The Impact of Austerity in the Framework of Corporate Rescue and the Rights of Workers in the EU: A Road to Recovery?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The financial crisis and the sovereign debt crisis have been attributed to a number of causes. Whether these are economic, social, cultural or legal, they are all by and large also political. The aim of this article is not to delve into the myriad of heated political arguments that continue to dominate the scene but to assess the impact of the financial crisis on the employment protection rights and the corporate rescue regimes in Greece, Portugal, France and the UK. In light of the crisis, the rights of the workforce have been severely compromised to afford financially troubled companies a greater opportunity to recover. In order to minimise the catastrophic impact of financial turmoil on their economy and society, all four jurisdictions introduced reforms to their labour codes and corporate rescue mechanisms, often in the name of austerity. This article will offer a snapshot of the changes and their effects and an assessment whether or not the reforms of pre-insolvency regimes have operated as an effective embankment for the protection of social and economic welfare. The purpose of this piece is to shed a light on the changes that have occurred and that have affected employment rights in the domestic legal systems of individual member states, as influenced to some extent by the EU in its expectations of improvements to increase labour market flexibility, and whether corporate rescue mechanisms in individual member states are able to provide some counterbalance to the erosion of employment rights generally. Copyright © 2017 INSOL International and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".