MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402064604 · doi:10.1080/02673037.2024.2381779

Live-in or locked-out: housing of migrant workers before and during COVID-19

2024· article· en· W4402064604 on OpenAlexaff
Tamar Barkay, Yahel Kurlander, Idit Zimmerman

Bibliographic record

VenueHousing Studies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEmployment and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsTellabs (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Migrant workersSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakDemographic economicsPolitical scienceSocioeconomicsSociologyEconomic growthEconomicsVirologyMedicineOutbreak

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents a comparative policy analysis of housing arrangements for migrant caregivers and farmworkers before and during COVID-19. By Juxtaposing structural conditions and industrial sectors, we explore the link between housing and labour migration regime, analysing its implications on migrant workers’ living conditions. Despite substantial differences in housing arrangements, prioritising employers’ needs and ethnonational values over migrant workers’ well-being and rights places migrant workers in both sectors at risk of exploitation. Crisis conditions, such as COVID-19, exacerbate the vulnerability of migrant workers to exploitation. By unpacking the repercussions of disparities between official rights-based housing policy and their implementation, this article seeks to contribute to the literature on the intersection between labour migration and housing policies. Rooted in a structural perspective on labour exploitation, we argue that bridging these disparities and preventing exploitation, while improving migrant workers’ living conditions, requires policymakers to address power imbalances between employers and migrant 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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.101

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.449
Teacher spread0.343 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHousing StudiesSame topicEmployment and Welfare StudiesFrench-language works237,207