MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6926147802 · doi:10.20381/ruor-25571

Why is Immigrants' Access to Employment lower in Montreal that in Toronto?

2010· article· en· W6926147802 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueuO Research (University of Ottawa) · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmigrationEthnic groupMetropolitan areaEthnic originNew immigrantsCountry of origin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores reasons why the employment rate gap between immigrants and Canadian born individuals is larger in Montreal than in Toronto. A major reason is language: relative to Canadian born individuals, immigrants in Montreal are significantly less likely to know French than their Toronto counterparts to know English and their knowledge of French is less rewarded by employers than their Toronto counterparts’ knowledge of English. We also find that holding other factors constant, the performance of immigrants according to their countries of origin is remarkably similar in Montreal and Toronto: in both metropolitan areas, immigrants from Europe and India generally perform better than immigrants from China, Taiwan and Muslim countries. While we do not find any evidence that Quebec’s different immigration policy is causing the larger immigrant employment rate gap in Montreal, we cannot rule out the possibility that immigrants would be subject to more labour market discrimination in Montreal than in Toronto. However, this discrimination would be French language related as opposed to being ethnicity related. Results are generally similar for both male and female immigrants. / Ce document explore les raisons pour lesquelles l'écart de taux d'emploi entre les immigrants et les personnes nées au Canada est plus grand à Montréal qu'à Toronto. Une raison importante est la langue : par rapport aux Canadiens de naissance, les immigrants à Montréal sont beaucoup moins susceptibles de connaître le français que leurs homologues à Toronto de connaître l'anglais, et leur connaissance du français est moins récompensée par les employeurs que la connaissance de l’anglais des immigrants à Toronto. Nous trouvons également que, toutes choses égales par ailleurs, la performance des immigrants selon le pays d'origine est remarquablement similaire à Montréal et à Toronto : dans les deux régions métropolitaines, les immigrants de l'Europe et de l'Inde ont en général une meilleure performance que ceux de Chine, de Taïwan et des pays musulmans. Bien qu’il n’y ait pas de preuve que la politique d'immigration spécifique du Québec soit la cause du plus grand écart de taux d'emploi à Montréal, nous ne pouvons pas exclure la possibilité qu’il y ait une plus grande discrimination sur le marché du travail contre les immigrants à Montréal qu'à Toronto. Toutefois, cette discrimination serait liée à la langue plutôt qu’à l’ethnicité. Les résultats sont généralement similaires pour les hommes et pour les femmes.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.128

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.001

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueuO Research (University of Ottawa)Same topicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosolsFrench-language works237,207