Passing the Buck? Neoliberal Restructuring and the Transformation of the Live‐in Caregivers Program to Keep “Women’s Work” Undervalued and Out of Sight in the Canadian Workforce
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent years, Canadian policies have reflected global trends towards neoliberal restructuring and a determination to participate in globalization processes. The emphasis is now on less government “interference” in order to encourage greater flows of capital, goods, and labour. At the same time, Canada has become increasingly dependent on migrant labour in order to fill “labour shortages;” in particular, the number of temporary Filipina migrant workers in Canada has risen dramatically over the last thirty years. While rhetoric states that government cutbacks in social spending, services, and regulation will benefit us all, questions arise about whose labour and spending will fill in these gaps left by a lack of public services. My research, based on a comprehensive overview of related literature, will demonstrate that in the end, these cutbacks in government spending have far‐reaching and profoundly gendered effects; Canadian women are greatly impacted by these reductions in government involvement. Furthermore, a disturbing trend is arising. Many women are now using the Live‐in Caregivers Program as a means of using their privilege to buy their way out of their gender subordination through the purchase of migrant labour. In the end, I conclude, that this is neither a sustainable nor appropriate means of dealing with Canadian household insecurity. Furthermore, the vulnerability of these workers and the restrictions on their opportunities while within Canadian borders is a true testament to long‐term societal issues in Canada that must be addressed in order to create a more just Canadian society.
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 | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.025 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".