Globalization and the Labour Movement: Challenges and Responses
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Up to a decade ago many labour movement strategists and analysts would probably have thought (though not necessarily said) that they were witnessing the beginning of the end of organized labour as a major political force. ‘There is no alternative’ was not just a triumphalist slogan of the political right but a palpable feeling across the political spectrum. But by the turn of the century the mood began to shift as the labour movement regained some ground after the long night of neo-liberal onslaughts. Maybe we were now at the ‘end of the beginning’ of a new era where the workers and their organisations will begin to impact on the new global order they have helped to create through their labour? That is, anyway, the premise of this presentation. It is not, however, a simple proclamatory vision, but rather seeks to present a realistic appraisal of the challenges of globalisation and possible responses by the labour movement. The challenges are many: from informalization to international migration, from routinization of labour practices to a sustained attempt by capital to make the world’s workers pay for the collapse of the neoliberal globalization model in 2008. It is arguably time for a sober appraisal of where global labour is in terms of a fight-back or perhaps, even in terms of offering an alternative vision for humanity.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it