Viking y Laval en el contexto del pluralismo constitucional y la posibilidad de diálogo con el Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Este artículo pretende abordar la jurisprudencia asentada por el Tribunal de Justicia de la Unión Europea (TJUE ) en los asuntos Viking y Laval, relativa al derecho de huelga, en tanto otorga prevalencia jerárquica a las libertades económicas frente a los derechos fundamentales. Partiendo de esta doctrina, se analizará a su vez el tratamiento de la huelga por parte del Tribunal de Estrasburgo y la posibilidad de que, sirviéndose del marco pluralista europeo, desarrolle en un futuro un diálogo judicial con el de Luxemburgo que fuerce a este un cambio de su jurisprudencia. This paper intends to analyse two decisions of the European Court of Justice about the right to strike: Viking and Laval. In both cases, the Court determined that economic freedoms have preeminence over fundamental rights. It will also address to demonstrate how the European Court of Human Rights has developed the right to strike. In this context, a future judicial dialogue between both Courts that force a change in their jurisprudence will be examined in the European pluralist framework.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.034 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.019 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".