MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391930757 · doi:10.1080/0023656x.2024.2319286

Worker ownership in North America: the cases of Weirton Steel (West Virginia) and Algoma Steel (Ontario)

2024· article· en· W4391930757 on OpenAlexaffabout
Gregory S. Wilson, Steven High

Bibliographic record

VenueLabor History · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLabor Movements and Unions
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWest virginiaArchaeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the last quarter of the 20th century, worker ownership emerged as a popular option for North American workers trying to save their mills or factories from closing. Most of these efforts eventually failed, sometimes at great financial cost to workers who gambled away their savings or pensions. Yet a few worker buyouts succeeded over the long term. This article examines two of these success stories, one on either side of the Canada-United States border, while situating them within the wider history of worker ownership in North America. When the United Steelworkers of America engineered the worker buyout of Algoma Steel in 1992, Canada’s third largest integrated steel-maker, it became the largest worker owned industry in North America. Before that, Weirton Steel had been the largest since 1984 when independent steelworkers there bought the mill from National Steel. If worker ownership offered short-termed relief to workers facing plant closings, its longer-term viability is highly suspect. Many worker-owned firms shut during the next down-turn. Both Weirton and Algoma eventually reverted back to corporate ownership, albeit this time inside Indian-based multinationals, but worker ownership saved the two steel mills and helped modernize them.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.228

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0240.007
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLabor HistorySame topicLabor Movements and UnionsFrench-language works237,207