COVID and work from home trends: Practices and recommendations in protecting employees
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic or the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has far-reaching effects on many parts of society, particularly the job market in VietNam. In just the third quarter of 2021, the COVID-19 epidemic has impacted approximately 28.2 million employees aged 15 and above across VietNam, which led them to lose their employment, cease work, rotate work, reduce working hours, and reduce income, etc. Furthermore, COVID-19 requires employees to work from home, and the fast rise in work from home creates a fresh urgency to evaluate the impact of work from home on both employees and employers, including contracts, insurance, wages, allowances, working hours, and so on. Due to the aforementioned urgent circumstances, in the framework of COVID-19, this research article tries to examine both positive impact of working from home such as decreasing workplace accidents, cleaning up the environment, saving money for both employees and employers, and harmonizing work and family responsibilities and negative impact, for example, lack of working tools, labour equipment or the right to disconnect between working hours and resting periods. Furthermore, the authors are going to highlight some potential legal loopholes that may exist in the context of changing working techniques in VietNam. Finally, the authors promote awareness of work from home and provide advise on policies that can help people who work from home in the current pandemic situation in VietNam, for instance, restrictions on workplace safety when working from home, regulations on the right to disconnect employees after working hours, and strengthening the function of the labor inspector in examining how much a company is paying out in salary and how much is being cut or reduced.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".