MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Employment Protection Legislation in Haiti

2018· book-chapter· en· W2883327242 on OpenAlexaff
Samir Amine, Wilner Predelus

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in finance, accounting, and economics book series · 2018
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Labor and Employment Law
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en Outaouais
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegislationEmployment protection legislationFlexibility (engineering)Labour lawLabour economicsIndustrial relationsLabor relationsJob securityWork (physics)BusinessSplit labor market theoryFlexicurityEconomicsMarket economyPolitical scienceLawUnemploymentEconomic growthSecondary labor marketEngineeringManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The merit of employment regulations in a market economy is often measured by their effectiveness in facilitating job creation without jeopardizing the notion of “decent work,” as defined by the International Labor Organization (ILO). Consequently, the recent literature on employment legislation has extensively focused on the flexibility of the labor market, as a fair middle ground is always necessary to avoid undue distortions that can negatively impact the economy and worker's wellbeing. This chapter analyzes the provisions of the labor law in Haiti and how it affects job security and flexibility to observe a flexible structure that rather benefits employers. Notably, labor law in Haiti may have in fact rendered workers more vulnerable because these labor legislations were enacted on the assumption that employers and workers are on the same footing when it comes to industrial relations, while historic facts do not support such an assumption.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.086

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in finance, accounting, and economics book seriesSame topicInternational Labor and Employment LawFrench-language works237,207