MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2319172837 · doi:10.1177/2158244015575632

“Fortis Et Liber” Unless You Are a Farm Worker

2015· article· en· W2319172837 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Bob Barnetson

Bibliographic record

VenueSAGE Open · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture and Farm Safety
Canadian institutionsAthabasca University
FundersUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of British ColumbiaAthabasca University
KeywordsWorkers' compensationFraming (construction)Statutory lawBusinessLabour economicsCompensation (psychology)Political scienceEconomicsLawSocial psychologyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Precarious employment entails both a heightened risk of injury and a greater likelihood of exclusion from statutory injury-compensation schemes. The contrasting cases of workers’ compensation entitlements among firefighters and farm workers in the anti-union Canadian province of Alberta provide a preliminary insight into how issue framing can be used to gain mandatory workers’ compensation coverage for workers. In addition to careful and timely critiques of legislator justifications, farm-worker advocates may be able to (a) generate shared framings among farm workers and farmers by creating a credible liability threat, (b) leverage preferential workers’ compensation access accorded to noncitizens into policy change, (c) challenge the constitutionality of the exclusion, and (d) trigger a framing process among farm workers via social media to increase pressure on legislators. These strategies offer a way to undermine the interlocking interests of farmers, politicians, and agribusiness that constrain efforts to achieve broad statutory inclusion of farm workers and achieve greater access to workers’ compensation benefits for them.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.887
Threshold uncertainty score0.359

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAGE OpenSame topicAgriculture and Farm SafetyFrench-language works237,207