MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2619387942 · doi:10.3406/ridc.2017.20809

Les droits fondamentaux du travail et le développement économique du Québec : obstacles et perspectives

2017· article· en· W2619387942 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Charles Tremblay Potvin

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue internationale de droit comparé · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLabor Movements and Unions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOutsourcingLabour lawGlobalizationContext (archaeology)Investment (military)EconomicsMarket economyWelfare economicsPolitical scienceLabour economicsLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To say that labor law is inherently linked to the economic system is a truism. The existence of the employment contract is a necessary condition to the establishment of a market structured by the capitalist firm as a production unit. Thus, since wage labor first started to emerge in the West, labor law has aimed to establish some “ rules of the game” to structure the market. However, the reduction of trade barriers and the free movement of persons and capital which we witness in today’s world tend to generate a high level of competition between jurisdictions. This new situation operates a reversal of the hierarchical relationship between juridical and economical logics. As outsourcing of the production and the search for greater flexibility on the employment market exacerbates concerns for the workers, the social rights that have already been granted to them are being strongly criticized on the grounds that they constitute barriers to the proper functioning of firms and to foreign investment attractiveness. What needs to be retained from this huge upheaval ? What is the future of social law in Quebec ? This text proposes to revisit the genesis of labor law and to study the connexions that may exist between this field of law and the economic system, in light of the current context of globalization.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.831
Threshold uncertainty score0.780

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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.267 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue internationale de droit comparéSame topicLabor Movements and UnionsFrench-language works237,207