MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4229459845 · doi:10.1177/00221856221099788

Unbundling workplace conflict: Exploring the relationship between grievances and non-strike industrial actions and the moderating effect of voice mechanisms

2022· article· en· W4229459845 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sung‐Chul Noh, Robert Hebdon

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Industrial Relations · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLabor Movements and Unions
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndustrial actionIndustrial relationsEmployee voiceDispute resolutionMediationConflict resolutionWork (physics)Dispute mechanismPolitical scienceTrade unionAction (physics)UnbundlingPublic relationsBusinessSocial psychologyAlternative dispute resolutionPsychologyLawIndustrial organizationEngineeringInternational trade

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Given that an understanding of the inter-relationships among workplace conflict expressions is necessary for effective dispute resolution, this study explores the moderating roles of various types of voice mechanisms in the relationship between grievances and non-strike industrial actions. Using data from the Statistics Canada's Workplace and Employee Survey, we found evidence that a positive relationship between grievances and non-strike industrial action (e.g. slowdowns, work-to-rule, etc.) is stronger in workplaces with weaker union voice, is weaker in non-union workplaces with more extensive high-involvement work systems, and was not affected by the presence of alternative dispute resolution systems. Our findings provide theoretical insights into the role of voice mechanism in the inter-relationships between individual and collective forms of conflict in both union and non-union environments. The results also have practical implications for dispute resolution in terms of the management of conflict and dispute systems design.

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 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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.351
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.155
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.179 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Industrial RelationsSame topicLabor Movements and UnionsFrench-language works237,207