MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3094558883 · doi:10.1177/2031952520966626

An analysis of the EU Seasonal Workers Directive in the light of two similar regimes: Three dimensions of regulated inequality

2020· article· en· W3094558883 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Fotis Bregiannis

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Labour Law Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEuropean Law and Migration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInequalityDirectiveWorkforceNoveltyLabour economicsEconomicsDemographic economicsPolitical scienceEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article analyses three cumulative situations of inequality suffered by seasonal low-skilled migrant workers in Europe: i) reinforced inequality of bargaining power before the employer, ii) legal inequality between them and the local workforce, and iii) legal inequality between them and high-skilled migrant employees. In this regard, the prioritisation of the needs of national economies rather than a rights-based approach is promoted by the legislators. The EU Seasonal Workers Directive (SWD) is here compared to two Temporary Migration Programmes (TMPs) regulating similar migrant mobility. One of them has been in force for decades in Canada and the other entered more recently into force in New Zealand. It is shown that, despite claiming novelty, the SWD follows the same basic principles of structured and regulated inequality existing in these schemes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.011
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Labour Law JournalSame topicEuropean Law and MigrationFrench-language works237,207