Organized Labour and the Making of Public Policy in Twentieth-Century New Brunswick
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The long view of New Brunswick history over the past century shows us glimpses of a vigorous tradition of social reform, much of it driven by the activism of organized labour. The New Brunswick Federation of Labour, established in 1913, was a major force in this history. The Federation played a leading part in the achievement of labour standards such as workmen’s compensation (1918) and subsequently in the enactment of laws to protect the right to union membership and collective bargaining. In pursuing these and other objectives, the province’s labour organizations have contributed to traditions of social democracy that are too easily overlooked in contemporary debates in New Brunswick. This essay sheds light on that important history, and why organized labour still matters in the province. Resume La perspective que nous offre un recul et une vision d'ensemble sur l'histoire du Nouveau-Brunswick au cours du siecle dernier nous permet d'entrevoir une forte tradition de reforme sociale en grande partie animee par l’activisme du mouvement syndical. La Federation des travailleurs et des travailleuses du Nouveau-Brunswick, etablie en 1913, occupe une place importante dans cette histoire. De fait, la Federation a joue un role de premier plan dans l’elaboration des normes du travail, telle que l’indemnisation pour accident du travail (1918) et, par la suite, de l’ediction de lois visant a proteger le droit a l’affiliation syndicale et a la negociation collective. En cherchant a atteindre ces objectifs ainsi que d’autres, les affiliations syndicales de la province ont contribue aux traditions de la democratie sociale, traditions trop facilement oubliees dans les debats d’aujourd’hui au Nouveau-Brunswick. Cet article jette un eclairage sur cette histoire marquante et des raisons pour lesquelles le mouvement des travailleurs importent toujours dans la province.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".