MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3163733151

The Role and Promise of International Law in Canada's New Labour Law Constitutionalism

2012· article· en· W3163733151 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kevin Banks

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Labor and Employment Law
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupreme courtLawFreedom of associationPolitical scienceCommon lawAppealJurisprudenceStatutory lawDutyHuman rights
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the landmark B.C. Health and Fraser cases, the Supreme Court of Canada draws upon international law which treats the right to bargain collectively as a key aspect of freedom of association in the workplace, and takes the position that the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms should be understood to give as much protection to that right as is given by international instruments which Canada has ratified. In Fraser, the Supreme Court (in reversing the Ontario Court of Appeal) holds that the core elements of the current statutory framework of Canadian labour law should not be constitutionally entrenched as the only acceptable way to protect the right to bargain collectively. However, the Supreme Court does suggest that a legal duty to bargain, based to some degree on that duty as it exists today in Canada, is an indispensable element of freedom of association. A problem with that view, the author argues, is that the many component parts of the current system of Canadian labour law are too interdependent to allow courts to isolate specific features of it for constitutional entrenchment in a way that would both vindicate freedom of association and leave Canadian legislatures with enough leeway to adopt new policy approaches to the regulation of workplace relations in the light of changing circumstances. Because International Labour Organization (ILO) jurisprudence sees freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining as basic human rights which are able to coexist with a wide range of legal frameworks, it can provide a solid foundation for the development of Canada’s new labour law constitutionalism. Some aspects of the ILO jurisprudence (such as some of its very tight restrictions on the imposition of alternatives to strikes) may, the author suggests, be ill-suited to the Canadian context, but most of it fits quite well with the existing Canadian model, and any problematic aspects can be managed within already established doctrinal structures of Canada’s new labour law constitutionalism.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.167
Threshold uncertainty score0.966

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0240.040
Scholarly communication0.0300.008
Open science0.0040.007
Research integrity0.0100.014
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicInternational Labor and Employment LawFrench-language works237,207