La qualité de travailleur handicapé dans le Code du travail français : une norme d’emploi ?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La reconnaissance de la « qualité de travailleur handicapé » dans le Code du travail français a eu progressivement pour effet de normaliser les handicaps en milieu de travail. Les travailleur⸱euses handicapé⸱es ont acquis au fil des législations une protection accrue afin de favoriser leur accès au marché du travail et de les maintenir dans l’emploi. Les demandes de reconnaissance sont aujourd’hui largement encouragées par l’ensemble des acteurs publics et privés intervenant dans le champ du handicap. Nous assistons dès lors, en France, au plébiscite d’une véritable norme d’emploi, celle de « travailleur handicapé », devant régir la situation de travail des personnes ayant des incapacités. Néanmoins, l’application de cette norme trouve d’importantes limites au regard de la situation des personnes ayant un trouble psychique ou une maladie chronique, appelant à une réflexion sur sa nécessaire évolution.
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 | 0.016 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".