MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379623443 · doi:10.1353/iur.2011.0026

Editorial: Global Framework Agreements

2011· editorial· en· W4379623443 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Union Rights · 2011
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicOutsourcing and Supply Chain Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNegotiationContext (archaeology)Political scienceSociologyManagementLawEconomicsHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

lUR □ EDITORIAL Editorial: Global Framework Agreements FlorAgreements a selection ourfocus of (GFAs): this articles month, their on IUR Global implementation, brings Framework together a selection ofarticles on GlobalFramework Agreements (GFAs): theirimplementation, design, development andpotential. Theseinclude somecase studies, witharticles from representativesoffourdifferent globalunionfederations ICEM ,UNI,BWIand PSI - introducing us to key agreements, howthey werenegotiated andimportant lessonsforthefuture. Alongside theseexperiences , we include several contributions that providea broader analysis ofGFAs, their potential and limitations andhowthey articulate withindustrial relations andquestions ofCSR. We beginwithan article byICEM'sDick Blin that provides anoverview ofGFAs, their evolution and someexamplesofICEM'sworkinthisarea. The author makesa case forGFAstobe seen as a starting pointforan ongoing activerelationship between companies andunions, andnotas anend in themselves. A detailedcase studyoftheGFA betweenUNIGlobalUnion,theGMBandG4Sis providedby Christy Hoffman, DeputyGeneral Secretary ofUNIGlobalUnion. Hoffman charts the evolution ofthecampaign overseveral yearsand across four continents, andhighlights, among other impacts oftheagreement, theimportant outcomes ithadfor organising workers. Jim Baker, CoordinatoroftheCouncilofGlobalUnions ,offers an excellent analysisofGFAsin thecontext ofthe RuggieProcessand CSR(thefocusofan earlier edition ofIUR,17.2).Bakerexplores theimplications ofGFAsinterms ofindustrial relations, nationallawandtheir potential asthey develop toinclude languagespecifying compliance bysubcontracted firms and a preference for'secure'employment over'precarious' contracts, andalsotouches upon theimportant roletheyplayinorganising strategies .ICTURVice-President KeithEwingpicksup onthequestion ofthelegalstatus ofGFAs, taking theUK and US intoconsideration and exploring questions around theenforceability ofagreements inthenational context. Dimitris Stevis andMichael Fichter introduce further interpretations on these questions, focusing onthestrategic roleGFAs could havenotjustinregulating capital, butalsoinshapingglobalunionism andglobalsocialdialogue. An interesting case studyofPSI's relationship and involvement inGFAsispresented byJ.Buxbaum, PSI's PublicAdministration and MNECo-ordinator .The author provides an accountofthechallenges encountered bypublic sector unions inmovingfrom a stance ofresistance against privatisation, to negotiation withprivate enterprises providing what were once public services.Finally,Bob Ramsay offers an accountoftheBWI'sagreement with IKEAandthechallenges facedbytheunions toensurecompliance. Thescope ofthisedition isnotlimited toGFAs alone,however, andwearevery pleasedtoinclude articles on otherimportant recent developments forinternational unionrights. Canadianlabour lawyer VeemaVerma givesherassessment ofthe Ontario v Fraser decisioninCanadaanditsimplications for thecollective bargaining rights ofagricultural workers. DavidBaconwrites aboutrecent proposals for labourlawreform inMexico, with a vividaccountofhowunionsandother organisationsare responding to thechallenges facedby thestate's anti-labour legislation. Finally, weinclude a short piecebythePakistan Workers' Federation thatalertsus to changesto labourlegislation in Pakistan andthethreat tofreedom ofassociation. Finally, IURis grateful fortheeditorial collaboration ofDickBlin, ICEM's HeadofCommunications andCampaigns, whoassisted intheplanning and commissioning ofthisedition.IUR extendsits thanks alsotoallthecontributors for sharing their expertise withourreaders. Acting Editor Elizabeth Molinari INTERNATIONAL union rights Page 2Volume 18Issue 2201 1 Next issue of IUR Articles between 850and1,900words should besentbyemail (mail@ictur.org) andaccompanied bya photograph andshort biographical note oftheauthor. Photographs illustrating thetheme ofarticles arealways welcome. Allitems must bewith usby30August 2011 if they are tobeconsidered for publication inthenext issueofIUR. Subscribe toAW; tosubscribe, complete theboxbelow. I/we would like tosubscribe toInternational Union Rights andenclose£20/US$30/€25. Name/Organisation Address PostCode Four issues£20/US$30/€25. Cheques should bemadepayable to"IUR" andsentto:ICTUR, 177Abbeville Road, London SW49RL, UK ...

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.135
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.003

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.233 · 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