Bibliographic record
Abstract
In a research paper, entitled ‘Labour Law After Labour’ published in 2011 Harry Arthurs developed a theory that labour law has gone through two phases and is now in a state of crisis. In his brief overview of the history of labour law he suggests that in the early years of the industrial revolution it was designed to protect the most vulnerable workers against physical and moral brutality but through much of the 20th century was largely focussed on collective issues. He then suggests that the type of ‘labourers’ for whom labour law was designed no longer exist and makes proposals for the way forward. This article considers whether this analysis, based on Canadian experience, is reflected in the development of occupational health and safety law in Britain. It reviews the past in two sections ‘Employee Protection’ and ‘Social Partnership’, then, after overviewing ‘Social Change’ in the last quarter century, it speculates as to the future having regard to the ideas Arthurs advances in his paper
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 | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.059 | 0.010 |
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".