Commission des Relations du Travail – Composition des bancs – Litige intersyndical – Effet de procédures pendantes devant les tribunaux, existant entre les parties
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La Commission des Relations du Travail, à l'occasion d'une requête en révision de décision, décide des règles de la composition des bancs et de l'interprétation qu'il faut donner à l'expression « litige intersyndical » ; elle décide en outre que le fait, pour un syndicat requérant en accréditation, d'être partie à un conflit avec l'employeur, devant les tribunaux, n'infirme pas un caractère de bonne foi.1 (1) L'Association des Travailleurs de Murdochville, requérante, et Métallurgistes-Unis d'Amérique, local 6086, intimés, et Gaspé Copper Mines Limited, mise-en-cause; Commission des Relations du Travail du Québec, Dossier no 4445-8-10; Hon. juge Gérard Vaillancourt, J.d., vice-président; Québec, le 19 Juin 1965; Me Fernand Guertin, c.r., pour la requérante; Mes Désaulniers et al, pour l'intimé; Me Gaston Pouliot, c.r., pour la mise-en-cause.
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 | 0.007 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 0.006 |
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".