Legal Action on Labour Inspection Memo in Industrial Relations in Indonesia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The research purpose is to study the professional relationship between workers and employers which is called industrial relations. This is motivated by the fact that workers and employers need to synergize in the process of producing goods and services for the community. In fulfilling the purpose and object of their role and activities and the quid pro quo relationship, the stakeholders pursue different interests. Employers try to earn a maximum profit by spending the least cost possible. In contrast, workers earn the maximum results with the least minimal effort. By using the socio-legal approach, the results showed that the circumstances that exist in these two different interests are prone to conflict and prone to irregularities in legislation. The government as a regulator is obliged to provide legal protection. Legal protection from the government is manifested in the role of labor inspectors, in which they have the right to conduct inspections in a preventive and repressive manner. If there is a violation, the inspectors shall issue the inspection memo. However, the implementation of the ruling of the Constitutional Court Number 7/PUU-XII/2014 results in a new problem which is an unclear execution of the said Constitutional Court ruling about the status of workers.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".