MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7008510403

A clash of kings. The European Committee of Social Rights on the âLex Lavalâ ⦠and on the EU framework for the posting of workers

2013· article· en· W7008510403 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Access to Libraries · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Labor and Employment Law
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial rightsEuropean unionFundamental rightsHuman rightsEconomic JusticeEuropean court of justiceSocial partners
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On the 20 November 2013 the European Committee of Social Rights delivered its decision on the Swedish law aimed at bringing the Swedish system in line with the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union regarding posting of workers and industrial relations. The evaluation of the so-called 'Lex Laval' however provides for an occasion to implicitly scrutinise the whole framework of EU law regulating the posting phenomenon. The present contribution hence analyses the relationship of the decision delivered by the ECSR with two aspects of EU law. On the one hand, the contribution deals with the case law of the CJEU about the (complicated) relationship between fundamental social rights and fundamental economic freedoms of the internal market. On the other hand, it will examine the more specific issue of posting of workers. Both topics reveal the existence of a sharp contrast between EU-law and the system of values, principles and rights embodied in the European Social Charter.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.012
Scholarly communication0.0130.006
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0110.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.003

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.255 · 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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigital Access to LibrariesSame topicInternational Labor and Employment LawFrench-language works237,207