Minding the Gap: Feminist perspectives on policies affecting immigrant labor in the domestic services industry in Europe
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many scholars have noted that a gap exists between government immigration policies and actual outcomes in the labour market. For a variety of reasons, laws are not enforced and policies are not adjusted to reflect the new realities of employers’ demand for labour. This tacit acceptance of the inflow of undocumented workers perpetuates the invisibility of these immigrants with regard to labour policy, and it denies immigrants important safety and security protections granted other workers.This gap between immigration law, government policy and outcomes is perhaps most pronounced with regard to domestic workers, most of whom are women. Female migrants have little access to formal sector jobs, and therefore take on informal sector jobs, typically those derived from traditionally delineated gender roles. These jobs include what Bridget Anderson calls “the three C’s”: cooking, cleaning and caring. Given ongoing globalization and concomitant disparities in income between rich and poor nations, women will continue to migrate from developing countries, travelling to Europe to find work in other people’s homes.Using a comparative framework, we apply feminist theory to the case of undocumented domestic workers in various European countries to analyze this gap between government policy and outcomes. We find that the policy gap persists in both new and old destination countries, partly due to the private nature of the domestic work environment, but that trade unions are more active in older destination countries, indicating that some progress toward protecting domestic workers rights can be made through collective action.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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".