The social organization of workplace mental health: local and translocal ruling relations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to make visible the ways in which peoples’ experiences of mental ill health are coordinated and produced in the workplace setting. Design/methodology/approach This institutional ethnography draws from data collected from 16 informants in one Canadian industrial manufacturing plant to explicate how texts organize activities and align worker consciousness and actions with company expectations of a “bona fide” illness. Findings The findings demonstrate how a “bona fide” illness is textually mediated by biomedical and physical work restrictions, thus creating a significant disjuncture between an experiential and ruling perspective of mental ill health. Research limitations/implications The work of employees living with self-reported depression becomes organized locally and translocally around the discourse of “mental illness is an illness like any other.” This presents a profound disjuncture between the embodied experience of being too unwell to mentally perform work duties, and the textually coordinated practices of what it means to access sick time for a “bona fide illness” within a biomedical-based attendance management protocol. Originality/value The current study adds to the literature by shedding light on the disjuncture created between the embodied experience of mental health issues and the ruling perspective of what constitutes a bona fide illness, adding a unique focus on how people’s use of attendance management-related supports in the workplace.
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 | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.063 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".