MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7066040918

Gender at Work: A Mixed Methods Study of Workplace Inequalities in the Quebec Legal Profession

2023· dissertation· en· W7066040918 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueQSpace (Queen's University Library) · 2023
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicOccupational and Professional Licensing Regulation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Government (linguistics)Circumstantial evidenceDemotionWork (physics)Qualitative research
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The legal profession in Canada was traditionally occupied by men. A sweeping feminization of the legal profession occurred in the 1970s and 1980s, bringing more women to the practice of law. Quebec was the last province to admit women to law. Today, Quebec—with its bi-juridical system of avocat.e.s and notaires—has the most feminized legal profession in North America. Regardless of significant changes to the legal profession, gender inequalities persist. The wage gap remains, where women continue to be paid less than men. Women continue to face challenges with career mobility. Experiences of a chilly climate are an additional barrier faced by women. These inequalities in the context of the legal profession in Quebec have received very limited attention in the sociological literature. This dissertation aims to understand gender inequalities amongst avocat.e.s and notaires in Quebec. I focus on three different dynamics of inequality: (1) differential earnings; (2) career mobility (career progress, job satisfaction, departures from law, and departures from private practice); and (3) chilly workplace climate. To explore these dynamics, I use a mixed methods approach. For the quantitative analyses, I rely on a total of 361 longitudinal surveys. For the qualitative analyses, I draw on 50 interviews with avocat.e.s and notaires who have over 20 years of experience in the Quebec legal profession. My study reveals that although a gender gap exists in earnings, the gap is best explained by professional group differences. The evidence shows that gender best predicts the career mobility aspect of departures from private practice. My findings also illustrate how the chilly climate faced by women is characterized by exclusion, sexist comments and stereotypes, negative perceptions of working mothers, and sexual harassment. I conclude that the three dynamics of gender inequality for legal professionals in Quebec are best explained with an integration of theoretical approaches and a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.424
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.236 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it