Bibliographic record
Abstract
Susan J. T. Johnson has discovered an error in the abstract of her July 2010 article, “First Contract Arbitration: Effects on Work Stoppages.” The corrected abstract appears here (modifiedwordsareinboldtype) and the entire corrected article is available at http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/ilrreview/ . Newly certified unions often experience difficulty negotiating a first agreement. To remedy this, the Employee Free Choice Act proposes that the National Labor Relations Act provide for first contract arbitration (FCA). Using a panel of Canadian jurisdictions that have introduced FCA legislation at different times over several decades, the author addresses three questions: (1) How does this legislation affect the incidence of first agreement work stoppages? (2) Does FCA encourage or discourage collective bargaining in the negotiation of first agreements? (3) Does FCA influence the duration of first agreement work stoppages? First, the author finds that the presence of FCA legislation reduces first agreement work stoppage incidence by at least 50 percent. Descriptive measures reveal that FCA is accessed infrequently; it is even rarer for a first contract (in whole or in part) to be imposed. Second, the fact that FCA is associated with a substantial reduction in work stoppage incidence, when combined with evidence that it is rarely used, suggests that FCA encourages collective bargaining. Finally, FCA has no statistically significant impact on the duration of first agreement work stoppages. Editor
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".