MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7128203871 · doi:10.3138/ccar.v12i2.125

Is Class Action a Preferable Remedy for Independent Contractors? A Case Study on the Proposed Canadian Hockey League Class Action

2017· article· en· W7128203871 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yaroslavna Nosikova

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Class Action Review · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicDispute Resolution and Class Actions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClass actionLeagueClass (philosophy)Action (physics)CertificationFace (sociological concept)Res judicata

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: A number of putative actions have been filed recently that allege misclassification of employees as independent contractors. Left unchanged, such misclassification prevents the formation of unions and avoids the application of employment standards legislation. Using the putative Canadian Hockey League class proceeding (the CHL case) as an example, this paper argues that a class action is a preferable remedy for misclassified employees because it is a more discreet option in terms of workplace politics, and it offers the hope of systemic change. The paper first reviews the 2016 Mayotte v Ontario case to highlight challenges that independent contractors face in establishing that their employer acted unreasonably. Second, the paper provides background about the CHL case and discusses the likely players’ status under the current law. Third, it reviews the law on certification of employment-related proceedings, and its likely application to the CHL case. It also looks at challenges that arise in staying a proceeding involving multijurisdictional class actions, particularly in Quebec with new article 577 of that jurisdiction’s new Code of Civil Procedure. The paper concludes with a discussion on how the CHL class action will shape hockey, the sport that defines Canada’s culture and identity.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.384
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.177
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.173 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Class Action ReviewSame topicDispute Resolution and Class ActionsFrench-language works237,207