Labour relations in the Asia-Pacific countries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Employment and Social Security Law Important issues concerning labour and industrial relations necessarily arise as markets among the countries around the Pacific Ocean become more integrated. With economic activity levels as different as that of the United States and that of Papua New Guinea, and with labour forces ranging in size from that of China to that of the Sultanate of Brunei - not to mention a vast spectrum of diverse cultural standards and customs - this important regional grouping demands the attention of labour law specialists if trade integration is to proceed amicably and to the benefit of all. In this valuable book sixteen academics and other professionals in the field present informed and insightful essays on aspects of labour and industrial relations law in ten countries (Australia, Canada, Chile, China, Japan, Korea, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, and the United States) as well as under the ASEAN regime. Among the imperative issues these authors elucidate are the following: collaboration within the firm to raise productivity; the need for competitiveness among firms; the importance of human relations and social responsibility; the development of social security policy; and reducing the risk and absorbing the benefits of integration under conditions of rapid social and industrial change. These papers were originally presented in 2001 in a report by the Peruvian labour journal Analisis Laboral, in response to a request by the Regional Office of the International Labour Organisation for a study of employment conditions, labour relations, and social security in the APEC countries as seen from a Latin American perspective. It was immediately apparent that many of the papers in this report were of great value to the international labour law community, and accordingly those papers are collected and reprinted 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 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 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".