MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2947261092 · doi:10.7202/1059324ar

Le gel statutaire des conditions de travail

2019· article· fr· W2947261092 on OpenAlexaffvenue
André Côté

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue générale de droit · 2019
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicLegal and Labor Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le gel des conditions de travail décrété à l’article 59 C.t., qui assure le maintien d’un équilibre entre les parties, vise à favoriser le libre exercice du droit d’association, tout en étant nécessaire à la réalisation des impératifs de la négociation collective de bonne foi. L’évolution substantive et juridictionnelle de cette règle témoigne de son importance dans l’économie du système. Quant à l’objet de ce gel, notre jurisprudence a opté en principe pour la thèse du business as before, de préférence à celle de l’equal partnership. On note néanmoins un flottement quant à la teneur de ce business as before en ce qui a trait à la relation à faire entre les droits résiduaires de la gérance, d’une part, et, d’autre part, les modalités et la finalité de leur exercice. L’auteur soumet que l’esprit de la règle est d’assurer que l’employeur ne changera pas sa manière de gérer, ni les paramètres de sa gestion en fonction du contexte nouveau créé par l’exercice du droit d’association aux phases initiales de la négociation collective. Dans la dernière section, la portée de la prohibition dans le temps et l’identité des titulaires du droit de veto sur les changements des conditions de travail sont considérées.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.124

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.013
Scholarly communication0.0100.008
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0060.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0370.009

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.199 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue générale de droitSame topicLegal and Labor StudiesFrench-language works237,207