MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1562556853 · doi:10.1108/13639510910937120

Continuous training as a subject of negotiations in public and private policing

2009· article· en· W1562556853 on OpenAlex
Marc Alain, Chantal Crête

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenuePolicing An International Journal · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolicing Practices and Perceptions
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNegotiationSubject (documents)Private securityTraining (meteorology)Public relationsPublic securityPublic administrationBusinessPolitical scienceLawComputer scienceLibrary science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Purpose – This paper aims to explore and document how the question of continuous training/education is presently being dealt with in the area of public services and private security providers and trying to assess best and wrong practices of discussions and negotiations regarding this same question. Design/methodology/approach – This research relied on content analysis of all 65 working agreements that have been negotiated in both the police and the private sectors in the province of Quebec within the last few years. In‐depth interviews were also conducted among 91 representatives of both employers and employees in order to explore more deeply the different contexts into which negotiations and discussions took place about the question of continuous training/education provisions. Findings – What clearly emerged from interviews conducted with police organization representatives, employees and employers alike, is that a confrontational attitude rather than a more collaborative standpoint is the norm in negotiations. There is, however, one element on which both parties agree – the idea that training must be of immediate relevance to the job. In this respect, police employers and employees are often united in their resistance to new and higher training standards imposed by governments and public sector professionals, who are often suspected of not knowing much about the "reality" of police work. Field interviews revealed that negotiations generally favor employers, while employee unions, when present, do their best to defend previously gained conditions, particularly those pertaining to seniority in determining who is eligible for training. Practical implications – Having documented the limitations imposed by the confrontational approach that is still being used in negotiations and discussions on the object of continuous training/education in the area of both public and private security sectors, we propose, as a final remark, that both employers and employees should envision the possibility of exploring new discussion and negotiation modalities which rest on a more consensual approach. This could help to give training and education its true value in this sector in an ever changing and globalizing economy. Originality/value – This exploratory study is the first one being conducted in Quebec's security sector about a question that is at the heart of the competition capacity in a fast changing economy; lessons learned through this research should help this sector to better its negotiation practices regarding training/education as well as other crucial elements of its social mandate.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.632
Threshold uncertainty score0.969

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.331 · 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