Bibliographic record
Abstract
Inattention to the gender implications of austerity measures, and coincident cuts in gender equality structures by state, employers and often unions themselves threaten gender equality measures and equality bargaining. These threats are compounded by the reconfiguring of the language of equality which is now re-focused on class inequalities, on the one hand, and an expanded range of equality-seeking groups, on the other. The language of equality no longer adequately captures trends in gender equality. Intersectionality (compound discrimination) is explored as a reference point for bargaining equality. Austerity measures are also reshaping the household-workplace-community nexus, re-invoking outdated and conservative views of women’s place, reconfiguring the positioning of women’s rights, and, to some extent, engineering women’s return to the household. This article argues that unions need to radicalize discourses around the household-workplace-community nexus, and explores gendered social unionism as an alternative progressive frame for equality bargaining. It concludes that bargaining for equality may support not only a revival of innovative collective bargaining but also union revitalization.
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 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 | 0.013 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".