MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2060594329 · doi:10.1111/0008-4085.00080

Union suppression and certification success

2001· article· en· W2060594329 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Chris Riddell

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d économique · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLabor Movements and Unions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceVotingCertificationHumanitiesArtLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the past decade a number of provinces have abandoned the long‐standing Canadian tradition of automatic certification of unions based on card‐signing and instead opted for mandatory representation voting. This trend, however, has developed with little understanding of the effectiveness of management opposition within a voting regime. In this paper the impact of union suppression on union organizing success within the voting regime of British Columbia is examined. We find that union suppression tactics were highly effective with estimates rivalling those found in the United States. Moreover, results from instrumental variable models suggest that OLS estimates may seriously underestimate the true impact of suppression. Effort de suppression du syndicat et succès dans le processus de certification. Au cours de la dernière décennie, un certain nombre de provinces canadiennes ont abandonné la pratique traditionnelle de certification automatique des syndicats sur la base des signatures de cartes d'adhésion au syndicat, et ont choisi de réclamer un scrutin pour déterminer le support des membres potentiels. On ne comprend pas bien l'efficacité de l'action d'opposition des patrons au syndicat dans ce régime de scrutin. Ce mémoire examine l'impact des efforts de suppression des syndicats sur les succès des syndicats dans leurs efforts d'organisation dans le cadre du régime de scrutin en Colombie Britannique. On découvre que ces tactiques ont été très efficaces, tout autant qu'aux Etats‐Unis. De plus, les résultats obtenus à l'aide de modèles de variables instrumentales montrent que ceux qu'on obtient à l'aide de la méthode des moindres carrés ordinaires peuvent sous‐évaluer l'impact des tactiques de suppression de manière significative.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.830
Threshold uncertainty score0.525

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.117
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.106 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations36
Published2001
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d économiqueSame topicLabor Movements and UnionsFrench-language works237,207