MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2189288150

Sympatiåtgärder som mänsklig rättighet? En komparativ studie om erkännandet nationellt och internationellt

2014· article· sv· W2189288150 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Fanny Kjellner

Bibliographic record

VenueLund University Publications Student Papers (Lund University) · 2014
Typearticle
Languagesv
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLabor Movements and Unions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSympathyCharterPolitical scienceConventionEuropean unionLabour lawLawEconomicsInternational trade
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current rules concerning the right to take industrial action were established in the early 1900s and are still an issue governed by the labour market organizations. In Sweden, the right to take industrial action is protected by constitutional law, which also includes sympathy actions. Limitations can only be made by law or particular agreements. In order to adapt to the current conditions, negotiations for a new Basic Agreement between Svenskt Näringsliv, LO and PTK 2008, where made, however it was unsuccessful and the Swedish trade unions still continue to maintain a strong position in comparison with the countries compared, concerning the right to take industrial actions. There are few similarities regarding the regulation of sympathy action with other EU member countries. In Britain sympathy actions are banned by the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 and in Denmark there are requirements of proportionality and interest associated. Such restrictions are alien to the Swedish model. However, Sweden is also bound by EU law, which affects the national regulations. The Laval case highlighted the problem between the balance of the right to take collective action and the free movements of services, which resulted in new legislation for Sweden in order to comply with EU law. Sweden, Denmark and the UK are all obliged to follow the EU Charter, European Convention, the European Social Charter and ILO Convention 87. However there is no explicit right to sympathy action in either of these. Conclusions can be drawn that the EU Charter, the European Social Charter and ILO Convention 87 includes an implicit protection, while the right to strike has no explicit protection in either the European Convention or ILO Convention 87. Trade union rights to take collective action hold no absolute protection and can be limited. Both the ILO's supervisory bodies as well as the Council of Europe’s European Committee of Social Rights have stated that a ban on sympathy action is not consistent with the convention or the Charter, resulting in sympathy actions indirectly acquiring the status of human rights.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.967
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.244 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLund University Publications Student Papers (Lund University)Same topicLabor Movements and UnionsFrench-language works237,207