MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6959925964 · doi:10.11575/prism/33923

The Employee is Just a Little Bad!

2007· other· en· W6959925964 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenuePRISM (University of Calgary) · 2007
Typeother
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic diversity and population structure
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNoticeDismissalDamagesSupreme courtSubpoenaContext (archaeology)Unfair dismissalWarrantPlaintiff

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Let us assume that an employer thinks it has enough cause to fire an employee and it does so. At the wrongful dismissal trial later, the court concludes that the cause did not justify the firing. Can the employer ask that the wrongful dismissal damages be reduced due to the cause that did exist? In other words, even if it was not sufficient to warrant summary dismissal, can some cause correspondingly reduce damages payable to the employee? The judicial approach to termination notice applied by the Supreme Court of Canada was stated in the 1992 case of Machtinger: "The most frequently cited enumeration of factors relevant to the assessment of reasonable notice is from the judgment of McRuer C.J.H.C. in Bardal [(1960), 24 D.L.R. (2d) 140 (Ont. H.C.)] was, at p. 145: 'There can be no catalogue laid down as to what is reasonable notice in particular classes of cases. The reasonableness of the notice must be decided with reference to each particular case, having regard to the character of the employment, the length of service of the servant, the age of the servant and the availability of similar employment, having regard to the experience, training and qualifications of the servant.'" In most employment dismissals that are litigated, improprieties can be found on the part of both employee and employer. The standard required to support a finding of sufficient cause for summary dismissal is left to the instincts of the trial judge in the rich factual context of each case. It may appear simplistic and perhaps arbitrary to determine that an employer possessed either sufficient legal cause or no legal cause to fire an employee. However, the judge has considerable discretion as to whether there was sufficient cause, the length of notice period, and [Wallace] damages. The judge will structure the overall decision to create a just outcome by applying the current mix of variables, and without the need for the intermediate third alternative of near cause. Indeed the judge ultimately will consider all evidence of cause and performance in rendering the decision.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.115

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0070.008
Scholarly communication0.0080.008
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0060.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0340.019

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePRISM (University of Calgary)→Same topicGenetic diversity and population structure→French-language works237,207→