Global union federations on affiliates’ websites: Forces shaping unions’ global organisational identity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Affiliates’ sense of oneness in a Global Union Federation (GUF) is pivotal for that GUF to be able to counter the forces of globalisation. We argue that GUF saliency in affiliates’ identity is the microfoundation of this sense of oneness. We examine this facet of identity by analysing the contents of the websites of 2314 affiliates of four major GUFs. Our three‐step study explores the extent to which and why GUFs’ saliency varies across affiliates. First, we compute a GUF saliency index score for each affiliate based on its website contents. Second, we examine the impact of macro‐institutional characteristics (national employment relations and socioeconomic characteristics) on the GUF saliency score. Finally, focusing on one GUF, Public Service International and drawing on 19 semi‐structured interviews in 16 countries across six world regions, we highlight appeal and relationships, and especially their joint effect, as fundamental forces to explain the variations between affiliates. We conclude by discussing the implications of our findings for GUF debate and policies.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 teacher head, 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".