Advocating for labour mobility and permanent residency for Canada's Seasonal Agricultural Workers from an international human rights law perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper delves into the implications of Canada's Seasonal Agricultural Worker Program (SAWP) through the lens of international human rights law (IHRL), spotlighting the nuanced effects on migrant agricultural workers' rights. Originating in 1966, the SAWP has been pivotal in recruiting labour from Mexico and the Caribbean to bolster Canada's agricultural sector. The paper critiques the program's core policies, notably the restrictive employment system that ties workers to specific employers and the significant barriers to obtaining permanent residency (PR) and citizenship. These policies are scrutinized for their potential violation of fundamental human rights, including the rights to equality, liberty and security, and access to justice, under both Canadian and international legal frameworks. A comprehensive analysis is presented, underpinning Canada's obligations under IHRL and the apparent discrepancies within its treatment of SAWP participants. The study proposes substantial policy reforms aimed at rectifying these discrepancies, advocating for a transition towards open work permits, and establishing clear pathways to PR and citizenship for SAWP workers. The research underscores the necessity for Canada to reconcile its labour demands within the agricultural sector with its human rights obligations, ensuring a fair and humane treatment of migrant workers who play a crucial role in the country's economy.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.022 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".