MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2115362545

Help or Hindrance: Temporary Help Agencies and the United States Transitory Workforce

2010· preprint· en· W2115362545 on OpenAlexaff
Fraser Summerfield

Bibliographic record

VenueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics · 2010
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRetirement, Disability, and Employment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEarningsWorkforceEmployabilityAgency (philosophy)Labour economicsWork (physics)Matching (statistics)BusinessPropensity score matchingDemographic economicsWageEconomicsFinanceEconomic growth
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The impact of a Temporary Help Agency (THA) job placement on an employee’s future employment status and labor market income is examined using NLSY79 data for the late 1990s. Several matching estimators provide gender-specific estimates of the effects of temporary agency employment on future employment outcomes. Compared to directhire temps, women’s earnings increase two years after THA employment, while men’s do not. Four years after THA employment, women continue to benefit from THA jobs, while men experience lower earnings and probability of employment. We find THA work does not help men with future income or employability, however, policy encouraging women to use THA firms for labor market re-entry would be beneficial in these two areas.

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 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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.650
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.181
GPT teacher head0.417
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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRePEc: Research Papers in EconomicsSame topicRetirement, Disability, and EmploymentFrench-language works237,207