MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7165818888

ТРУДО-ПРАВОВІ ОСОБЛИВОСТІ ДИСТАНЦІЙНОЇ РОБОТИ В КАНАДІ

2021· article· uk· W7165818888 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueeKNUTSHIR · 2021
Typearticle
Languageuk
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicWork-Family Balance Challenges
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTelecommutingVoluntarinessWork (physics)LiabilityLabour lawEmployment contractIndependent contractorCollective agreement
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the article, the author has analysed the peculiarities of remote work regulations in Canada.The author found that in Canada the introduction of telecommuting must be the result of an agreement between the employee and the employer, reflecting the discussion of the following issues: (1) the voluntariness of the agreement; 2) working hours; 3) whether the arrangement will be regular or episodic; (4) the remote worker's location; (5) work goals; (6) expected results; (7) issues of responsibility; and (8) liability for telecommuting expenses. If either party so requests, the agreement must be put into writing. In the case of a telework agreement, the employee or the employer must be able to terminate the telework agreement with reasonable notice. Collective agreements, employment conditions, and internal labour regulations apply to employees who work remotely.In Canada, there are two scenarios where an employer can require an employee to work from home as a condition of employment that are relevant for legal purposes: (1) a separate employment contract is entered into; and (2) in the ordinary course of work (due to a change in the terms of the employment contract).If the employee is required to work at home as a condition of employment at the time of employment, remote work becomes a condition of the employment contract. However, there is no law that would oblige an employee to work from home. Thus, it can be argued that the potential employee is free to accept or reject the employer's offer of telecommuting.If the employee already works for the employer, and remote work was not mentioned in the employment contract, but later the employer requires the employee to work at home, then this will be a case of unilateral change of working conditions. In such a case, the employee is again not obliged to accept these conditions, but may resign, in which case he will be entitled to compensation for damages.In Canada, a telecommuter can unilaterally return to a position at an enterprise for reasonable reasons and by notifying the employer.Remote workers in Canada are subject to workplace health and safety regulations. Workers’ compensation legislation provides financial compensation to workers at the workplace in cases of injury.

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.

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), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.493
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.007

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.276 · 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