L’évolution du dialogue entre le Canada et l’OIT en matière de liberté d’association : vers une protection constitutionnelle du droit de grève ?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le 8 juin 2007, la Cour suprême du Canada renversait sa jurisprudence des vingt dernières années en matière de liberté d’association. La majorité des juges reconnurent que l’article 2(d) de la Charte canadienne des droits et libertés protégeait le droit au processus de négociation collective. Ce faisant, la Cour renonçait aux motifs de la majorité exprimée dès la trilogie de 1987 sur la question et donnait enfin sa place au droit international du travail, en particulier aux principes de la liberté syndicale élaborés par les organes de contrôle de l’Organisation internationale du travail. L’analyse de ces principes, orientée vers trois droits sous-jacents à la liberté syndicale, soit le droit à la négociation collective, le droit de grève et le droit de non-association, permet de constater que pour, la première fois, le Canada fait preuve d’un plus grand respect de ses obligations internationales en cette matière. Reste à voir le sort que la Cour réserve au droit de grève.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.023 | 0.026 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.000 |
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.
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".