Danbury Hatters in Sweden: A U.S. Perspective on the Available Remedies and Sanctions for Employers Who Suffer Unfair Labor Practices by Labor Unions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article describes the remedies available to employers who suffer unfair labor practices by labor unions, and contributes to European Union (EU) discussions on how the EU should sanction labor organizations that infringe on fundamental freedoms. These EU discussions have flourished ever since the Court of Justice of the European Union decided the Laval quartet of cases which held that worker concerted activities that impacted freedom of services and establishment in the EU violated EU law. After Laval, the Swedish Labor Court imposed exemplary or punitive damages, on labor unions for violating EU law. The U.S. experience warns against the imposition of punitive damages. Punitive damages may not only be unfair for workers, but may cause unions to become too risk-averse when representing workers. Moreover, workers' concerted activities should be understood as activities commensurate with market freedoms. If such market freedoms are exercised in unfair ways, the unions should be subject to compensatory but not punitive damages.
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 | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.021 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.017 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".