MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1800288480

An Overview of Quebec Back-to-Work Acts Enacted between 1964 and 2001

2002· article· en· W1800288480 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
François Delorme, Gaston Nadeau

Notice bibliographique

RevueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2002
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueLabor Movements and Unions
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésLegislatureCollective bargainingIntervention (counseling)Work (physics)LegislationIndustrial relationsPolitical scienceService (business)BusinessPublic relationsLaw and economicsPublic administrationSociologyLawEngineeringPsychologyMarketing
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

The authors present a detailed account of each of the special acts that ordered people back to work, most of the time, employees according to the definition of the Labour Code (R.S.Q., c. C-27), or that ordered such employees to perform their usual tasks. Between 1964 and 2001, 34 such exceptional acts were adopted. The paper does not take into consideration legislative amendments enacted over the years to modify in a general manner the rules governing collective bargaining relations in the public and para-public sectors as well as within public services.In spite of the quite significant differences between the collective bargaining systems in place in Canada, especially as concerns the right to strike and the concept of essential services, such statistical data is evidence of a tendency to intervene more in the area of industrial relations in comparison with what occurs in other Canadian jurisdictions. A more detailed analysis of the rules in force elsewhere, especially in Ontario (24 special acts) and at the federal level (27 special acts) would explain these differences.As far as the areas affected by this type of legislative intervention are concerned, the data collected indicate that such areas of activity are especially those in which the State is often involved either as an employer or as a financial backer, even though other reasons for this exceptional type of intervention must not be neglected: the necessity of ending violence and the obvious intolerance of citizens deprived of a service that is not deemed essential according to the other legal criteria, are examples of this.From another perspective, the duration of the conflict is far from being in itself a decisive basis for intervention. From this point of view, we were able to establish that for public transit within the Montreal Urban Community, conflicts varying in duration between 2 and 22 days preceded the government’s decision to enact such special legislation. It was also possible to note such a time variation in the area of electrical services supply with strikes lasting from 10 to 22 days.It’s also useful to mention that if the use of such exceptional acts has diminished since the creation of the Conseil des services essentiels in 1982 (20 such acts were adopted between 1964 and 1982 as compared to 14 since 1983), we would be wrong to attribute the reduction in such periodic interventions to the sole existence of the Conseil. Other factors, such as the reduction of the number of work stoppages since 1983 in the public sector as well as the permanent measures provided for by the Act to ensure that essential services are maintained in the health and social services sector (R.S.Q., c. M-1.1) may also account for this phenomenon.Without giving any consideration to the social legitimacy of legislative intervention to terminate a labour conflict - real or apprehended - it must be admitted that the use of a special act in such situations is a sign of the failure of the free collective bargaining process, and that its repeated use runs the risk of undermining the authority of such laws. This instrument of social control involves a problem of public policy in the field of labour relations : how to conciliate certain international commitments, for example, ones made within the framework of the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work adopted in 1998, with the use of this unusual manner of conflict settlement, even when essential services are provided to the population?

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,892
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,785

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,005
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,001
Bibliométrie0,0140,020
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0070,001
Communication savante0,0030,001
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0120,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,046
Tête enseignante GPT0,322
Écart entre enseignants0,276 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2002
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueSSRN Electronic Journal→Même sujetLabor Movements and Unions→Travaux en français237 207→