Women’s Occupational Health: Resisting When We Can: Santé des femmes au travail: mobiliser quand c’est encore possible
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The continuing worldwide struggle for decent working conditions is under intense economic, social, and political pressures. Women are particularly affected by these pressures because of their still-tenuous position in the service sector, in lowprestige, low-paid occupations. In addition, their occupational health issues are often overlooked or minimized. Nevertheless, women continue to struggle, as individuals and collectively. This issue describes a number of instances where women in the Québec labor movement have attempted to reconcile equality concerns with protecting their own health. There are successes, failures, and puzzles. Résumé La lutte mondiale pour des conditions de travail décentes subit d'intenses pressions économiques, sociales et politiques. Les femmes sont particulièrement touchées par ces pressions à cause de leur situation encore fragile dans le secteur des services, dans des professions de faible prestige et salaire. De plus, leurs besoins en santé au travail sont souvent minimisés ou ignorés. Toutefois, les femmes continuent à résister, individuellement et collectivement. Ce numéro décrit un certain nombre d'exemples où des travailleuses militantes ont tenté de concilier leurs revendications d'égalité et d'accès au travail avec leur besoin de protéger leur santé.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.024 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.002 |
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".