L'INCLUSION DE LA LIBERTE SYNDICALE DANS LA LIBERTE GENERALE D'ASSOCIATION: UN PARI CONSTITUTIONEL PERDU?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Section 2(d) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms gives expression to the constitutional protection of the freedom of association. Does it encompass all of the essential dimensions of the freedom of association in the labour relations context? It seems that the original expectations of parliamentarians were that it would encompass all of these dimensions. Indeed, various manifestations of concerted action, in particular the strike, collective bargaining and the practice of union shops, are deeply rooted in the Canadian tradition of industrial relations . Various instruments of international law also support such a broad interpretation of the freedom of association. Yet, the right to strike and the right to bargain collectively are excluded from the protection of the Canadian Charter and the debate over the practice of union shops remains unresolved. Recent jurisprudence would appear favourable to the recognition of a truly collective dimension of the freedom of association. Given their different objects and the distinct nature of the types of instruments that ensure their protection, is there an inevitable discrepancy between the specific expression of the freedom of association in a labour relations context and the general concept of freedom of association? It is argued here that this is not necessarily the case, but that the courts will have to adopt an interpretation of freedom of association that is more contextualized and inclusive of the overall Canadian industrial relations tradition with respect to freedom of association.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.021 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".