SITUATED REFLECTIONS ON INTERNATIONAL LABOUR LAW, CAPABILITIES, AND DECENT WORK: THE CASE OF CENTRE MARAÎCHER EUGÈNE GUINOIS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article engages the contemporary transformation of international labour normativity by refocusing debates between civil/political rights and economic/social rights on a contextualized discussion on social inequalities. It traces the persistent labour market inequality experienced by one historically marginalized group, the black community in Canada, though the lens of a particularly problematic recent human rights decision. It first contends that efforts to reconceptualize labour law as fundamentally procedural in nature run the risk of undermining attempts to protect the economic and social rights of those most in need of labour law. It adds that neither are economic and social rights a panacea. Instead it suggests that notions of equality and decent work must play a guiding role in rethinking the indivisibility of rights, to ensure that labour law (national and transnational) fulfil both its protection and worker empowerment mandates.
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 | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.043 | 0.054 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".