MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1988533009 · doi:10.1177/102425890601200204

The <i>Vaxholm</i> case from a Swedish and European perspective

2006· article· en· W1988533009 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueTransfer European Review of Labour and Research · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEuropean and International Law Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEuropean unionLatvianDirectiveContext (archaeology)Common lawLawLabour lawEuropean court of justiceEuropean Union lawWork (physics)Interpretation (philosophy)Economic JusticeAction (physics)Political scienceAction planBusinessEngineeringManagementGeographyEconomicsInternational trade

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Vaxholm (or Laval) case concerns an industrial action undertaken on a building site in Vaxholm, a town not far from Stockholm, Sweden. The work was performed by Latvian workers employed by a Latvian company. In order to put pressure on the company to conclude a collective agreement the Swedish Building workers' union initiated industrial action, including a ban on all building and installation. This blockade was supported by the Electricians' Union through a secondary action. Both the primary and the secondary actions were lawful under Swedish law. The case raises the question whether the industrial action or Swedish law is contrary to Community law on the free movement of services or the Posted Workers Directive. The case is now pending before the European Court of Justice (ECJ). The aim of this article is to present the background and context of the Vaxholm case for a non-Swedish audience and to outline the main issues of legal interpretation at stake, as well as their background in the Swedish industrial relations system and in Swedish and European law. The authors also point to some probable solutions in the light of earlier case-law of the ECJ.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.967
Threshold uncertainty score0.895

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.048
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.332 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it