MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405414279 · doi:10.5539/jpl.v18n1p24

Constitutional Guarantees for Terminating an Employment Contract for Economic and Technical Reasons in Jordanian Legislation

2024· article· en· W4405414279 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jehan Khalid Al-Zubi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Politics and Law · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicLaw, logistics, and international trade
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegislationLawEmployment contractBusinessLaw and economicsPolitical scienceLabour economicsEconomicsEngineeringWork (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Jordanian Constitution guarantees the right to work for all Jordanian citizens in Articles 6 and 23. It grants them many rights derived from this right within the provisions of the labour law. The research aims to investigate the constitutionality of Articles 6 and 23 of the Jordanian Constitution. The descriptive analytical approach aims to describe and analyze the constitutional and legal texts related to the termination of employment contracts in Jordan, while also analyzing the data gathered from interviews. The comparative approach identified the strengths and weaknesses of Jordanian legislation by comparing it with legislation from other countries. Using a case study approach, the researchers analyzed specific issues related to the termination of employment contracts in Jordan for economic and technical reasons. The text of Article 31/d of the Labor Law is contrary to all constitutional principles that guarantee fair trial guarantees. These findings provide a comprehensive understanding of the constitutional guarantees in Jordanian labour law and offer a roadmap for potential reforms to strengthen these protections.

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)0.023
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.119

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0230.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.016
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.270 · 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
GenreOther

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 venueJournal of Politics and LawSame topicLaw, logistics, and international tradeFrench-language works237,207