MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Cross‐constituency Organizing in Canadian Unions

2008· article· en· W2000967353 on OpenAlexaffabout
Linda Briskin

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Industrial Relations · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLabor Movements and Unions
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInstitutionalisationIntersectionalityEquity (law)PoliticsPublic administrationAutonomyPolitical scienceSociologyPublic relationsPolitical economyGender studiesLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article explores cross‐constituency organizing inside three Canadian unions that involves dual, parallel and integrated structures. It assesses these approaches with reference to the conceptual frame of intersectional political practice. In particular, this study highlights the institutionalization of intersectionality through constitutional, organizational and representational intersectionality. The paradigm of autonomy and integration is used to identify effective mechanisms for cross‐constituency vehicles. Cross‐constituency organizing is a form of coalition‐building inside unions It is a vehicle for building solidarities across identities and advancing equity organizing in Canadian unions that supports, at one and the same time, union revitalization and the union equity project.

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 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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.510
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations32
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of Industrial RelationsSame topicLabor Movements and UnionsFrench-language works237,207