La regulación normativa del mobbing en las administraciones públicas españolas : corrección disciplinaria : tipificación penal y prueba
Bibliographic record
Abstract
El objeto de la tesis es el análisis de los antecedentes legislativos y jurisprudenciales para la determinación del nivel normativo de la regulación del fenómeno “mobbing” en las Administraciones Públicas españolas. \nUna vez que se efectúa una aproximación al concepto de mobbing, se analiza el concepto en el derecho comparado. Para ello, es sigue un método transversal partiendo de la recopilación de los diversos autores sobre la materia y sus obras, la legislación concreta y la jurisprudencia existente al respecto en otros países Suecia, Bélgica, Suiza , Finlandia, Noruega, EE.UU.( en este caso tanto leyes federales como estatales),Inglaterra, Irlanda y Gales ,Australia, Francia, Italia, Canadá, Portugal y España. \nSe incide en la regulación concreta del acoso en la Administración Pública española, tanto en su nivel disciplinario, como en su nivel laboral, administrativo y penal. \n El presente trabajo distingue, en el ámbito de la Administración Pública, entre el nivel estatal, autonómicos o locales. Así mismo se estudian los diferentes planos normativos dentro de la Administración Militar, examinándose la regulación normativa aplicable a las diferentes Fuerzas y Cuerpos de Seguridad del Estado , con clara distinción del ámbito del Ejército, haciendo extensivo este análisis al ámbito universitario, para terminar analizando el ámbito de la administración de Justicia, distinguiéndose en el mismo las diferentes especificidades de Magistrados , Jueces, Secretarios Judiciales , representantes del Ministerio Fiscal, Funcionarios de la Oficina judicial y personal adscrito, tales como Médicos Forenses . \nSe realiza un análisis detallado de la jurisprudencia y se lleva a cabo un recorrido por las legislaciones protectoras de la víctima, así como de los procedimientos de reparación. \nEn cuanto a la prueba de la actividad delictual que comporta el presupuesto normativo del mobbing, se analiza la dificultad que entraña su concreción jurisdiccional, al estar los hechos acaecidos circunscritos a un estricto ámbito privado. \n[ABSTRACT]The object of the thesis is the analyses of previous legislatives and precedent through the determination of the regulatory level of mobbing phenomenon into Spanish public administration.Having made the approach about mobbing concept, it will be transferred to the contrastive law using a transversal method of recompilation of authors experts on the subject, the concrete legislation and law legally constituted and existing on that subject in: Sweden, Belgium, Switzerland, Finland, Norway, USA (in this case as much as federals and states laws), England, Ireland and Wales, Australia, France, Italy, Canada, Portugal and Spain. We carry on a detailed analysis of the law of the established document by the Supreme Court and a journey is made by protective legislation for the victim, as well as repair procedures. \nOnce previously analyzed we introduce in the concrete regulation of harassment in the Spanish public administration as well as disciplinary level ,labored, administrative and penalty. \nThe present work distinguish, between a national or regional level in administrative area Likewise differences normative plans are studied into military administration by considering the normative regulation applicable -put into practise- to the different forces and security bodies of state with a clear distinction between military area making it extendable to university in order to analyse justice administration, differentiating specialities of magistrates , judges, court registrar, fiscal representative ministry, court officers, and staff attached to such as forensic surgeon. \nAs for the test of the criminal activity it endures the normative budget of mobbing caused by it concretion jurisdictional had been facts happened kept in private
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.038 | 0.001 |
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.
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".