MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7020685270

Management Rights Revisited: How the Good Ship Warrior & Gulf Sailed Up the Potomac River and Wound Up in Metropolitan Toronto

2011· article· en· W7020685270 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueValpoScholar (Valparaiso University) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysical Phenomena and Observations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetropolitan areaForm of the GoodSanitary sewerGood practice
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Prior to collective bargaining legislation in Canada and the United States, management's legal obligations to consider the interests of employees was limited only by common law, a small number of statutes affecting the employment relationship, statutes imposing health and safety obligations, workmen's compensation statutes, and the willingness of employees to work under the conditions imposed.'A common philosophical tenet among representatives of management was that matters such as wages, hours and working conditions should be determined by market conditions and that any intervention by government is an unwarranted interference.2 After the adoption of collective bargaining legislation, serious questions arose as to how the new labour statutes might limit management's actions and how they might affect unions and bargaining unit * The Warrior & Gulfof the title is a water transportation company operating as a contract carrier of vessels along southern waterways in the United States.It became famous as a result of a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court involving the scope of arbitral authority and management rights: United Steelworkers v. Warrior & Gulf Navigation Co., 363 U.S. 574 (1960).The case is associated with two other cases, making up the Steelworker's Trilogy: United Steelworkers v.American Mfg.Co., 363 U.S. 564 (1960), and United Steelworkers v. Enterprise Wheel & Car Corp., 363 U.S. 593 (1960).** The competing philosophies of arbitration considered in the Trilogy cases also were the focus in the Ontario Court of Appeal case of Re Metropolitan Toronto Board of Commissioners of Police and Metropolitan Toronto Police Ass'n et al. 33 Ont.2d 476 (1981).The purpose of this article is to examine the way in which the American doctrine of collective bargaining interpretation has affected Canadian jurisprudence in the same area.While recognizing the differences that exist, I have concluded that similarities have been obscured as a result of the failure to appreciate the more limited meaning of Warrior & Gulf and the more expanded interpretation of which Metro-Police is capable.My conclusions support a philosophy of collective bargaining interpretation which rejects the extreme positions of proponents of the rival philosophies of the reserved rights and implied limitations schools of collective agreement interpretation.*** Faculty of Law, University of Western Ontario 1. Warrior & Gulf, 363 U.S. at 583.This statement is also applicable in Canada and is implicit in the judgment of the Court of Appeal in Metro-Police, 33 Ont.2d at 478.

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)0.007
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.917
Threshold uncertainty score0.491

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0450.024
Scholarly communication0.0160.008
Open science0.0030.009
Research integrity0.0060.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.194 · 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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueValpoScholar (Valparaiso University)Same topicAstrophysical Phenomena and ObservationsFrench-language works237,207