analyse du contenu de plus de six mille conventions collectives conclues au Quebec, sur une periode de quinze ans, est cependant revelatrice d’un decouplage entre la concertation sociale qui s’opere a des niveaux centralises (provincial, sectoriel, regional) et la negociation collective decentralisee au niveau de l’etablissement. La mise en evidence de ce decalage est revelatrice d’enjeux importants lies a la capacite des acteurs syndicaux et patronaux du Quebec de participer a la modernisation de l’economie de cette province.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.001 |
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".