MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2341810913 · doi:10.25071/1705-1436.185

A New Look at Shorter Hours of Work in the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union

2002· article· en· W2341810913 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJust Labour · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and Work-Related Fatigue
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOvertimeHumanitiesWork (physics)Work hoursPolitical scienceArtSociologyWorking hoursLabour economicsEconomicsEngineeringLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper argues that we need to look again at hours of work. One out of every five Canadians is working more than 40 hours a week as their regular hours, while one out of ten work over 50 hours. On top of this, overtime is excessive - paid overtime alone is the equivalent of 225,000 full-time jobs. A major study by the CEP in the pulp and paper industry has shown that overtime may be more expensive than hiring additional workers and that workers are willing to reduce overtime in order to save or create jobs. On reducing regular hours of work, the CEP has found that additional days away from work, once negotiated and experienced, are extremely popular. While more time off is about job creation, better health and safety and improving family and social life, it opposes the lean and mean approach of business corporations. Cet article soutient que nous devons repenser les heures de travail. Un Canadien ou une Canadienne sur cinq a une semaine de travail normale de plus de 40 heures et un ou une sur dix travaille plus de 50 heures par semaine. Qui plus est, les heures supplémentaires sont excessives. Les heures supplémentaires rémunérées comptent, à elles seules, pour l’équivalent de 225 000 emplois à plein temps. Un importante étude réalisée par le SCEP dans l’industrie papetière a révélé qu’il peut être plus coûteux de faire effectuer des heures supplémentaires que d’engager des employés ou employées additionnels et que les gens sont disposés à réduire leurs heures supplémentaires afin de maintenir ou de créer des emplois. Le SCEP a constaté que les personnes ayant consenti à réduire leurs heures normales de travail apprécient grandement leurs journées libres supplémentaires. L’augmentation du temps libre est destinée à créer des emplois, à accroître la santé et la sécurité et améliorer la vie familiale et sociale, mais elle s’oppose au régime minceur des entreprises.

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.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.363
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.243 · 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