Corporate governance and the role of labour as institutional shareholder and worker representative : towards a strategy framework for participation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study is concerned with the development of a strategy framework for the Canadian Shareholder Association for Research and Education (SHARE) and the Canadian Labour Congress (CLC) on Canadian labour movement participation in corporate governance and business strategy.The paper examines the rationale for labour participation in corporate governance and the problem of shareholder-stakeholder conflict arising from labour's dual role as active shareholder and worker representative.Labour's support for a stakeholder-based governance is premised on the belief that shareholders and stakeholder goals can be made consistent with one another.This study addresses that assumption and argues that the opportunities to align shareholder and stakeholder goals are limited.The paper compares and contrasts the dominant Anglo-American and stakeholder models of corporate governance with respect to shareholder and labour stakeholder participation.It also examines labour's role in both international and domestic corporate governance reform and discusses how these reforms impact both shareholder and labour participation in governance.It argues that while both Anglo-American and European Union labour unions seek a greater role in the governance of the corporation, the structure of governance systems is a function of domestic/regional laws, political customs and differing approaches to industrial organization.Therefore, a strategy framework for the Canadian labour movement should be anchored within the Anglo-American shareholder value model of corporate governance.iiiThe paper discusses the ways in which labour seeks to gain voice, or influence, within the corporation in order to affect the direction of business strategy and decisionmaking.The study considers how labour participation impacts upon firm performance, the creation of shareholder wealth and the achievement of stakeholder goals.It probes labour's attempt to gain voice through its support for corporate social responsibility, socially responsible investment funds and direct participation on the board.The paper finds that the evidence supporting a positive relationship between labour participation and improved firm performance is ambiguous and, at times, contradictory.Nevertheless, it concludes that labour participation can, in certain circumstances, create mutual benefits for shareholders and stakeholders.However, the opportunities to do so are limited and the potential for shareholder-stakeholder conflict is great.
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 | 0.018 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.054 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".