Bibliographic record
Abstract
The flexible working system in Jordan for the year 2017 represents a qualitative leap in the field of work, for providing an easy work for the workers, especially the working woman, which enables her to enter the labor market. However, this system has many conditions that must be met in flexible working contract in terms of a written agreement between the worker and the employer and the time limit and specified some categories that are subject to flexible working.The flexible working system collides with some general principles of the labor law, such as the legal subordination, and the disciplinary authority of the employer in imposition of disciplinary sanctions in the event that the worker violates the flexible working rules.The study concluded with a number of results, the most important is that the flexible working contract is a formal contract in which the writing is required. The Jordanian legislator ruled out the event from the workers who are subject to the flexible working system.The most important recommendations were, It is necessary explicitly state that the rights of the worker may be established in the flexible working contract by all means of legal proofs. If the contract was not issued in writing, it is necessary to stipulate that the wage might be determined in the flexible working contract on a daily or weekly basis.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".