MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2743980511

Adverse Effect Discrimination: Proving the Prima Facie Case

2005· article· en· W2743980511 on OpenAlex
Evelyn Braun

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue d'études constitutionnelles · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiscrimination and Equality Law
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPrima faciePhilosophyPolitical scienceEpistemology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

espanolA une epoque ou les principes antidiscriminatoires sont acceptes a grande echelle, les cas de discrimination directe n’apparaissent que peu souvent, et l’attention est alors attiree vers les effets prejudiciables des normes apparemment neutres. La preuve d’effets prejudiciables presente des defis uniques bien evidents. L’auteurse concentre sur l’application de principes fondamentaux de la discrimination par suite d’un effet prejudiciable pour prouver une cause prima facie. Cette discussion cadre dans le contexte du droit du travail avec une attention speciale aux poursuites pour discrimination par suite d’un effet prejudiciable intentees par les employes a temps partiel. La jurisprudence europeenne etablissant que la discrimination contre les employes a temps partiel peut representer de la discrimination indirecte contre les femmes fait contraste avec une cause canadienne. La decision de la Cour d’appel federale en reponse a ces poursuites intentees par un travailleur a temps partiel illustre le besoin important d’insister sur les principes de base regissant la preuve prima facie de la discrimination par suite d’un effet prejudiciable. L’auteur conclut que plus de direction est requise de la part des tribunaux canadiens pour elucider la demarche canadienne a l’egard de la preuve de discrimination par suite d’un effet prejudiciable. EnglishIn an era where anti-discrimination principles have gained widespread acceptance, cases of direct discrimination arise infrequently, and attention is increasingly drawn to the adverse effects of apparently neutral standards. Proof of adverse effect discrimination presents unique evidentiary challenges. The author focuses on the application of fundamental principles of adverse effect discrimination to proof of a prima facie case. This discussion is framed within an employment law context, with a particular focus on the example of adverse effect discrimination claims by part-time employees. European case law establishing that discrimination against part-time employees can amount to indirect discrimination against women is contrasted with a Canadian case. The Federal Court of Appeal decision in response to this claim by a part-time worker illustrates the need for a strong emphasis on the basic principles governing proof of a prima facie case of adverse effect discrimination. The author concludes that further guidance from Canadian courts is needed to elucidate the Canadian approach to proof of adverse effect discrimination.

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.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.963
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.283 · 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