MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1157984006 · doi:10.71781/24255

L’implication du syndicat dans la gestion de la prestation des services municipaux : une comparaison Québec-Écosse

2014· dissertation· fr· W1157984006 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Geneviève Coderre-LaPalme

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2014
Typedissertation
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pour devenir plus flexible, le secteur public a ouvert la voie à de nouveaux principes inspirés de la gestion propre aux firmes, soit la marchandisation des services (Fairbrother et Poynter, 2001). Notre recherche souhaite mieux comprendre les facteurs qui peuvent influencer l’implication du syndicat lorsque la marchandisation est introduite dans la gestion de la prestation des services municipaux. Pour se faire, nous avons choisi de comparer des cas des municipalités dans deux pays, la Ville de Québec et Edinburgh en Écosse, afin de nous aider à comprendre davantage les interactions entre les influences nationales et locales. Nous proposons que les ressources de pouvoir du syndicat local et la stratégie patronale influencent l’implication du syndicat dans la gestion de la prestation des services municipaux, peu importe le contexte national. Les résultats de la recherche nous indiquent que les ressources de pouvoir et la stratégie patronale influencent directement l’implication syndicale. Alors que les ressources de pouvoir donnent un rapport de force au syndicat face à l’employeur, la stratégie patronale peut encourager ou freiner l'implication syndicale. Nos résultats ont aussi soulevé certaines différences entre les contextes nationaux de l’Écosse et du Québec affectant l’implication syndicale: les législations de « Best Value » au Royaume-Uni et celles encadrant les conventions collectives et relations de travail au Québec. Ainsi, des recherches futures sont nécessaires pour mettre à l’épreuve les modèles nationaux couramment utilisés en relations industrielles pour contribuer à la création d’une nouvelle théorie comparative.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.157

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.341 · 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MIND→Same topicSocial Sciences and Governance→French-language works237,207→