The Social Foundations of Structural Power: Strategic Position, Worker Unity and External Alliances in the Making of the Chilean Dockworker Movement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines the associational and societal foundations of structural power. A case studyof the ten-year-long history of the Unión Portuaria de Chile is analysed with a focus on a criticaljuncture in 2012–2014. The Chilean dockworker case is an emblematic example of trade unionmovement revitalisation via strikes of strategically positioned workers. Yet ethnographic researchwith the organisation suggests that the role it has come to play in the country was only possible asa result of intensive long-term organising efforts to develop a high degree of internal unity atmultiple scales, as well as sustained alliances with external actors. As a result, the authors argue thatthe most economistic accounts of worker power and trade union movement revitalisation areanalytically insufficient and would benefit from greater attention to associational and societaldimensions of power, even among the most strategically positioned workers.KEYWORDS: trade union revitalisation; structural power; associational power; strategic position; dockworkers
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.027 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".