WageIndicator Collective Agreements Database Dataset with Full Texts and Selected Clauses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since 2012, the WageIndicator Foundation has maintained a Collective Agreements Database, where the texts of 1600 collective agreements (CBAs) from 61 countries and in 27 languages have been uploaded, coded and annotated. This database is a unique example at global level: collective agreements are documents containing conditions of employment that result from negotiations between independent unions and employers, and their content is often surrounded by an atmosphere of secrecy. Under the SSHOC project and with the support of the CLARIN Research Infrastructure, the agreements have been manually and automatically annotated on several levels: for each agreement, the team answers a series of questions and selects the appropriate piece of text (clause) for each. One of the results of the collective agreements' annotation process is the dataset which is available here and includes all the clauses selected for each variable (WageIndicator_CBADatabase_Selected_Clauses). The full collective agreements' texts are stored in another dataset, also available here (WageIndicator_CBADatabase_Full_Texts_211019). A codebook is also included (210125-wageindicator-cba-codebook.pdf).
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.055 | 0.091 |
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".