Notice bibliographique
Résumé
FOCUS □ COLLECTIVE BARGAINING The right to bargain in a non-majority situation Workers majority pursue have their unions a interests human and right if through they to form choose them nonto to majority unions and throughthemto pursuetheirinterests iftheychoose to do that. Thisis notincompatible withan industrial relations system that makesuse ofmajoritarian exclusivity. In factthe ILO's Committee on Freedomof Association ('CFA') whose jurisprudenceon workers' humanrights is cherished by trade unionistsaround the globe, recognises majoritarian exclusivity as an option. Unfortunately, ChiefJusticeWinklerin the Fraserdecisionreferred to by Clancyordered Ontario tointroduce legislation that would"eradicate the possibility of irreconcilable demands from multiple employee representatives, purportingtosimultaneously represent employees inthe sameworkplace withsimilar job functions." My concernis thatthe Winklerdecision,if it is allowedtostandbytheCanadianSupreme Court, wouldcreatea legalstandard requiring governments tosuppress therights ofworkers toorganise in anyformat otherthanmajoritarian exclusivity . ThatwouldplaceCanadasquarely against theinternational humanrights consensusregardingworker rights. In itsmostrecent DigestofDecisions,theCFA hadthistosayaboutmajoritarianism: Withregardtoa provision thatstipulates thata collective agreement maybe negotiated onlybya tradeunionrepresenting an absolutemajority oftheworkers in an enterprise , theCommittee considered thatthe provisiondoesnotpromote collective bargaining in thesenseofArticle 4 ofConvention No. 9821 and itinvited thegovernment totake steps, in consultation withtheorganisations concerned, toamendthe provision in questionso as toensurethatwhenno trade unionrepresents theabsolutemajority ofthe workers, theorganisations mayjointlynegotiatea collective agreement applicabletothe enterprise orthebargainingunit,orat least concludea collective agreement on behalf of their members'. (FreedomofAssociation: Digestofdecisions and principles oftheFreedom ofAssociation Committee oftheGoverning BodyoftheILO, Fifth (revised)edition (Geneva:International LabourOffice, 2006),atpara.978.) As thingsnow standin Canada, the statutory rights of unionswithmajority supportare clear whiletheconstitutional rights of'mostrepresentative 'and 'members only'unionsare currently beingworkedoutbythecourts. Certified exclusive agentunionshave a right to bargainand their employers have a dutyto bargainin good faith withthem. Shouldnegotiations fail, certified exclusiveagentunionshave a right to strike or, forcertain publicsectorunions, a right tosubmit thedisputeto independent binding arbitration. Unionswithless thanmajority support havea right to existbut theirrights to bargainand to strike are unsettled. Should the Canadian SupremeCourtcontinue to relyon international lawtointerpret theFreedom ofAssociation clause intheCharter ofRights and Freedoms, therights of workersto bargainand to strikein a nonmajority format willbe established and governmentswillfulfil their responsibility to effectively protect thoserights. Shouldthat happenI suspect thatlikeJudyAtkinsand David Cohen,many tradeunionists willwelcomethat development. RoyAdams responds to James Clancy's concerns around his supportfor minority union rights PROFESSOR ROY ADAMS is an author, columnist, human rights activist and academic based in Hamilton Page 15Volume 17Issue 42010 INTERNATIONAL union rights Thebenefits ofcertification InCanada, certification asanexclusive agent provides trade unionists with strong legal supports that arethe envy of their brothers andsisters inmany nations. Itmakes good and obvious sense for James Clancy and other Canadian labour leaders tofully support the continued availability of those supports. ...
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».