Transnational trade union strategies in the context of market integration: The case of company union clubs in the Nordic finance sector
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The creation of a common European market for financial services has significantly altered the strategic edifice for banks, as well as for the trade unions representing their employees. In the Nordic countries, where regulation of the labour market has long relied on multiemployer bargaining and strong sector-level actors, this has led to a strategic realignment. Faced with mergers and acquisitions, the potential for delocalization and an increasing amount of directly applicable EU-regulation in the sector, Nordic finance trade unions have supported the creation of company-level trade union alliances within MNCs, while still building upon resources and repertoires stemming from Nordic ‘comparative institutional advantage’. Our ‘extended case study’ of three such alliances in the finance sector, called ‘Nordic company clubs’, concludes that, while trade unions there still benefit from strong, typically Nordic institutional and associational power resources, important actor-centred variables and capabilities such as narratives, scaling, resourcefulness and institutional experimentation complement and strengthen our understanding of trade union strategies and institutional change in the context of market integration.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.026 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".