Bibliographic record
Abstract
The decisions of the Court of Justice in Viking, Laval and their progenies have been harshly criticised by scholars and other international institutions, but above all, they have been received as a hard blow by trade unions and social actors. Indeed, the Court has been accused of supporting (or even encouraging) social dumping, by increasing the already uneven power of economic actors at the expense of the workers and of their longstanding protectors, the trade unions. While these decisions sparked extensive doctrinal debate, legislative action, even radical changes to the constitutional architecture in some countries, they seem to have gone completely unnoticed in Italy. This is rather surprising, given the fact that workers' protection and the activity of trade unions are at the very core of the Italian Republic. This paper aims first to bring into full light the blatant incompatibility of the dictum of the Court of Justice in the abovementioned decisions with different cornerstones of the Italian legal and social system. Second, it seeks to provide some possible reasons why, in Italy, the potentially devastating effects of the Viking quartet have still to be seen, also considering the opinion of the main Italian trade unions.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".