Hard Infrastructure, Hard Times: Workers Perspectives on Privatization and Contracting out of Manitoba Infrastructure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For several years, the Manitoba government led by the Progressive Conservatives has been pushing hard to reduce the number of government workers, while transferring work and contracts to the private sector. This report examines the push for privatization and contracting out of design and maintenance of Manitoba’s infrastructure and transportation services. The report focuses on gathering the perspective of government workers who are or were responsible for a variety of tasks such as highway and bridge maintenance, including snow clearing, capital project planning and delivery, road safety and enforcement, including regulation of trucking, maintenance of the provincial vehicle and equipment fleet, operation of water structures and ferries, as well as winter roads. Findings, based on reports from workers, include: \nShort-staffing is jeopardizing public safety and leading to burnout. \nWorkers predicting a reduction in quality of service and assets from the changes. \nWorkers expecting higher costs for taxpayers and reduced value for money. \nCivil service expertise is being ignored, with workers shut out of the process. These negative results regarding service quality and public safety are consistent with earlier studies, with Manitoba ignoring the evidence. The report concludes that the destruction of internal capacity built up over decades will be costly and challenging to undo, and that Manitobans, along with public sector workers, are already paying the price.
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 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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".