MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3176336370 · doi:10.1093/indlaw/dwab017

Canadian Jurisprudence and the Employment Contract

2021· article· en· W3176336370 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Douglas Brodie

Bibliographic record

VenueIndustrial Law Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Economy and Work Transformation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupreme courtJurisprudenceRelevance (law)LawPolitical sciencePower (physics)Bargaining powerCollective bargainingLabour lawEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The jurisprudence of the Canadian Supreme Court has been at the forefront of a judicial conversion to a more progressive view of the employment relationship, which is attuned to key realities such as inequality of bargaining power. The Court’s influence can be seen in the decisions of courts in other jurisdictions such as the UK. The change in outlook has had a discernable impact on doctrinal development. In recent years, the Canadian Supreme Court has elevated the importance of good faith in contract law as a whole. In 2020, in a series of key decisions, the Court explored some of the implications for the law of employment contract. This article seeks to explore whether those developments will be of relevance to the development of the employment contract here.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.986
Threshold uncertainty score0.961

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndustrial Law JournalSame topicDigital Economy and Work TransformationFrench-language works237,207