The transformative potential of casework: analyzing the political subjectivation of migrant workers at the Immigrant Workers Center
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canada’s immigration policy has undergone a major shift in recent decades, from an approach centered on permanent immigration to a system increasingly focused on temporary migration. Temporary migrants face highly unequal power relations in the workplace, making them particularly vulnerable to abuse and exploitation. Drawing on fieldwork at the Immigrant Workers Center (IWC), a Quebec-based activist organization, this paper examines how migrant workers come to engage in political action despite this adverse context, and how they experience such action. The analysis is informed by the concept of political subjectivation, defined as the process by which individuals contest their subordinate position within a political order and seek to redefine it on more egalitarian terms. I argue that migrant workers’ political subjectivation is supported by the IWC’s participatory and collective approach to casework. In workers centers, casework refers to the practice of providing individual assistance to workers. While it is often described as an individualized and depoliticized approach to social change, my research shows how the practice of casework at the IWC fosters individual and collective transformations conducive to political subjectivation. Thus, it contributes to recent literature on radical approaches to casework and literature at the intersection of social movement and popular education scholarship.
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 | 0.011 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.029 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".