Assessing the Damage: Money Awards by the OHRT in Sexual Harassment Cases
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Individuals who experience sexual harassment in employment, housing, education, or other social services in Ontario may be entitled to a general damages remedy under section 45.2 of the Ontario Human Rights Code. The Ontario Human Rights Tribunal conducts an objective analysis of the severity of the harasser’s conduct and a subjective analysis of the impact of the incident on the applicant. Generally, the more severe the conduct or impact on the applicant, the higher the award for general damages. Due to an expectation that individuals will appear traumatized after enduring sexual harassment, an applicant’s failure to produce evidence of distress or traumatization will often adversely affect his or her entitlement to higher damage awards. This paper argues that the requirement to produce medical proof is an unwarranted invasion of the individual’s right to medical privacy, unjustly imposes an additional evidentiary burden upon the applicant, and perpetuates the myth surrounding sexual assault that trauma is visible and uniform.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it