Brave New Words: Labour, The Courts and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Health Services and Support – Facilities Subsector BargainingAssociation v. British Columbia, [2007] 2 S.C.R.391, the Supreme Court of Canada overturned precedent andconcluded “that the grounds advanced in the earlier decisions forthe exclusion of collective bargaining from the Charter’s protectionof freedom of association do not withstand principled scrutinyand should be rejected” (at para. 22). The author exploresthe Supreme Court of Canada’s change of heart and what thischange implies, not only for constitutional doctrine, but also forwhat the Court understands about the governance of the post-Fordist world of work. She situates the Court’s reasoning in afew key cases dealing with labour’s distinctive rights – to bargaincollectively and to strike – in the social context that both shapesthe legal discourse about labour rights and influences organizedlabour’s power. She considers the paradox of the Supreme Court’sembrace of Fordist labour rights in a post-Fordist economy, andsuggests a modest, though important, role that the Court couldplay in fostering social justice in the brave new world of work.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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".