MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Modern digital practices of labor dispute resolution: theoretical and legal aspects and prospects of implementation in Ukraine

2025· article· uk· W7127168517 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
K. V. Klymov

Bibliographic record

VenueUzhhorod National University Herald Series Law · 2025
Typearticle
Languageuk
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicDispute Resolution and Class Actions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDispute resolutionRelevance (law)Online dispute resolutionWork (physics)Dispute mechanismAlternative dispute resolutionEconomic JusticeResolution (logic)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article provides a comprehensive theoretical and legal analysis of the concept, methodology, and practical aspects of implementing Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) systems within the framework of labor relations in Ukraine. The relevance of this study is driven by the urgent need to modernize traditional mechanisms for protecting labor rights amidst rapid societal digitalization, the widespread adoption of remote and hybrid work models, and the significant challenges posed by martial law, which hinder physical access to judicial institutions for many citizens. The author defines the legal nature of ODR as an innovative synthesis of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) methods, such as mediation, negotiation, and arbitration, with advanced information and communication technologies, effectively shifting the concept of justice from a physical location to a high-tech service. The article thoroughly examines the primary functional models of ODR, including e-negotiation, e-mediation, and e-arbitration. Particular emphasis is placed on the concept of «algorithmic justice» and the potential of artificial intelligence systems for the preliminary assessment of litigation prospects based on data analysis, drawing on international benchmarks like the Solution Explorer technology. By conducting a systematic review of international practices in Canada (the Civil Resolution Tribunal), the USA, and EU member states, the author highlights the critical advantages of digital procedures for parties in labor conflicts, such as cost-effectiveness, procedural speed, psychological comfort, and territorial inclusivity. These factors are essential for ensuring the protection of rights for internally displaced persons and citizens residing abroad. Furthermore, the study identifies and categorizes potential risks associated with digital implementation, including the «digital divide,» challenges in party verification, cybersecurity threats, and the risk of «algorithmic bias» in automated decision-making processes. The paper substantiates the necessity for a comprehensive legislative framework for online labor dispute resolution through strategic amendments to the Labor Code of Ukraine and the Law of Ukraine «On Mediation». The research culminates in the proposal of an original model for a national platform, «E-Labor Arbitration,» intended to be integrated into the «E-Court» ecosystem or the «Diia» portal, aimed at creating a transparent, rapid, and accessible mechanism for labor rights protection in the digital era.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.849
Threshold uncertainty score0.727

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUzhhorod National University Herald Series LawSame topicDispute Resolution and Class ActionsFrench-language works237,207