Bibliographic record
Abstract
Au Québec, les relations du travail dans l’industrie de la construction font l’objet, depuis 1968, d’un encadrement spécifique en marge du Code du travail. L’adoption et l’originalité de ce régime, qui prévoit un éventail de règles visant les rapports collectifs du travail, mais aussi l’emploi des travailleurs de la construction, sont souvent expliquées par les rivalités intersyndicales qui ont marqué le secteur depuis les années 1960.
 L’objectif du texte est de montrer que la mobilité provinciale des travailleurs de la construction constitue, au Québec, une source de conflits au travail qui, bien que pouvant mettre en présence des organisations syndicales rivales, doit néanmoins être distinguée de ces rivalités naissant du pluralisme syndical. 
 Pour ce faire, après avoir mis en évidence certaines caractéristiques industrielles et économiques de la construction québécoise, nous proposons une analyse de l’évolution du cadre législatif et réglementaire applicable à l’emploi dans ce secteur, en portant une attention particulière aux conflits et manifestations qui l’ont marqué.
 
 In Quebec, since 1968, labour relations in the construction industry have been the subject of a specific framework beyond the Labour Code. The adoption and singularity of this undertaking, which provides for a range of rules targeting collective labour relations, but also the employment of construction workers, are often explained by the inter-union rivalries which have had a great impact on the sector since the 1960s.
 The objective of the article is to demonstrate that provincial mobility of construction workers constitutes, in Quebec, a source of labour conflicts, which, although it may involve rival labour organizations, must nevertheless be distinguished from the rivalries arising from union pluralism. 
 In order to achieve our goal, besides highlighting certain industrial and economic characteristics of Quebec construction, we suggest an analysis of the evolution of the legislative and regulatory framework applicable to employment in the sector, paying special attention to conflicts and demonstrations which have marked the sector.
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 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 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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 teacher head, 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".