MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4280498886 · doi:10.5206/uwojls.v13i1.14339

Examining Labour Rights Enforcement Mechanisms in NAFTA and the USMCA and its Impact on Labour Conditions in Mexico

2022· article· en· W4280498886 on OpenAlex
Brittany Bates

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueWestern Journal of Legal Studies · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Labor and Employment Law
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnforcementFree trade agreementWorkforceGovernment (linguistics)Labour lawPolitical scienceEconomicsInternational tradeFree tradeLabour economicsDevelopment economicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this paper is to examine changes made to labour rights enforcement mechanisms under the United States-Mexico Canada Agreement, from its predecessor agreement, the North America Free Trade Agreement, and the impact it may have on labour conditions in Mexico. Some scholars argue that the labour rights enforcement mechanisms in the North America Free Trade were fundamentally flawed, and allowed the Mexican government to passively enforce its domestic labour laws to the detriment of its workforce. This paper will argue that while the United States-Mexico Canada Agreement has made positive advancements to remedy labour issues under the North American Free Trade Agreement, limitations still exist, which may promote inequities amongst Mexican workers.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.796
Threshold uncertainty score0.426

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.321 · 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