Bibliographic record
Abstract
Significant attention has been given to social unionism in Canada as an alternative form of unionism which can combine successful bargaining with community‐based action for broader, even radical, social change. Supposedly representing an engaged, socially rooted activist union movement which might revitalize the labor movement as a whole, social unionism is said to provide the basis to return unions to the center of social change and progressive political action in Canada. There is even expectation that social unions will play a leading role in the foundation of a militant left resistance. Unfortunately, the reality is that social unionism has not been anything, even approximating a militant force or change or community defense during the decades‐long neoliberal period of capitalist development. In certain unfortunate instances, social union leaders have chosen to condemn the community groups that have put up a militant resistance, even going so far as to discipline their own rank‐and‐file members who have organized flying squads to support working‐class community struggles more broadly. The fundamental limits of social unionism in Canada are related to three main problems: a hierarchical and conciliatory bargaining model for action; electoralism and commitment to social democratic pressure politics through boycotts, symbolic protests, and political lobbying, especially through the New Democratic Party, and more recently even the procapitalist Liberal Party; and a charitable approach to community groups coupled with a paternalistic relation with social movements.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".