MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3107764365 · doi:10.1177/0950017020954746

A Feminist Political Economy Critique of ‘the Militant Minority’

2020· article· en· W3107764365 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueWork Employment and Society · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLabor Movements and Unions
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMilitantScholarshipCollective bargainingLabour lawPoliticsPolitical economyTrade unionPower (physics)Political scienceSociologyEconomicsLawLabour economics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent growth in strike activity in the United States and Canada has motivated a broad scholarship on union organizing and labour movement revitalization. However, researchers and activists particularly concerned with the role of member mobilization in union renewal have downplayed institutional changes to labour law and regulation which might address the decline of union density and worker power. This commentary offers a feminist political economy critique of recent works on ‘the rank and file strategy’ and ‘the militant minority’ by arguing that greater focus should be devoted to how North American labour law and decentralized bargaining continue to impede union renewal. The article briefly traces the gendered legacy of ‘Wagnerism’ and the latter’s growing incompatibility with contemporary workplaces and forms of employment. It then makes the case for thinking through how organizing could also push for labour law reform, particularly towards broader-based, sectoral forms of collective bargaining and labour market regulation.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.911
Threshold uncertainty score0.298

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.264 · 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