The Experiences of Black LGBQ Canadians within the Workplace
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research examines the experiences of Black LGBQ people within the workplace in the Lower Mainland. It is important to explore these experiences because there is a significant lack of research regarding the experiences of Black LGBQ people in not only British Columbia but Canada. The theoretical framework of this study included critical race theory, feminist theory, intersectionality, and queer theory. These theories supported the findings of this research and helped to analyze patterns that emerged from the data collected. The literature review of this study guided the development of the interview guide and analysis of data. The literature review argues the limited research literature on the experiences of Black LGBQ people. For this study, 1 semi-structured interview was conducted in-person, and 3 were conducted over the phone. There were 1 cisgendered lesbian, 2 cisgendered bisexual women, and 1 cisgendered gay man interviewed, 3 of whom had university degrees. Participants worked in a range of workplaces (e.g., childcare, educational services, health care, non-profit organizations, sales and retail, and transportation). The research findings illustrated intersectional experiences between both Black women and Black men. The 4 key themes found in this research were 1) racism within the workplace, 2) inequity in promotions and opportunities within the workplace, 3) supervisors and responses to racism within the workplace and 4) relationship with colleagues and supervisors within the workplace. In the discussion chapter, an analysis of the key findings are supported by the theoretical framework and research literature is undertaken. Three policy recommendations for workplaces within the service sector and the labour market are outlined to better equip workplaces with the knowledge and understanding of various forms of discrimination demonstrated within 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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.050 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".