MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2109237163 · doi:10.1177/135822910901000404

Discrimination, Freedom, and the Limits of Contract

2009· article· en· W2109237163 on OpenAlexaffabout
Gillian Demeyere

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Discrimination and the Law · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiscrimination and Equality Law
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFreedom of contractLegislatureLawScope (computer science)Law and economicsPoliticsPolitical scienceSubject (documents)SociologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article offers a challenge to the widely held view that legislative prohibitions against discrimination in employment represent a restriction on freedom of contract. Rather than engage in the political debate concerning the justifiability of such a restriction on an employer's contracting freedom, I instead argue how the apparent conflict between the individual's claim to equality and the employer's claim to freedom of contract might prove to be illusory. I argue that the freedom in freedom of contract is best understood, as it is defined in the republican tradition, in terms of immunity from interference on an arbitrary basis (freedom as “nondomination”). On this understanding of freedom, anti-discrimination law poses no threat to contracting freedom since discriminatory hiring and workplace practices fall outside the scope of the employer's freedom of contract. The article focuses mainly on Canadian law but the analysis and conclusions are generalizable to other common law jurisdictions where the employment relationship is subject to a prohibition against discrimination.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.809
Threshold uncertainty score0.656

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.314 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Discrimination and the LawSame topicDiscrimination and Equality LawFrench-language works237,207