MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2768027516

Memory, Mobilization, and the Social Bases of Intra-Union Division: Some Lessons from the 2009-2010 USW Local 6500 Strike in Sudbury, Ontario

2017· article· en· W2768027516 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Adam D.K. King

Bibliographic record

VenueE-Journal of international and comparative labour studies · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLabor Movements and Unions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMobilizationOriginalityNarrativeWork (physics)Value (mathematics)Political scienceSociologyLawEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Purpose. This paper engages with workers’ accounts of a strike in Northern Ontario, Canada to consider the processes through which intra-union tensions develop and to examine their implications for member involvement and mobilization. Design/methodology/approach. The paper draws on interviews with currently employed and retired United Steelworkers miners in Sudbury, Ontario, and analyses their memories and narratives of the 2009-2010 strike at Vale (Inco). Findings. I argue that differences in the accounts of the strike between older and younger workers result from their historically specific class positions, as well as the uneven nature of contract concessions. I suggest that generational tension could be an impediment to future broad-based member engagement. Research limitations/implications. The research contributes to work on union renewal and social unionism. Originality/value. The paper provides insight into the dynamics of member mobilisation and contract concessions, and asks us to consider the social bases of intra-union division. Keywords: Mining, Union renewal, Member mobilisation, Memory, Generational tension

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.098
Threshold uncertainty score0.248

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0180.012
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations5
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueE-Journal of international and comparative labour studiesSame topicLabor Movements and UnionsFrench-language works237,207