Bibliographic record
Abstract
The emergence of “atypical” jobs in Quebec raises new social and political issues concerning labour flexibility. The labour market segmentation which results is characterized by increasing job insecurity for the employee and represents a structural deterioration in working and employment conditions. Sociology is particularly interested in the consequences of these changes on living conditions as seen through the subjective perceptions of the actors involved. Hence, the relationship to work, which includes the physical conditions, the accomplishment of tasks and socialization, involves a dichotomy that revolves around the employee’s satisfaction and sources of validation on the one hand, and, on the other, dissatisfaction, which leads to discomfort. Recent changes in the world of work mean that fragmented and uncertain careers are emerging and consequently a reassessment is required concerning the impact of this upon the work relationship, something which to date has been poorly documented. What does atypical employment mean for these workers? Does it affect the value that they place on work? Does this type of career path constitute a new reality? Based on the results of qualitative research conducted in 2009 amongst residents of a deprived area of Montreal who were working in atypical employment, this article goes to the heart of relational dynamics in the Quebec workplace, to understand how they contribute to the construction of specific career paths and to identify the implications for the relationship to work and employment of these workers. The various cases studied provide an insight into the phenomenon of job insecurity from both scientific and policy perspectives.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".