Wall-to-wall worker organizing in the university: the Coalition of Rutgers Unions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Workers at Rutgers University, the state university of New Jersey, US, have formed the Coalition of Rutgers Unions (CRU). This workplace-based union coalition engages in wall-to-wall organizing, which seeks to include every Rutgers worker, irrespective of occupation, status, or union affiliation. This form of coalition creatively retains the benefits of certified unions while navigating the sectionalism encouraged by American labour laws. CRU’s recovery of traditional organizing principles amid neoliberal conditions is a new industrial unionism. It is thereby an example of the union renewal affirmed by proponents of social movement unionism. CRU is also an organizational model for workers in large, complex, heterogeneous workplaces with multiple existing unions. This article draws from qualitative interviews with CRU activists to discuss its participants, structure, activities, and its role in a victorious 2023 strike at Rutgers University.
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 | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.033 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| 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".