Strategies to develop and maintain occupational health and safety measures in small businesses employing immigrant workers in metropolitan Montreal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose In large urban centres, immigrants are employed by businesses in which there is a high incidence of serious or fatal occupational injuries. This paper aims to present findings on the lack of knowledge and understanding in terms of: explanations for the implementation or lack of, procedures; technical expertise in prevention and the inability of the internal actors to implement changes. Design/methodology/approach A study design with a comparison group is used. The observation sample is comprised of 21 small businesses (SB), of which 16 meet the following criteria: the enterprise had fewer than 50 employees; and at least 25 per cent of the workers were born outside the country. The other five serve as a comparison group; the only difference in these SB is that they employ fewer (<25 per cent) immigrant workers. Findings The findings indicate that SB employing immigrants have totally or partially failed to implement health and safety management in area of occupational health and safety. Practical implications Implementation of safety management is impeded by numerous factors, including a partial or biased understanding, from managers and workers, on occupational health and safety rules. Democratic participation is to be encouraged so that management and workers get more involved in actual prevention strategies implementing health and safety measures. Social implications Active participation of workers in workplace is essential in global health improvement, as related by Armataya Sen on concept of “substantial freedom”. Originality/value The paper focuses on health and safety management in SB employing immigrants
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 | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".