Climate Change and Canadian Unions: The Dilemma for Labour
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2010, a group of Canadian trade unions, labour academics and environmental groups began a five year funded community-university research project, Work in a Warming World (W3), to develop effective ways for labour to take leadership in the struggle to slow global warming. We stated the problem this way: How can labour broaden and deepen its capacity to protect work and workers from the unique threats posed by climate change, all the while contributing to the struggle to slow global warming within the context of increasingly pessimistic climate science, global economic crisis, a hostile national government and strategic paralysis in the national and international political arena? The authors explore the challenges and dilemmas for labour leadership in relation to environmental responsibility in the current political climate in Canada, drawing on W3 research and the unexpected uses that research can be put to, using the case of the Canadian Union of Postal workers in catalyzing and internationalising activist engagement for climate bargaining.
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 | 0.007 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.069 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.022 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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".