MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414827981 · doi:10.29173/psur408

Reforms, Reports, Reckoning

2025· article· en· W4414827981 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Shairene Veronica Asuncion

Bibliographic record

VenuePolitical Science Undergraduate Review · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrecarityPrioritizationFace (sociological concept)Foreign policyMigrant workersGovernment (linguistics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2014, Canada introduced sweeping reforms to its Temporary Foreign Worker Program (TFWP) that significantly heightened the precarity of migrant workers. A decade later, new policy changes have emerged, this time, alongside a damning United Nations report accusing Canada of enabling modern slavery through its treatment of its temporary foreign workers. This paper argues that Canada’s long standing prioritization of economic growth consistently eclipses its proclaimed commitment to human rights, reducing migrant workers to disposable labour units rather than rights-bearing individuals. Tracing the trajectory of the TFWP over the last decade, this paper examines the 2014 reforms, the classification of low-wage migrants as ‘essential’ during the Covid-19 pandemic, and the 2024 rollback of those pandemic-era measures. At the heart of the analysis lies a central question: Do the 2024 policy changes represent a continuation of Canada’s prioritization of economic growth, or, in the face of international condemnation, do they signal a potential towards a more just, human-rights-oriented approach to labour migration?

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.837
Threshold uncertainty score0.944

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.346 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolitical Science Undergraduate ReviewSame topicCanadian Policy and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207