MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2415511583 · doi:10.15173/glj.v7i2.2501

On Standing's A Precariat Charter: Confronting the Precaritisation of Labour in Brazil and Portugal

2016· article· en· W2415511583 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ruy Braga

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Labour Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical Economy and Marxism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCharterShadow (psychology)Working classTrade unionSociologyIdentity (music)Political sciencePolitical economyGender studiesEconomicsLabour economicsLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Guy Standing’s new book, A Precariat Charter, does not allow us to forget that we live under the shadow of the “precariat” – a group of people who are deprived of any work-related guarantees, subjected to uncertain income, and without a collective identity that is rooted in a labour world. Among the many merits of his most recent book, Standing reports the damaging effects suffered by a substantial section of the European trade union movement. At the root of this decline is labour’s submission to a socially irresponsible and environmentally unsustainable model of development. First, I will examine the book from a Southern perspective. The data and examples that Standing provide pertain largely to changing working-class relations in advanced capitalist countries. In contrast, I will focus my attention on the metamorphosis of the working class in the Global South – particularly Brazil – during the post-Fordist era in order to raise questions about the class character of the precariat.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.010
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations18
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Labour JournalSame topicPolitical Economy and MarxismFrench-language works237,207