MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2922282768 · doi:10.25071/1705-1436.154

Class Action: Building Political Activism Among Union Activists

2004· article· en· W2922282768 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Jason Foster

Bibliographic record

VenueJust Labour · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLabor Movements and Unions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsPolitical actionPolitical sciencePolitical activismClass (philosophy)Direct actionAction (physics)Political mobilizationTrade unionPerceptionLived experiencePolitical economySociologyLawPsychologyEconomicsLabour economics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

New research into the political attitudes and behaviours of union activists challenges traditional beliefs about the prospects for politicizing unionists in Canada. A study of union activists in Alberta finds two significant results. First union activists are more politically active than the average Canadian. This contradicts conventional wisdom about union activists. Second, unions can play a direct and important role in fostering political participation among their activists, a finding that has the potential to extend to the general membership. However, to be effective in mobilizing unionists politically, unions need to approach the project differently than they do at present. It is a project of action, not words, and it must be grounded in the lived experience of union workers. In particular, perceptions of class play a central role in shaping the political decisions of unionists. Relational articulations of class lead to political mobilization, and thus union actions must reflect the lived experience of being working class in Canada.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.121
Threshold uncertainty score0.241

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0120.006
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.312 · 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

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJust LabourSame topicLabor Movements and UnionsFrench-language works237,207