MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2177796442 · doi:10.60082/2817-5069.1440

Twenty Years of Labour Law and the Charter

2002· article· en· W2177796442 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Dianne Pothier

Bibliographic record

VenueOsgoode Hall law journal · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLabor Movements and Unions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCharterSupreme courtJurisprudenceLegislaturePolitical scienceLabour lawLawFreedom of associationScope (computer science)DeferenceConstitutional reviewJudicial reviewCommon lawHuman rightsConstitution

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article critically reviews the Charter jurisprudence of the Supreme Court of Canada relating to labour law. The rejection of the right to strike and to bargain collectively as part of freedom of association reflect substantial judicial deference to legislative policy choices. Recently, however, a constitutional right of unfair labour protection for particularly vulnerable workers shows some judicial willingness to intervene. While freedom of expression provides significant scope to union supporters, picketing and leafleting are still subject to wide restraint, the exact parameters of which remain unclear. The Charter has had only a modest effect on labour law. Even successful challenges have produced results well within the dominant legislative model in Canada.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.942
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.235 · 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.

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

Citations10
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOsgoode Hall law journalSame topicLabor Movements and UnionsFrench-language works237,207