MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2128663099 · doi:10.1111/1467-6486.00369

Understanding Labour Turnover in a Labour Intensive Industry: Evidence from the British Clothing Industry*

2003· article· en· W2128663099 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Management Studies · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLabor Movements and Unions
Canadian institutionsEmissions Reduction Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRestructuringClothing industryClothingLabour economicsProduction (economics)BusinessWageTurnoverEconomicsLow wageManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The clothing industry is both a quintessential global industry and one that is inescapably labour intensive. Despite more and more production shifting to low wage economies in the past decades, there remains a significant amount of clothing manufacturing in high wage economies. This study examines the drivers of change that are forcing restructuring in one such country and the outcomes of such changes for the organization of production. Because the changes have involved treating workers as a resource to be developed rather than a cost, preventing labour turnover has become a crucial component of this strategic repositioning. In presenting the results of a national survey of UK clothing manufacturers we find that high labour turnover rates persist. We discuss the historical background to this phenomenon and current trends, and then explore the principal variables that might explain these trends. We conclude with a discussion of the outcomes facing firms in this industry and comment on why managers resist comprehensive changes in organizational routines and the effort bargain.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.446
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.164
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.192 · 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