L'efficacité du cadre légal particulier de la négociation collective visant les pompiers municipaux québécois : le cas des pompiers de Montréal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’encadrement légal particulier de la négociation collective impliquant les pompiers municipaux québécois, malgré sa soumission à certaines règles prévues par le régime général du Code du travail, présente des spécificités qui pourraient en affecter l’efficacité et ainsi contribuer à l’instauration de relations de travail difficiles. Ce mémoire s’attarde aux difficultés associées à ce régime de négociation collective interdisant le recours à la grève et prévoyant son remplacement par un système d’arbitrage obligatoire. L’étude des relations de travail impliquant les pompiers de Montréal ne permet pas, à elle seule, de qualifier ce régime particulier de négociation collective d’alternative inefficace au régime général. Toutefois, ce mémoire met en évidence les limites d’un cadre légal, alors que des facteurs externes au droit, tels que le caractère public de l’employeur et la nature particulière du métier, semblent jouer un rôle déterminant dans la dynamique conflictuelle des relations de travail impliquant des pompiers municipaux.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.000 |
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.
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".