L’aménagement du pluralisme syndical en droit du travail québécois : quel équilibre entre efficacité et participation des salariés ?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
En marge du modèle dominant de monopole de l’association majoritaire dans les rapports collectifs du travail, le pluralisme syndical s’est exprimé de longue date au Québec et nécessite un aménagement normatif approprié. Le présent article vise à identifier les enjeux d’un tel aménagement à partir d’une étude comparative de trois cas, soit : 1- la participation des associations accréditées aux comités d’équité salariale; 2- le traitement des plaintes relatives au maintien de l’équité salariale dans des entreprises où plus d’une association accréditée représente des salariés; et, 3- la participation des associations syndicales à la négociation des conventions collectives sectorielles de l’industrie québécoise de la construction. L’analyse des solutions retenues par le législateur dans ces trois cas permet de mettre au jour une tension entre efficacité et participation des salariés, ainsi que de discuter des conséquences de celles-ci pour la démocratie au travail.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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 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".