MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405155407 · doi:10.46329/llf.2024.11.43.339

A Study on Legislation of the Right to Disconnect from Work outside of Working Hours

2024· article· en· W4405155407 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yun-Shik Oh

Bibliographic record

VenueLabor Law Forum · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Labor and Employment Law
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegislationWork (physics)Right to workBusinessOperations managementEngineeringPolitical scienceLawMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article deals with a comparative legal analysis of legislative status in Australia, Ontario(Canada), France and Germany in relation to the right to disconnect from work outside of working hours. It also proposes a bill to introduce such a right into the Labor Standards Act. The conclusions of this article are as follows.BR/ First, the review of legislative status in these countries confirms that the Australian approach provides the best protection for the so-called the right to disconnect(“the R2D”). However, the legislation is also considered to be somewhat incomplete from the perspective of dispute prevention, as it is open-ended in terms of determining whether it is unreasonable for an employee to refuse to connect with an employer or third party outside of working hours.BR/ Second, the constitutional basis for the R2D is the right to rest and the right to health. The right to rest is a fundamental right recognised under the right to pursuit of happiness, Article 32(3) of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea, and the right to health is a fundamental right recognised under the right to pursuit of happiness, Article 32(3) and Article 36(3) of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea.BR/ Third, the need for legislation on the R2D based on these fundamental rights is fully justified when one considers the potential erosion and threat to employees’ ‘sustainable work’ resulting from the ‘hyperconnectivity’ caused by the rapid development of ICTs.BR/ Fourth, this article proposes a bill tailored to our legal situation based on a sample formulation on the R2D proposed by Stück lawyer et al. in Germany. What is particularly important here is that the legislation should also reflect the business necessity of employers to contact employees outside of working hours. Accordingly, the bill stipulates that an employee shall have the right to refuse to comply with an employer’s instructions through information and communication devices outside of working hours. The bill also stipulates that an employer shall have the right to use information and communication devices to contact or instruct an employee during outside of working hours when it is necessary to contact the employee urgently due to unavoidable circumstances. In order to ensure the effective protection of this right, the bill also proposes the imposition of criminal penalties and fine for negligence in certain cases.

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)0.018
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 score0.400
Threshold uncertainty score0.796

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0090.017
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.283 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLabor Law ForumSame topicInternational Labor and Employment LawFrench-language works237,207