MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2300867868

Temporary employment and the quality of temporary jobs

2011· article· en· W2300867868 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sylvia Dixon

Bibliographic record

VenueNew Zealand journal of employment relations · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEmployment and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCasualQuarter (Canadian coin)Agency (philosophy)BusinessProject commissioningDemographic economicsQuality (philosophy)Labour economicsPublishingEconomicsPolitical scienceGeographySociology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper discusses some of the insights that can be gained from Statistics New Zealand's Survey of Working Life (2008) on the profile of temporary workers, the reasons they give for working in a temporary job, their pay and conditions. In the March 2008 quarter, 9.4% of New Zealand employees were working in temporary jobs. The survey results reveal substantial differences between temporary and permanent employees in indicators of job quality such as pay, training rates, and working time patterns as well as substantial differences among the four main types of temporary employee (casual, fixed-term, temporary employment agency and seasonal). The paper summarises these results and then analyses the role of personal and job characteristics in contributing to the pay and training gaps that exist between temporary and permanent workers.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.123
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.273 · 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

Citations6
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew Zealand journal of employment relations→Same topicEmployment and Welfare Studies→French-language works237,207→