Bibliographic record
Abstract
The choice of union certification procedure is a frequent subject of legislative change in Canada, and in 1995 the long-standing card system of certification in Ontario was replaced with a system of mandatory representation votes for certification. This study investigates the effect of this legislative change on the outcome of certification applications and the results of representation elections. Analysing 3567 non-construction certification application cases filed with the Ontario Labour Relations Board between 1993 and 1998, this research also examines whether the magnitude and significance of factors related to union certification differ under the two certification systems. The results demonstrate that, overall, certification applications under the vote system were significantly less likely to be granted than to result in another outcome. The results also suggest that this negative effect on the probability of certification is greater for private sector certification applications than for applications arising from the public sector. Further, multinomial logit regression analysis suggests that the increased probability, under the vote system, that certification applications will not succeed is due to the significantly increased probability that these applications will be withdrawn rather than being dismissed, compared to applications filed under the card system. The results also indicate that certification elections held under the vote system are statistically significantly more likely to result in a union majority and a greater proportion of votes cast in favour of certification, compared to elections held under the card system. This was found to be the case for both public sector and private sector applications. Finally, this study suggests that different factors are significantly associated with certification application outcomes and with the results of union representation elections, between public sector applications and private sector applicants, and between applications filed under the card system and those filed under the vote system of certification.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".