Right to Strike, Transnational Collective Action and European Law: Time to Move On?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: Starting from an analysis of two pending cases before the ECJ ( Laval and Viking case), the paper focuses on the issue of the scope and significance the EU intends to accord to collective actions within the dynamics of European integration. In the first part of the paper the author deals with the principles governing the internal market of services in order to asses whether and how the performance of collective actions might fall within the scope of Article 49 TEC. In the second part, the different solutions arising as to collective actions violating prima facie article 49 will lead to an investigation on the possibility to accommodate the exercise of the right to strike with the constraints posed by the internal market principles. In the final part of this essay the author deals with the issue of the legitimacy of the right to take collective action from a “procedural” perspective, considering the increasing influence of the deliberative theories on the debate about European governance.
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 | 0.017 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.076 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.026 | 0.036 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.024 | 0.016 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".