Roundtable discussion: Domestic worker organizing in Latin America and beyond
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In 2011, the International Labor Organization (ILO) adopted the Domestic Worker Convention (no. 189), which established labor standards for household workers, including protection from abuse, provisions to ensure freedom of movement for migrant domestic workers, coverage under national minimum wage, overtime, child labor, and human rights laws, and access to contact information of private employers and appropriate legal resources, among others. Domestic worker advocates throughout Latin America rallied behind the ILO's Domestic Worker Convention to ensure its ratification at the national level. Latin American and Caribbean nations account for 55% of the national signatories to the convention; at the same time, 77% of domestic workers in the region remain informally employed. The roundtable discussion brought together scholars conducting research in Argentina, Colombia, Ecuador, and Mexico, and among Central Americans in the United States, to address the impact of the ILO convention and to share their research on domestic work and domestic worker movements. How have the changes in domestic work regulation affected the organizing efforts of domestic workers? How are domestic workers advocating for their rights in the wake of the ILO Convention?
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it