Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigated the impact of employment equity legislation, FCP compliance regulations, and the absence of these requirements on employment equity and diversity practices of Canadian firms. Our results indicate that CEOs of EEA firms have more proactive attitudes towards diversity. EEA firms, and to some extent FCP firms, also indicated higher levels of practices (e.g., policies, recruiting, training, and accountability) supportive of equity and diversity, than firms not subject to employment equity. The demand for skilled workers and an aging population has forced Canada to turn to immigration as a source of skills and knowledge. Census data from 2001 has shown that immigrants represented about 70 percent of Canada’s labour force growth over the past decade (Statistics Canada, 2003). There is also awareness that immigrant workers pose a human resource challenge to organizations (Richard, Kochan, & McMillan-Capeheart, 2002). Thus far, the tendency has been to develop separate public and business policies to deal with the problems of workforce diversity (Jain & Verma, 1996). For example, the Canadian government responded with employment equity legislation to remove barriers facing women and minority groups. At the same time, businesses are actively engaged in women and
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.481 | 0.141 |
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".