MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2999168826

Walmart, John Tate, and their anti-union America

2012· article· fr· W2999168826 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nelson Lichtenstein

Bibliographic record

VenuePolitique américaine · 2012
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLabor Movements and Unions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLoyaltyTrade unionMetropolitan areaIdeologyPublic administrationPolitical scienceLawEconomicsLabour economicsPoliticsHistory
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hostility to trade unionism infused the corporate culture of Walmart, whose revolutionary transformation of the retail industry in the United States made it, for a time, the nation’s largest and one of its most dynamic companies. A product of the rural South, Walmart required an ideologically sophisticated strategy to stymie union organizing when it began to open its stores in metropolitan America. Employment lawyer John Tate proved his worth in this regard. The anti-union strategist’s ideas had been shaped by his clients, some of the most intransigent anti-union employers of the textile South and the small-town Midwest. In the early 1970s, Tate codified for Walmart and other service-sector firms the key elements of a successful union avoidance strategy: construct a business ethos that mimics the sense of community found in monoracial, small-town America; deploy a pension scheme that rewards loyalty for a core of longtime employees; and use the “free speech” rights of employers to paint unions as corrupt and self-serving institutions incapable of improving the wages or working conditions of employees. He proved to be successful: there are no unions at any of the 5,000 plus Walmart stores in the United States and 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.086

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0140.005
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.269 · 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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolitique américaineSame topicLabor Movements and UnionsFrench-language works237,207