Health and Safety Issues in Precarious Cultural Work
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many creative workers are without the contractual clarity and safeguards bestowed by collective agreements or labour legislation, and encounter a host of health and safety issues as a result. This study is based on a sample of eight Toronto-based theatre artists who had worked together on a 2008 production, and whose careers in the subsequent three years were explored in in-depth interviews. That the participants had held a total of 412 jobs, frequently unpaid, in a three-year period is indicative of the precarious conditions in which they laboured. This study details both psychological and physical health and safety risks that these cultural workers encountered as they contemplated labouring for love, incessantly sought creative cultural work opportunities, combined such work with other “flexible and disposable” (read: precarious) jobs, and laboured in unregulated or underregulated cultural workplaces. Keywords: Health and Safety, Precarious Work, Creative Workers, Canada, Theatre Artists, Flexibility, Collective Bargaining
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".