Unemployment in the days of Covid: will the Canadian unemployment insurance program survive the pandemic?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Governed by Austerity, the Canadian unemployment regime stopped delivering a proper wage replacement coverage starting in 1995. Nowadays, the situation is far from showing better results. For the year 2018-2019, only 40% of those who contributed through their wages to the Unemployment Fund were deemed eligible to an unemployment benefits period. Without any surprise, precarious workers had been largely denied such benefits. Those same workers are often active in the service sector, a sector that largely contributes to the GDP increase in Canada. In the Covid context, Canada looked for income replacement answers outside the Unemployment regime and relied on social tax expenditures by creating programmes that showed their flexibility and agility. Those who had to stop working or reduce their working hours - either because they were affected by the virus or had to take care of an affected member of their household - were well served by those programmes. Are social tax expenditures, also called cash transfer programmes, showing the way for the future? Or, can a contributory model like the unemployment regime in Canada adapt to the needs of the workers in the post Covid era?
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 | 0.008 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".