MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2188193018 · doi:10.25071/1705-1436.41

Time as a Way Of Reconciling Conflict and Cooperation in the Employment Relationship: a View with Special Application to New Employment Forms

2010· article· en· W2188193018 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Anthony M. Gould

Bibliographic record

VenueJust Labour · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEmployment and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkforceTerm (time)IdeologyRelation (database)Context (archaeology)Positive economicsSociologyConflict resolution researchSocial psychologyPolitical sciencePsychologyEconomicsSocial sciencePoliticsConflict resolutionLawComputer scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Explanations of the coexistence of conflict and cooperation in the employment relationship are often vague and-or misleading. Authors have frequently failed to distinguish between institutional bases for cooperation and the ideological orientations of employers and employees. Previous theorizing has typically presented cross-sectional views where the employment relationship is presented outside of its temporal context. Here it is argued that the extent and nature of conflict and cooperation between employers and their workforce should be understood through appreciating that interest alignment changes as an employment relationship moves from a short to a long term. In practice, the institutional basis for conflict mostly exists in the short and long term and cooperation in the long term exclusively. Using survey data obtained from fast food workers, the theoretical and strategic consequences of this view are explored in relation to new employment forms which have a modified concept of a long term.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.443
Threshold uncertainty score0.576

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.326 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJust LabourSame topicEmployment and Welfare StudiesFrench-language works237,207