MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2140317095

The Laws of Unintended Consequence: The Effect of Labour Legislation on Wages and Strikes

2010· book· en· W2140317095 on OpenAlexaff
Benjamin Dachis, Robert Hebdon

Bibliographic record

VenueC.D. Howe Institute Commentary · 2010
Typebook
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLabor Movements and Unions
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnintended consequencesLegislationLegislatureGovernment (linguistics)ArbitrationLabour lawWork (physics)Labour economicsLawAction (physics)Psychological interventionPolitical scienceEconomicsBusinessLaw and economicsPsychologyEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When politicians consider intervening in labour disputes, they should also consider the long-term, potentially unintended results of such action. In this study, the authors investigate the lessons from previous government legislative interventions, whether through compulsory arbitration, “back-to-work” legislation or bans on replacement workers during strikes, and find these actions have unintended results that give reason for sober second thought.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.036
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.036
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.024
Scholarly communication0.0050.007
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0260.025
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations18
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueC.D. Howe Institute CommentarySame topicLabor Movements and UnionsFrench-language works237,207