MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1977218000 · doi:10.1080/15555240902849073

Labour Welfare in Canada: An Examination of Occupational Assistance

2009· article· en· W1977218000 on OpenAlexaffabout
Rick Csiernik

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Workplace Behavioral Health · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLabor Movements and Unions
Canadian institutionsKing's University CollegeWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWelfareCapitalismBoomIndustrial RevolutionWelfare capitalismGreat DepressionWork (physics)Political scienceLabour economicsWelfare stateEconomic growthEconomicsMarket economyLawPoliticsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article explores labour welfare in Canada across three distinct periods of occupational assistance: welfare capitalism that began with the Industrial Revolution and persisted through the depression of the 1930s; occupational alcoholism programming that emerged during World War II and the typically unreported domestic labour strife of the 1940s, lasting through the postwar economic boom into the 1960s; and the employee assistance programming era with the introduction of the broad-brush approach to workplace-based assistance that also witnessed organised labour in Canada provide fundamental supports to workers that were originally introduced by workplace owners during the welfare capitalism period, though now to benefit workers rather than to control them. Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution and into the new information and technological era of work, organised labour has had a distinct role in shaping and providing services to enhance worker and community wellness in Canada.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.202
Threshold uncertainty score0.926

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.017
Science and technology studies0.0170.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.001
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.338 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Workplace Behavioral HealthSame topicLabor Movements and UnionsFrench-language works237,207