The Meaning of Work among Nonstandard Workers: A Multifaceted Reality/Le Sens Du Travail Chez Des Travailleurs Atypiques: Une Réalité Aux Multiples Facettes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The changes that have occurred in the work world and their ensuing consequences have been one of the most socially important themes in the scientific on work. The career trajectories of many workers are no longer linear, predictable, and long-term in that they now take place in a rapidly evolving global economy that induces changes and turbulence in work environments and organizations (Herr, as cited by Burnett, 2010). At the individual level, these changes are expressed through, among other things, the emergence of nonstandard work.Without attempting to achieve a uniformity that would partially obscure the nature of nonstandard work, it is worthwhile to clarify the meaning at- tributed to this term. Tucker (2002) reported that the notion of nonstandard work designates a part-time, nonpermanent job, but that definitions vary from one country to another. The term peripheral workers was used in reference to people employment is contingent, free-lance, temporary, external, part-time, and casual (Savickas et al., 2009, p. 241). As Dupuis and McLaren (2006) observed, the fact that workers can hold more than one job at a time can complicate the situation. By combining different analysis perspectives, Fournier, Bourassa, and Beji (2003) associated nonstandard work with employment whose length was limited or uncertain and whose status was either poorly or not at all defined. This phenomenon is sizable, as noted by Goguel d'allondans (2005), who, in his reflections on the metamorphosis of the work world, evoked the breaking up of the social body into three categories, namely employees with stable jobs, those with precarious jobs, and those excluded from the labour market.Echoing ideas put forward by Richardson (1993), who underlined the importance of studying the reality of work in people's lives, Blustein (2006) stated that there has been a notable lack of attention to the inner motivations, personal constructions, and the way in which people make meaning of working in the literature (p. 66), and suggested that, if we are to understand this reality, it is imperative to examine the situations of people who have little or no control over the work-related choices they make. Accordingly, we believe it is important to comprehend the meaning that nonstandard workers attribute to work, considering the difficulty they have in keeping their jobs.The exploratory study presented here was part of a larger research program focusing on career trajectories characterized by unstable employment (Bujold & Fournier, 2008; Fournier & Bujold, 2005; Fournier, Lachance, & Bujold, 2009). In line with Blustein's (2006) suggestion, our study set out to determine the meaning of work in the eyes of workers who had been in a nonstandard work situation for at least three years. We examined this meaning by looking at four aspects: the significance the workers attributed to work, work's absolute and relative centrality for them, their expectations of it, and their representation of their personal commitment to work. This article presents the review as it applies to the variables, methodology, and results of our study.UTE RATURE REVIEWThe four aspects mentioned above are examined at the conceptual and empirical levels with regard to work in general and to nonstandard work in particular. Furthermore, work by Mercure and Vultur (2010), which deals with both of these two categories, will be discussed at the end of this section.SignificanceBased on her examination of various studies on the subject, Morin (2004) drew out six characteristics of significant work. Significant work (a) is useful, (b) is morally justifiable, (c) allows people to benefit from their accomplishments, (d) allows individuals to carry out socially acknowledged tasks, (e) is self-sufficient, and (f) permits the establishment of gratifying relationships with one's colleagues. The latter two characteristics were also mentioned by Blustein (2006), who spoke more of the functions of work than of its significance. …
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 | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.055 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".