La culture organisationnelle et les préoccupations des parents-travailleurs concernant le soutien de l'employeur en matière de conciliation travail-famille
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Partant du constat que l’apport organisationnel d’avantages familiphiles (family-friendly benefits) ne suffit pas à aider les parents-travailleurs à concilier adéquatement travail et famille, la thématique de la culture organisationnelle défavorable à la conciliation travail-famille (CTF) est abordée par l’intermédiaire du manque de soutien de l’employeur. L’analyse qualitative exploratoire proposée s’appuie sur des témoignages recueillis auprès de 30 parents-travailleurs québécois. Les résultats de l’étude indiquent que le manque perçu de soutien de l’employeur touche près d’un parent-travailleur sur deux. Il s’agit de la situation-problème relative au travail la plus importante et préoccupante pour les parents-travailleurs. L’effet décuplant de la combinaison des types de cultures organisationnelles défavorables à la CTF, lequel accélère l’érosion des relations personnelles entre l’employeur et les parents-travailleurs, rend principalement compte de ces résultats.
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 | 0.004 | 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 | 0.007 | 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) | 0.006 | 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".