WeSISpedia - User contributions [en]

Minimum qualifying period for unjust dismissal (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)

2025-12-15T18:01:54Z

Hfechner: Redirected page to Minimum qualifying period of service for normal case of unjust dismissal (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)

#REDIRECT [[Minimum qualifying period of service for normal case of unjust dismissal (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]

Minimum qualifying period of service for normal case of unjust dismissal (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)

2025-12-15T18:01:01Z

Hfechner: Created page with "{{Indicator |datatype = Numeric |scale = Metric |valuelabels = not applicable |techname = labor_min_qua_per |category = Labour and labour market..."

{{Indicator
|datatype = Numeric
|scale = Metric
|valuelabels = not applicable
|techname = labor_min_qua_per
|category = [[Labour and labour market |Labour and labour market]]
|label = Minimum qualifying period of service for normal case of unjust dismissal (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)
|relatedindicators =
<ul>
<li>[[Part-time workers have the right to equal treatment (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Fixed-term contracts are allowed only for limited duration (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Maximum duration of fixed-term contracts (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Agency work is prohibited or strictly controlled (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Agency workers have the right to equal treatment (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[The law determines the legal status of the worker (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
</ul>
|description =
"Minimum qualifying period of service for normal case of unjust dismissal" refers to the duration of employment necessary for an employee to be eligible for general protection against wrongful termination (e.g. unjust dismissal). The variable is based on the CBR-LRI 18 indicator "Minimum qualifying period of service for normal case of unjust dismissal" (see Adams et al. 2017, 2023:17). To create a new scale for the variable "Minimum qualifying period of service for normal case of unjust dismissal", the CBR-LRI (18)'s initial values were reversed. The variable now ranges from 0 to 1, where "1" refers to 3 years or more, and "0" to that the law requires no qualifying.
The original variable is taken from the CBR Labour Regulation Index Dataset (‘CBR-LRI’), which provides data on labour laws in 117 countries for the period from (in most cases) 1970 to 2022, except for post-socialist countries (see Adams et al. 2017, 2023). The existing CBR-LRI data points were supplemented with data points prior to 1970 or corresponding points in time for socialist countries (see coding rules). In addition, data points for a further 36 countries were added (see coding rules). The CBR Labour Regulation Index Dataset was coded using provisions of law and relevant court decisions, which are taken from secondary sources, national law databases, and ILO NATLEX data (see Adams et al. 2017, 2023). The supplemented data points were coded using statutory law, only. The combined data points with reversed scale result in the World of Labour Dataset (WoL) (for first version V1, 1970-2013 see Dingeldey et al. 2022).
|codingrules =
The scale ranges from 0 to 1, where no qualifying period of service for normal case of unjust dismissal is required by law, represented by a score of "0" (Dingeldey et al. 2022). A missing value (-999) means the law has not been coded for this country year for multiple reasons or in the case of supplemented data points there is ‘no information available’. Statutory law is coded for the year in which it comes into force. Until the law was altered, the coding values were carried over for the ensuing years. As a result, the values between the years when the statutory legislation is in effect are an “estimate” of the legal standards/norms based on former law.
The coding template (algorithm) with the definition of the variable and instructions for the coding process is described Dingeldey et al. (2022, Online Supplement; Adams et al. 2023, on the variable 'Minimum qualifying period of service for normal case of unjust dismissal' see 2023:17). Dingeldey et al. (2022) describe the value of the variable "Minimum qualifying period of service for normal case of unjust dismissal" as "Period of service required before worker qualifies for general protection against unjust dismissal; normalised score; 1=3 years or more; 0=no qualifying period (reversed scale)" (2022, Online Supplement,https://academic.oup.com/ilj/article/51/3/560/6325574#supplementary-data). 
Dingeldey et al. (2022) assess the scale level as “The nature of each indicator’s scale depended on the number of possible states that we could envisage for that variable; in the end, all indicators that we developed had either binary (true and false) or graduated scales, some of which, drawing on the CBR, were ordinal in nature, and some cardinal (in the case, for example, of certain working time standards).” (p. 582). 
The scale level for WESIS was set uniformly to metric for all CBR-LRI and supplemented data points in the 1st project phase of CRC 1342; this is retained because all variables are coded on a 0-1 scale, with 1- and/or 2-digit decimal. Users should use the WESIS scale level with caution and consult the coding template (algorithm) and values. 
There is a break in time series within countries (in most cases 1880 to 1969 and 1970 to 2022, except for post-socialist countries) and limited comparability between countries [see 2] due to coverage of legal text during coding:
<ul>
<li>Variable values are based on statutory law, only for the period 1880-1969 (see WoL data points) [1880-1979/89 [see 1]] + 36 additional countries [see 2] for all time points available </li>
<li>Variable values are based on provisions of law, relevant court decisions or collective agreement (see CBR Leximetric Datasets, Deakin et al. 2023) for the period 1970-2022 [1980-2022 [see 3]] </li>
</ul>
 
<ul>
<li>[1] Applies to the following countries: Namibia, Zimbabwe.</li>
<li>[2] Applies to all countries not covered by CBR Leximetric Datasets (see Deakin et al 2023): Albania, Benin, Bosnia/Herzegovina, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo, El Salvador, Eritrea, Gambia, Guatemala, Guinea, Hong Kong, Haiti, Iraq, Jamaica, Kuwait, Laos, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritania, Mozambique, Nepal, Niger, North Korea, Papua New Guinea, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Tajikistan, Togo, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan for all times points available.</li>
<li>[3] Applies to the following countries: (1991-2022) Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Croatia, Estonia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Macedonia, Moldova, Serbia, Slovenia, Ukraine; (1990-2022) Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Namibia, Poland, Romania, Vietnam; (1992/3/5-2022) Cambodia, Russia, Slovakia, Yemen; (1980/6-2022) China, United Arab Emirates, Zimbabwe; (2006-2022) Montenegro. </li>
<li>[4] Important note: The (supplemented) data points of the variable are stored in extensive Excel tables, in which the corresponding sources, i.e. legal extracts and sources of these extracts, are also documented as the basis for the coded data points. A publication of the version: 0.002 Excel tables in GESIS is planned.</li>
</ul>
|citation =
Carlino, Marina, Irene Dingeldey, Heiner Fechner, Ulrich Mückenberger and Andrea Schäfer (2024). Compiled WoL and CBR Leximetric Datasets [Updated 2024]. University of Bremen
|relatedpublications =
<ul>
<li>Adams, Zoe, Bhumika Billa, Louise Bishop, Simon Deakin and Tvisha Shroff (2023). CBR Labour Regulation Index (Dataset of 117 Countries, 1970-2022) - Codes and Sources. Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge. at: https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.9130.2
<li>Carlino, Marina, Fechner, Heiner, and Schäfer, Andrea (2025, forthcoming). Using leximetrics for coding legal segmentation in employment law: The development and potential of the Worlds of Labour database. In I. Dingeldey, H. Fechner, & U. Mückenberger (Eds.), Constructing Worlds of Labour. Coverage and Generosity of Labour Law as Outcomes of Regulatory Social Policy. Palgrave Macmillan. p.53-83
<li>Deakin, Simon, Johna Armour and Mathias Siems (2023). CBR Leximetric Datasets [Updated 2023]. Apollo - University of Cambridge Repository. https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.9130.2
<li>Dingeldey, Irene, Heiner Fechner, Jean-Yves Gerlitz, Jenny Hahs and Ulrich Mückenberger (2022). Worlds of Labour: Introducing the Standard-Setting, Privileging and Equalising Typology as a Measure of Legal Segmentation in Labour Law, Industrial Law Journal, 51(3): 560–597, https://doi.org/10.1093/indlaw/dwab016
</ul>
|projectmanagers = Responsible for data editing, description (WESIS) and entry: Andrea Schäfer (2021-2025), Jenny Hahs (2018-21), Jean-Yves Gerlitz (2018-20); Responsible for data coding: Heiner Fechner (2018-2025), Marina Carlino (2022-2025); Principal Investigator: Irene Dingeldey, Ulrich Mückenberger ; Student assistants (alphabetical ordering): Max Anders, Julia Bode, Jessica Bonn, Daniel Euler, Jan-Christopher Floren, Maxime Fischer, Jennifer Götte, Eliko Hagen, Désirée Hoppe, Irina Kyburz, Alexandra Kojnow, Tarek Mahmalat, Karolin Meyer, Oguz Mermut, Johanna Nold, Tanusha Pali, Gerrit Pantel, Johannes Ramsauer, Max Sudhoff, Kristina Walter, Caroline Zambiasi
|datarelease =
<ul>
<li>Version 0.001: Initial release with data from CBR-LRI published in April 2017 (data for the period from (in most cases) 1970 to 2013) + supplemented data points from WoL, V1</li>
<li>Version 0.002: Updated with data from CBR-LRI 2023, V2* (data for the period from (in most cases) 1970 to 2022) + supplemented data points from WoL, V2</li>
</ul>
|revisions = No revisions yet
|sources =
<ul>
<li>Deakin, Simon, Johna Armour and Mathias Siems (2023). CBR Leximetric Datasets [Updated 2023]. Apollo - University of Cambridge Repository. https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.9130.2 </li>
<li> The sources used for coding the WoL-values are described in WESIS with “n. k.” for “not known”, information on sources can be found in the column 'source' in the Excel files (for more information on sources pls contact the person responsible for data coding – see the entry: Project manager(s)) -. </li>
</ul>
}}

Labour and labour market

2025-12-15T17:58:28Z

Hfechner:

{|class="wikitable sortable" border="1"
|-
! Indicator name*
! Subcategory I
! Subcategory II
! Subcategory III
! Technical name*
! Scale*
! Short description
! Data origin*
|-
| [[Unemployment Insurance Law. Program Type.]]
| Unemployment insurance
| Legal
| Program type
| labor_unemp_type
| Multinomial
| Program type of each scheme
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Unemployment Insurance Law. Financing Mode.]]
| Unemployment insurance
| Legal
| Financing
| labor_unemp_financing
| String
| Defines who contributes to scheme
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Unemployment Insurance Law. Average Replacement Rate.]]
| Unemployment insurance
| Legal
| Benefits
| labor_unemp_benefit_rate
| Metric
| Replacement rate based on average income
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Unemployment Insurance Law. Average Replacement Rate 6 Months.]]
| Unemployment insurance
| Legal
| Benefits
| labor_unemp_benefit_rate_6_months
| Metric
| Replacement rate based on average income and 6 months of unemployment spell
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Unemployment Insurance Law. Duration of Benefits.]]
| Unemployment insurance
| Legal
| Benefits
| labor_unemp_benefit_duration
| Metric
| Duration of unemployment benefits
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Unemployment Insurance Law. Maximum Duration of Benefits.]]
| Unemployment insurance
| Legal
| Benefits
| labor_unemp_benefit_max_duration
| Metric
| Maximum duration of unemployment benefits
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Unemployment Insurance Law. Benefit Progressivity.]]
| Unemployment insurance
| Legal
| Inequality
| labor_unemp_benefit_progressivity
| Metric
| Progressivity of unemployment benefits
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Unemployment Insurance Law. Required Contributions.]]
| Unemployment insurance
| Legal
| Eligibility
| labor_unemp_eligibility_contributions
| Metric
| Required contributions for benefit eligibility
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Unemployment Insurance Law. Required Contributions Reference Period.]]
| Unemployment insurance
| Legal
| Eligibility
| labor_unemp_eligibility_reference_period
| Metric
| Reference period for required contributions
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Unemployment Insurance Law. Required Contributions Ratio.]]
| Unemployment insurance
| Legal
| Eligibility
| labor_unemp_eligibility_ratio
| Metric
| Ratio of required contributions and reference period
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Legally mandated notice period (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Dismissal protection
| labor_dis_not_per
| Metric
| Measures the length of notice, in weeks, that has to be given to a worker with 3 years’ employment (CBR-LRI).
| CRC Compiled Data
|-
| [[Legally mandated redundancy compensation (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Dismissal protection
| labor_red_com_amm
| Metric
| Measures the amount of redundancy compensation payable to a worker made redundant after 3 years of employment, measured in weeks of pay (CBR-LRI).
| CRC Compiled Data
|-
| [[Minimum qualifying period of service for normal case of unjust dismissal (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Selectivity
| labor_min_qua_per
| Metric
| Measures the period of service required before a worker qualifies for general protection against unjust dismissal (CBR-LRI).
| CRC Compiled Data
|-
| [[Redundancy selection (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Seniority
| labor_redund_select
| Metric
| Measures the priority rules, in the country's statutory or case law and relevant court decisions, for redundancy (CBR-LRI).
| 3rd Party Data
|-
| [[Priority in re-employment (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Seniority
| labor_pri_re_emp
| Metric
| Measures the priority rules, in the country's statutory or case law and relevant court decisions, for re-employment (CBR-LRI).
| CRC Compiled Data
|-
| [[Law imposes procedural constraints on dismissal (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Dismissal protection
| labor_pro_dis_con
| Metric
| Measures the failures, in the country's statutory or case law and relevant court decisions, to follow procedural requirements for dismissal (CBR-LRI).
| CRC Compiled Data
|-
| [[Law imposes substantive constraints on dismissal (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Dismissal protection
| labor_sub_dis_con
| Metric
| Measures the permissibilities, in the country's statutory or case law and relevant court decisions, on dismissal (CBR-LRI).
| CRC Compiled Data
|-
| [[Reinstatement normal remedy for unfair dismissal (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Dismissal protection
| labor_reinstate
| Metric
| Measures the remedies, in the country's statutory or case law and relevant court decisions, for unfair dismissal (CBR-LRI).
| CRC Compiled Data
|-
| [[Annual leave entitlements (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Working time restriction
| labor_ann_lea_ent
| Metric
| Measures the normal length of annual paid leave guaranteed by law or collective agreement (CBR-LRI).
| CRC Compiled Data
|-
| [[Public holiday entitlements (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Working time restriction
| labor_pub_hol_ent
| Metric
| Measures the normal number of paid public holidays guaranteed by law or collective agreement(CBR-LRI).
| CRC Compiled Data
|-
| [[Overtime premia (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Working time restriction
| labor_overt_premia
| Metric
| Measures the normal premium for overtime working set by law or by collective agreements which are generally applicable (CBR-LRI).
| CRC Compiled Data
|-
| [[Weekend working (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Working time restriction
| labor_weekend_work
| Metric
| Measures the normal premium for weekend working set by law or by collective agreements which are generally applicable (CBR-LRI).
| CRC Compiled Data
|-
| [[Limits to overtime working (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Working time restriction
| labor_overt_work
| Metric
| Measures the maximum weekly number of overtime hours permitted by law or by collective agreements which are generally applicable (CBR-LRI).
| CRC Compiled Data
|-
| [[Duration of the normal working week (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Working time restriction
| labor_workweek
| Metric
| Measures the maximum duration of the normal working week exclusive of overtime (CBR-LRI).
| CRC Compiled Data
|-
| [[Maximum daily working time (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Working time restriction
| labor_workday
| Metric
| Measures the maximum number of permitted working hours in a day, taking account of rules governing rest breaks and maximum daily working time limits (CBR-LRI).
| CRC Compiled Data
|-
| [[The law determines the legal status of the worker (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Selectivity
| labor_work_def
| Metric
| Measures the kind of legal relationship in the country's statutory or case law and relevant court decisions determining the legal status of the worker (CBR-LRI).
| CRC Compiled Data
|-
| [[Part-time workers have the right to equal treatment (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Non-standard employment
| labor_ptemp_et
| Metric
| Measures the equality in the country's statutory or case law and relevant court decisions in equal treatment for part-time workers (CBR-LRI).
| CRC Compiled Data
|-
| [[Dismissing costs for part-time workers is proportional (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Non-standard employment
| labor_pt_dis_cost
| Metric
| Measures the proportionality in the country's statutory or case law and relevant court decisions in terms of cost of dismissing part-time vs full-time workers (CBR-LRI).
| CRC Compiled Data
|-
| [[Fixed-term contracts are allowed only for work of limited duration (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Non-standard employment
| labor_fx_limit
| Metric
| Measures the constraints in the country's statutory or case law and relevant court decisions on the conclusion of a fixed-term contract (CBR-LRI).
| CRC Compiled Data
|-
| [[Fixed-term workers have the right to equal treatment (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Non-standard employment
| labor_fxemp_et
| Metric
| Measures the constraints in the country's statutory or case law and relevant court decisions in equal treatment of fixed-term versus permanent workers (CBR-LRI).
| CRC Compiled Data
|-
| [[Maximum duration of fixed-term contracts (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Non-standard employment
| labor_max_fx_dur
| Metric
| Measures the maximum cumulative duration of fixed-term contracts permitted by law before the employment is deemed to be permanent(CBR-LRI).
| CRC Compiled Data
|-
| [[Agency work is prohibited or strictly controlled (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Non-standard employment
| labor_awork_con
| Metric
| Measures the prohibition in the country's statutory or case law and relevant court decisions for agency work (CBR-LRI).
| CRC Compiled Data
|-
| [[Agency workers have the right to equal treatment (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Non-standard employment
| labor_awork_et
| Metric
| Measures the equality in the country's statutory or case law and relevant court decisions in equal treatment of agency workers (CBR-LRI).
| CRC Compiled Data
|-
| [[Legally mandated notice period increases with seniority (WoL V1)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Seniority
| labor_notped_sen
| Metric
| Measures the strength of the law in increasing the notice periods for employees with seniority (CRC 1342).
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Legally mandated severance compensation increases with seniority (WoL V1)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Seniority
| labor_redcomp_sen
| Metric
| Measures the strength of the law in increasing severance payments for employees with seniority (CRC 1342).
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Seniority is a decisive redundancy selection criterion (WoL V1)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Seniority
| labor_redsec_sen
| Metric
| Measures the strength of the law in taking account of seniority as a decisive redudancy selection criterion (CRC 1342).
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Dismissal protection depends on size of enterprise (WoL V1)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Selectivity
| labor_dispro_size
| Metric
| Measures the dismissal protection in relation to size of the enterprise (CRC 1342).
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Law provides for equal access to employment for men and women (WoL V1)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Antidiscrimination and Equity
| labor_eqacc_gend
| Metric
| Measures non-discrimination based on the gender in terms of access to employment (CRC 1342).
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Law prescribes special measures for women (WoL V1)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Antidiscrimination and Equity
| labor_posdis_gend
| Metric
| Measures the strength of the law in prescribing special measures for women (CRC 1342).
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Law provides for equal access to employment concerning ethnicity/race (WoL V1)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Antidiscrimination and Equity
| labor_eqacc_ethn
| Metric
| Measures if the law is guaranteeing non-discrimination concerning the ethnicity/race or not (CRC 1342).
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Law provides regulation of special measures concerning ethnicity/race (WoL V1)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Antidiscrimination and Equity
| labor_posdis_ethn
| Metric
| Measures the strength of the law in prescribing special measures for groups discriminated against in terms of ethnicity/race (CRC 1342).
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Equal pay for work of equal value is legally provided for (WoL V1)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Antidiscrimination and Equity
| labor_eqpay
| Metric
| Measures wether the law is guaranteeing equal pay for equal value or not (CRC 1342).
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Law provides for equal working conditions for men and women (WoL V1)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Antidiscrimination and Equity
| labor_eqwc_gend
| Metric
| Measures the strength of the law in guaranteeing equal working conditions concerning sex (CRC 1342).
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Law provides for equal working conditions concerning ethnicity/race (WoL V1)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Antidiscrimination and Equity
| labor_eqwc_ethn
| Metric
| Measures the strength of the law in guaranteeing equal working conditions concerning ethnicity/race (CRC 1342).
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Employees enjoy right to a universal minimum wage (WoL V1)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Antidiscrimination and Equity
| labor_minwage
| Metric
| Measures the strength of the law in guaranteeing a minimum wage for all employees (CRC 1342).
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Right to unionisation ]]
| Labour law
| Collective rights
| Employee representation
| labor_union
| Metric
| Measures the protection of the right to form trade unions in the country's constitution (flexibly interpreted in the case of countries without a codified constitution) (CBR-LRI).
| 3rd Party Data
|-
| [[Right to collective bargaining ]]
| Labour law
| Collective rights
| Employee representation
| labor_coll_barg
| Metric
| Measures the protection of the right to collective bargaining or the right to enter into collective agreements in the country's constitution (loosely interpreted in the case of system such as the UK without a codified constitution) (CBR-LRI).
| 3rd Party Data
|-
| [[Duty to bargain ]]
| Labour law
| Collective rights
| Employee representation
| labor_duty_barg
| Metric
| Measures the employers duty of the right to reach an agreement with official collective actors in the country's constitution (flexibly interpreted in the case of countries without a codified constitution) (CBR-LRI).
| 3rd Party Data
|-
| [[Extension of collective agreements ]]
| Labour law
| Collective rights
| Employee representation
| labor_exten_barg
| Metric
| Measures the extension of collective agreements in the country's statutory or case law, constitution and relevant court decisions (CBR-LRI).
| 3rd Party Data
|-
| [[Closed shops ]]
| Labour law
| Collective rights
| Employee representation
| labor_closedshop
| Metric
| Measures the right in prohibiting/permitting pre-entry/post-entry closed shops in the country's statutory or case law, constitution and relevant court decisions (CBR-LRI).
| 3rd Party Data
|-
| [[Codetermination board membership ]]
| Labour law
| Collective rights
| Employee representation
| labor_codeterm_bmem
| Metric
| Measures the co-determination right of unions/workers in terms of board membership in the country's statutory or case law, constitution and relevant court decisions (CBR-LRI).
| 3rd Party Data
|-
| [[Codetermination and information/consultation of workers ]]
| Labour law
| Collective rights
| Employee representation
| labor_codeterm_info
| Metric
| Measures the rights of information and co-decision making of works councils or enterprise committees in the country's statutory or case law, constitution and relevant court decisions (CBR-LRI).
| 3rd Party Data
|-
| [[Unofficial industrial action ]]
| Labour law
| Collective rights
| Industrial action
| labor_unoff_indact
| Metric
| Measures the unlawfulness of unofficial industrial action (such as unofficial or ‘wildcat’ strikes) in the country's statutory or case law, constitution and relevant court decisions or equivalent (CBR-LRI).
| 3rd Party Data
|-
| [[Political industrial action ]]
| Labour law
| Collective rights
| Industrial action
| labor_polit_indact
| Metric
| Measures the unlawfulness of political industrial action (i.e. non work-related) in the country's statutory or case law, constitution and relevant court decisions or equivalent (CBR-LRI).
| 3rd Party Data
|-
| [[Secondary industrial action ]]
| Labour law
| Collective rights
| Industrial action
| labor_second_indact
| Metric
| Measures the constrains on secondary industrial action in the country's statutory or case law, constitution and relevant court decisions or equivalent (CBR-LRI).
| 3rd Party Data
|-
| [[Lockouts ]]
| Labour law
| Collective rights
| Industrial action
| labor_lockouts
| Metric
| Measures the permission of lockouts in the country's statutory or case law, constitution and relevant court decisions or equivalent (CBR-LRI).
| 3rd Party Data
|-
| [[Right to industrial action ]]
| Labour law
| Collective rights
| Industrial action
| labor_right_indact
| Metric
| Measures the protection of the right to industrial action (i.e. strike, go-slow or work-to-rule) in the country's constitution or equivalent (CBR-LRI).
| 3rd Party Data
|-
| [[Waiting period prior to industrial action ]]
| Labour law
| Collective rights
| Industrial action
| labor_wait_indact
| Metric
| Measures the requirement of a waiting period prior to industrial action in the country's statutory or case law, constitution and relevant court decisions or equivalent (CBR-LRI).
| 3rd Party Data
|-
| [[Peace obligation ]]
| Labour law
| Collective rights
| Industrial action
| labor_peace_oblig
| Metric
| Measures the unlawfulness of strikes while peace obligation are in force in the country's statutory or case law, constitution and relevant court decisions or equivalent (CBR-LRI).
| 3rd Party Data
|-
| [[Compulsory conciliation or arbitration ]]
| Labour law
| Collective rights
| Industrial action
| labor_comp_conc
| Metric
| Measures the right of mandate conciliation procedures or other alternative-dispute-resolution in the country's statutory or case law, constitution and relevant court decisions or equivalent (CBR-LRI).
| 3rd Party Data
|-
| [[Replacement of striking workers ]]
| Labour law
| Collective rights
| Industrial action
| labor_replac_strike
| Metric
| Measures the prohibition of dismissal for striking workers in the country's statutory or case law, constitution and relevant court decisions or equivalent (CBR-LRI).
| 3rd Party Data
|-
| [[Type of employment law]]
| Labour Law
| Individual labour law
| Labour law type
| labor_emplaw_typ
| Multinomial
| Typology of legal segmentation in employment law with related types and middle category (CRC 1342).
| CRC Compiled Data
|-
| [[Standard-setting function]]
| Labour Law
| Individual labour law
| Labour law function
| labor_stand_sett_func
| Metric
| Measures the level of general worker protection in individual labour law (CRC 1342).
| CRC Compiled Data
|-
| [[Privileging function]]
| Labour Law
| Individual labour law
| Labour law function
| labor_priv_func
| Metric
| Measures the level of norm-related privileging in individual labour law (CRC 1342).
| CRC Compiled Data
|-
| [[Equalising function]]
| Labour Law
| Individual labour law
| Labour law function
| labor_equa_func
| Metric
| Measures the level of norm-related equalising in individual labour law (CRC 1342).
| CRC Compiled Data
|-
| [[Work-injury. Introduction year of first federal law. ]]
| Work-injury
| First law
| Introduction
| labor_workinjury_firstlaw
| Date
| Not counting state employees (military or civil servants), (CRC 1342)
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Work-injury. Introduction year of first law as independent nation-state. ]]
| Work-injury
| First law
| Introduction
| labor_workinjury_firstnat
| Date
| Not counting state employees (military or civil servants), (CRC 1342)
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Work-injury. First law program type. ]]
| Work-injury
| First law
| Program type
| labor_workinjury_firstlaw_programtype
| Multinomial
| Either employer-liability (=1) or a risk-pooling (=2), (CRC 1342)
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Work-injury. First risk pooling law. ]]
| Work-injury
| First law
| Program Type
| labor_workinjury_firstins
| Date
| Year of first law that involved risk-pooling, either as insurance or fund (CRC 1342)
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Work-injury. First establishment of a fund. ]]
| Work-injury
| First law
| Program Type
| labor_workinjury_first_fund
| Date
| Year of first law establishing a provident fund for at least part of the workforce (CRC 1342)
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Work-injury. First instance of social insurance. ]]
| Work-injury
| First law
| Program Type
| labor_workinjury_first_socins
| Date
| Year of first law establishing social insurance for at least part of the workforce (CRC 1342)
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Work-injury. White-collar first law introduction year. ]]
| Work-injury
| First law
| Coverage
| labor_workinjury_firstlaw_whitecollar
| Date
| Year of law first covering any white-collar, commercial workers (CRC 1342)
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Work-injury. White-collar first law full coverage. ]]
| Work-injury
| First law
| Coverage
| labor_workinjury_firstlaw_whitecollar_fullcoverage
| Date
| Year of law first covering all* white-collar workers (*defined as literally all, over 80% or all possible) (CRC 1342)
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Work-injury. Blue-collar first law introduction year. ]]
| Work-injury
| First law
| Coverage
| labor_workinjury_firstlaw_bluecollar
| Date
| Year of law first covering any segment of the blue-collar work-force (CRC 1342)
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Work-injury. Blue-collar first law full coverage. ]]
| Work-injury
| First law
| Coverage
| labor_workinjury_firstlaw_bluecollar_fullcoverage
| Date
| Year of law first covering all* blue-collar industrial workers (*not counting agriculture; defined as literally all, over 80% or all possible) (CRC 1342)
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Work-injury. Blue-collar first full-coverage social insurance. ]]
| Work-injury
| First law
| Coverage
| labor_workinjury_firstins_bluecollar_fullcoverage
| Date
| Year of law first covering all blue-collar industrial workers with social insurance
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Work-injury. Agricultural workers first law introduction year. ]]
| Work-injury
| First law
| Coverage
| labor_workinjury_firstlaw_agriworkers
| Date
| Year of first law covering some or all agricultural workers (CRC 1342)
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Work-injury. Agricultural workers first law full coverage. ]]
| Work-injury
| First law
| Coverage
| labor_workinjury_firstlaw_agriworkers_fullcoverage
| Date
| Year of law first covering all* agricultural workers (*not counting farmers; defined as literally all, over 80% or all possible) (CRC 1342)
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Work-injury. First-law according to US Social Security Administration. ]]
| Work-injury
| First law
| Introduction
| labor_workinjury_firstlaw_sspw
| Date
| Not counting state employees (military or civil servants) (CRC 1342)
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Work-injury. Replacement rate temporary. ]]
| Work-injury
| Legal
| Benefits
| labor_workinjury_replacement_rate_temp
| Metric
| Wage replacement rate for incapacity to work for a period of 6 months, with expected return to full work (CRC 1342)
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Work-injury. Replacement rate permanent. ]]
| Work-injury
| Legal
| Benefits
| labor_workinjury_replacement_rate_perm
| Metric
| Wage replacement rate for incapacity to work for a period of 12 months, unexpected to return to full work (CRC 1342)
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Work-injury. Coverage as percent of labor force. ]]
| Work-injury
| Legal
| Inclusivity
| labor_workinjury_coverage
| Metric
| Percentage of the labor force legally covered by main work-injury law, and all subsidiary laws and exceptions (CRC 1342)
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Work-injury. Duration of temporary wage replacement. ]]
| Work-injury
| Legal
| Benefits
| labor_workinjury_duration_temp
| Metric
| Legal duration of benefits for temporary incapacity to work due to a work-injury (CRC 1342)
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Work-injury. Duration of permanent wage replacement. ]]
| Work-injury
| Legal
| Benefits
| labor_workinjury_duration_perm
| Metric
| Legal duration of benefits for permanent incapacity to work due to a work-injury (CRC 1342)
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Work-injury. Replacement rate single worker harmonized for SIED and imputed for full world. ]]
| Work-injury
| Legal
| Benefits
| workinjury_replacement_rate_single_SIED_harmo_full
| Metric
| Multi-law and applied policy legal replacement rate for incapacity to work due to a work-injury, world imputed (CRC 1342)
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Work-injury. Coverage as a percent of labor force SIED harmonized and imputed for full world. ]]
| Work-injury
| Legal
| Inclusivity
| workinjury_coverage_SIED_harmo_full
| Metric
| Multi-law and applied legal coverage as a percent of the labor force against a work-injury, world imputed (CRC 1342)
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Unemployment. Introduction year of first federal law. ]]
| Unemployment insurance
| First law
| Introduction
| labor_unemp_firstlaw
| Date
| Not counting state employees (military or civil servants) (CRC 1342)
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Unemployment. First law program type. ]]
| Unemployment insurance
| First law
| Program type
| labor_unemp_firstlaw_programtype
| Multinomial
| Nature of first unemployment system (CRC 1342)
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Unemployment. First law financing mode.]]
| Unemployment insurance
| First law
| Financing
| labor_unemp_firstlaw_financing
| Multinomial
| Financing mode of first unemployment system (CRC 1342)
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Unemployment. First law beneficiaries.]]
| Unemployment insurance
| First law
| Coverage
| labor_unemp_firstlaw_beneficiaries
| Multinomial
| Which groups were covered by the first unemployment system (CRC 1342)
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Unemployment. First law benefit duration and amount. ]]
| Unemployment insurance
| First law
| Benefits
| labor_unemp_firstlaw_duration
| String
| Written description of the maximum amount and duration of unemployment (CRC 1342)
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Unemployment. First law family benefit. ]]
| Unemployment insurance
| First law
| Benefits
| labor_unemp_firstlaw_benefit_family
| Binary
| Any provision for family in case of unemployment
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Unemployment. First law group differences. ]]
| Unemployment insurance
| First law
| Inequality
| labor_unemp_firstlaw_groupdiff
| String
| Any groups excluded by race, ethnicity, place of birth, language, religion, gender, or other non-occupation-related group differences
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Introduction dates employment legislation]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Regulation of contract
| labor_employleg_employpro_regcontract
| Date
| The data set captures years of introduction of the first law concerning the regulation of contracts (CRC 1342)
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Type of employment law (string)]]
| Labour Law
| Individual labour law
| Labour law type
| labor_emplaw_typ_string
| String
| Typology of legal segmentation in employment law with related types and middle category (CRC 1342).
| CRC Compiled Data
|-
| [[SPE-Type of employment law ]]
| Labour Law
| Individual labour law
| Labour law type
| labor_emplaw_typ_short
| Multinomial
| Typology of legal segmentation in employment law (CRC 1342).
| CRC Compiled Data
|-
| [[SPE-Type of employment law (string)]]
| Labour Law
| Individual labour law
| Labour law type
| labor_emplaw_typ_short_string
| String
| Typology of legal segmentation in employment law (CRC 1342).
| CRC Compiled Data
|-
| [[Notification of dismissal (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]
| Labour Law
| Individual labour law
| Dismissal protection
| labor_not_dism
| Metric
| Measures the notifications, in the country's statutory or case law and relevant court decisions, of dismissal by third party (CBR-LRI).
| CRC Compiled Data
|-
| [[Annual leave entitlements (WoL, V2)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Working time restriction
| labor_time_leave
| Metric
| Measures the normal length of annual paid leave guaranteed by statutory law.
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Public holiday entitlements (WoL, V2)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Working time restriction
| labor_time_holiday
| Metric
| Measures the normal number of paid public holidays guaranteed by statutory law.
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Overtime premia (WoL, V2)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Working time restriction
| labor_time_ot_premia
| Metric
| Measures the normal premium for overtime working set by statutory law.
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Weekend working (WoL, V2)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Working time restriction
| labor_time_we_premia
| Metric
| Measures the normal premium for weekend working set by statutory law.
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Limits to overtime working (WoL, V2)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Working time restriction
| labor_time_ot_limit
| Metric
| Measures the maximum weekly number of overtime hours permitted by statutory law.
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Duration of the normal working week (WoL, V2)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Working time restriction
| labor_time_week
| Metric
| Measures the maximum duration of the normal working week set by statutory law exclusive of overtime.
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Maximum daily working time (WoL, V2)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Working time restriction
| labor_time_day
| Metric
| Measures the maximum number of permitted working hours in a day set by statutory law, taking account of rules governing rest breaks and maximum daily working time limits
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Legally mandated notice period (WoL, V2)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Dismissal protection
| labor_dism_notice
| Metric
| Measures the length of notice, in weeks, that has to be given to a worker with 3 years’ employment based on statutory law.
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Legally mandated redundancy compensation (WoL, V2)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Dismissal protection
| labor_dism_comp
| Metric
| Measures the amount of redundancy compensation payable to a worker made redundant after 3 years of employment, measured in weeks of pay, based on statutory law.
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Law imposes procedural constraints on dismissal (WoL, V2)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Dismissal protection
| labor_dism_constr_proced
| Metric
| Measures the strength of procedural requirements for dismissals set by statutory law.
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Law imposes substantive constraints on dismissal (WoL, V2)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Dismissal protection
| labor_dism_constr_subst
| Metric
| Measures the strength of substantive requirements for dismissals set by statutory law.
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Reinstatement normal remedy for unfair dismissal (WoL, V2)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Dismissal protection
| labor_dism_reinstate
| Metric
| Measures the strength of remedies, in the country's statutory law, for unfair dismissal.
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Notification of dismissal (WoL, V2)]]
| Labour Law
| Individual labour law
| Dismissal protection
| labor_dism_notif
| Metric
| Measures the strength of control and controllability via notification in case of dismissal, in the country's statutory law, by the worker and third parties.
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Notice period increases with seniority (WoL, V2)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Seniority
| labor_priv_sen_notif
| Metric
| Measures the strength of statutory law in increasing the notice periods for employees with seniority.
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Severance compensation increases with seniority (WoL, V2)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Seniority
| labor_priv_sen_pay
| Metric
| Measures the strength of the law in increasing severance payments for employees with seniority.
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Seniority is decisive redundancy selection criterion (WoL, V2)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Seniority
| labor_priv_sen_sel
| Metric
| Measures the strength of statutory law in taking account of seniority as a decisive redundancy selection criterion.
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Priority in re-employment (WoL, V2)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Seniority
| labor_priv_sen_prio
| Metric
| Measures the priority rules, in the country's statutory law, for re-employment rights after dismissal.
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Dismissal protection depends on size of enterprise (WoL, V2)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Selectivity
| labor_priv_size
| Metric
| Measures the dismissal protection by statutory law in relation to size of the enterprise.
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Law determines the legal status of the worker (WoL, V2)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Selectivity
| labor_priv_contract
| Metric
| Measures the strength of legal rules defining the legal status of the worker.
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Minimum qualifying period for unjust dismissal (WoL, V2)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Selectivity
| labor_priv_sen_quali
| Metric
| Measures the period of service required before a worker qualifies for general protection against unjust dismissal.
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Law provides for equal access to employment for men and women (WoL, V2)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Antidiscrimination and Equity
| labor_discr_equ_op_gend
| Metric
| Measures the strength of statutory law guaranteeing non-discrimination concerning gender in terms of access to employment.
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Law prescribes special measures for women (WoL, V2)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Antidiscrimination and Equity
| labor_discr_special_gend
| Metric
| Measures the strength of the law in prescribing special measures for women.
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Law provides for equal access to employment concerning ethnicity/race (WoL, V2)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Antidiscrimination and Equity
| labor_discr_equ_op_rac
| Metric
| Measures the strength of statutory law guaranteeing non-discrimination concerning race/ethnicity in terms of access to employment.
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Law provides regulation of special measures concerning ethnicity/race (WoL, V2)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Antidiscrimination and Equity
| labor_discr_special_rac
| Metric
| Measures the strength of the law in prescribing special measures for groups discriminated against in terms of ethnicity/race.
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Equal pay for work of equal value is guaranteed (WoL, V2)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Antidiscrimination and Equity
| labor_discr_equ_pay
| Metric
| Measures the strength of statutory law concerning the guarantee of equal pay.
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Law provides for equal working conditions for men and women (WoL, V2)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Antidiscrimination and Equity
| labor_discr_equ_cond_gend
| Metric
| Measures the strength of the law in guaranteeing equal working conditions concerning gender/sex.
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Law provides for equal working conditions concerning ethnicity/race (WoL, V2)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Antidiscrimination and Equity
| labor_discr_equ_cond_rac
| Metric
| Measures the strength of the law in guaranteeing equal working conditions concerning ethnicity/race.
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Right to minimum wage (WoL, V2)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Antidiscrimination and Equity
| labor_equity_miniwage
| Metric
| Measures the strength of the law in guaranteeing a minimum wage for all employees.
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Fixed-term contracts are allowed only for limited duration (WoL, V2)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Non-standard employment
| labor_equity_fix_constr
| Metric
| Measures the constraints in the country's statutory law on the conclusion of fixed-term contracts.
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Maximum duration of fixed-term contracts (WoL, V2)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Non-standard employment
| labor_equity_fix_dura
| Metric
| Measures the maximum cumulative duration of fixed-term contracts permitted by law before the employment is deemed to be permanent.
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Agency work is prohibited or strictly controlled (WoL, V2)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Non-standard employment
| labor_equity_agen_contr
| Metric
| Measures the strength of restrictions in the country's statutory law on agency work.
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Part-time workers have right to equal treatment (WoL, V2)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Non-standard employment
| labor_equity_part_equal
| Metric
| Measures the strength of statutory law guaranteeing equal treatment for part-time workers.
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Costs of dismissing part-time workers are proportional (WoL, V2)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Non-standard employment
| labor_equity_part_dismiss
| Metric
| Measures the strength of statutory law guaranteeing equal rights in case of dismissal.
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Fixed-term workers have right to equal treatment (WoL, V2)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Non-standard employment
| labor_equity_fix_equal
| Metric
| Measures the strength of statutory law guaranteeing equal treatment for fixed-term workers.
| Original CRC Data
|-
| [[Agency workers have right to equal treatment (WoL, V2)]]
| Labour law
| Individual labour law
| Non-standard employment
| labor_equity_agen_equal
| Metric
| Measures the strength of statutory law guaranteeing equal treatment for agency workers.
| Original CRC Data
|-
|}

Fixed-term contracts are allowed only for limited duration

2025-12-15T16:45:33Z

Hfechner: Redirected page to Fixed-term contracts are allowed only for limited duration (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)

#REDIRECT [[Fixed-term contracts are allowed only for limited duration (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]

Fixed-term contracts are allowed only for limited duration (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)

2025-12-15T16:45:04Z

Hfechner: Created page with "{{Indicator |datatype = Numeric |scale = Metric |valuelabels = not applicable |techname = labor_fx_limit |category = Labour and labour market |l..."

{{Indicator
|datatype = Numeric
|scale = Metric
|valuelabels = not applicable
|techname = labor_fx_limit
|category = [[Labour and labour market |Labour and labour market]]
|label = Fixed-term contracts are allowed only for limited duration (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)
|relatedindicators =
<ul>
<li>[[Part-time workers have the right to equal treatment (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Dismissing costs for part-time workers is proportional (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Fixed-term workers have the right to equal treatment (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Maximum duration of fixed-term contracts (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Agency work is prohibited or strictly controlled (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Agency workers have the right to equal treatment (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
</ul>
|description =
"Fixed-term contracts are allowed only for limited duration" measures the constraints in the country's statutory or case law and relevant court decisions on the conclusion of a fixed-term contract. The scale ranges from 0 to 1.
This variable is taken from the CBR Labour Regulation Index Dataset (‘CBR-LRI’), which provides data on labour laws in 117 countries for the period from (in most cases) 1970 to 2022, except for post-socialist countries (see Adams et al. 2017, 2023). The existing CBR-LRI data points were supplemented with data points prior to 1970 or corresponding points in time for socialist countries (see coding rules). In addition, data points for a further 36 countries were added (see coding rules).
The CBR Labour Regulation Index Dataset was coded using provisions of law and relevant court decisions, which are taken from secondary sources, national law databases, and ILO NATLEX data (see Adams et al. 2017, 2023). The supplemented data points were coded using statutory law, only. The combined data points result in the World of Labour Dataset (WoL) (see Dingeldey et al. 2022).
|codingrules =
The score is adjusted to a 0-1 scale, where "1" is assigned if the law imposes a significant limitation on the termination of a fixed-term contract, and "0" if "otherwise" (see Adams et al. 2023, Dingeldey et al. 2022). A missing value (-999) means the law has not been coded for this country year for multiple reasons or in case of supplemented data points there is ‘no information available’. Statutory law is coded for the year in which it comes into force. Until the law was altered, the coding values were carried over for the ensuing years. As a result, the values between the years when the statutory legislation is in effect are an “estimate” of the legal standards/norms based on former law. The coding template (algorithm) with the definition of the variable and instructions for the coding process is described in Adams et al. (2017, 2023) and Dingeldey et al. (2022, Online Supplement). 
As Adams et al. (2023) describe, the value of the variable "Fixed-term contracts are allowed only for work of limited duration" "Equals 1 if the law imposes a substantive constraint on the conclusion of a fixed-term contract, by, for example, allowing temporary hirings only for jobs which are temporary by nature, training, seasonal work, replacement of workers on maternity or sick leave, or other specified reasons. Equals 0 otherwise. Scope for gradation between 0 and 1 to reflect changes in the strength of the law." (2023:15). 
Dingeldey et al. (2022) describe the value of the variable "Fixed-term contracts are allowed only for work of limited duration" as "1=the law imposes a substantive constraint on the conclusion of a fixed-term contract; 0=otherwise; gradations between 0 and 1 reflect changes in the strength of law" (2022, Online Supplement,https://academic.oup.com/ilj/article/51/3/560/6325574#supplementary-data). 
The Assessment of the scale level in Dingeldey et al. (2022) and Adams et al. (2017, 2023) and the description of the values in the template differ. As Adams et al. (2023) state “Some indicators use binary coding but most use non-binary or graduated scores. The template indicates the approach to scoring in each case. Some indicators are expressed as cardinal variables (for example, those relating to minimum qualifying periods of continuous employment) but most are expressed on an ordinal scale.” (p. 7) and Dingeldey et al. (2022) state “The nature of each indicator’s scale depended on the number of possible states that we could envisage for that variable; in the end, all indicators that we developed had either binary (true and false) or graduated scales, some of which, drawing on the CBR, were ordinal in nature, and some cardinal (in the case, for example, of certain working time standards).” (p. 582). 
The scale level for WESIS was set uniformly to metric for all CBR-LRI and supplemented data points in the 1st project phase of CRC 1342; this is retained because all variables are normalised on a 0-1 scale. Users should use the WESIS scale level with caution and consult the coding template (algorithm) and values.
<ul>
There is a break in the time series due to coverage of legal text:
<ol> <li>Variable values are based on statutory law, only for the period 1880-1969 [1880-1979/89 [see 1]] + 36 additional countries [see 2] <li>Variable values are based on law or collective agreement - which have been extracted from CBR Leximetric Datasets (see Deakin et al 2023) for the period 1970-2022 [1980-2022 [see 3]]
</ol>
The comparability of the values over time is therefore limited.
<ul>
[1] Applies to the following countries: Namibia, Zimbabwe.
</ul>
<ul>
[2] Applies to all countries not covered by CBR Leximetric Datasets (see Deakin et al 2023): Applies to all countries not covered by CBR Leximetric Datasets (see Deakin et al 2023): Albania, Benin, Bosnia/Herzegovina, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo, El Salvador, Eritrea, Gambia, Guatemala, Guinea, Hong Kong, Haiti, Iraq, Jamaica, Kuwait, Laos, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritania, Mozambique, Nepal, Niger, North Korea, Papua New Guinea, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Tajikistan, Togo, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan for all times points available.
</ul>
<ul>
[3] Applies to the following countries: (1991-2022) Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Croatia, Estonia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Macedonia, Moldova, Serbia, Slovenia, Ukraine; (1990-2022) Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Namibia, Poland, Romania, Vietnam; (1992/3/5-2022) Cambodia, Russia, Slovakia, Yemen; (1980/6-2022) China, United Arab Emirates, Zimbabwe; (2006-2022) Montenegro.
</ul>
Important note: The (supplemented) data points of the variable are stored in extensive Excel tables, in which the corresponding sources, i.e. legal extracts and sources of these extracts, are also documented as the basis for the coded data points. A publication of the version: 0.002 Excel tables in GESIS is planned.
|citation =
Carlino, Marina, Irene Dingeldey, Heiner Fechner, Ulrich Mückenberger and Andrea Schäfer (2024). Compiled WoL and CBR Leximetric Datasets [Updated 2024]. University of Bremen
|relatedpublications =
<ul>
<li>Adams, Zoe, Bhumika Billa, Louise Bishop, Simon Deakin and Tvisha Shroff (2023). CBR Labour Regulation Index (Dataset of 117 Countries, 1970-2022) - Codes and Sources. Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge. at: https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.9130.2
<li>Carlino, Marina, Fechner, Heiner, and Schäfer, Andrea (2025, forthcoming). Using leximetrics for coding legal segmentation in employment law: The development and potential of the Worlds of Labour database. In I. Dingeldey, H. Fechner, & U. Mückenberger (Eds.), Constructing Worlds of Labour. Coverage and Generosity of Labour Law as Outcomes of Regulatory Social Policy. Palgrave Macmillan. p.53-83
<li>Deakin, Simon, Johna Armour and Mathias Siems (2023). CBR Leximetric Datasets [Updated 2023]. Apollo - University of Cambridge Repository. https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.9130.2
<li>Dingeldey, Irene, Heiner Fechner, Jean-Yves Gerlitz, Jenny Hahs and Ulrich Mückenberger (2022). Worlds of Labour: Introducing the Standard-Setting, Privileging and Equalising Typology as a Measure of Legal Segmentation in Labour Law, Industrial Law Journal, 51(3): 560–597, https://doi.org/10.1093/indlaw/dwab016
</ul>
|projectmanagers =
<ul>
<li> Responsible for data editing, description (WESIS) and entry: Andrea Schäfer (2021-2025), Jenny Hahs (2018-21), Jean-Yves Gerlitz (2018-20)
<li> Responsible for data coding: Heiner Fechner (2018-2025), Marina Carlino (2022-2025)
<li> Principal Investigator: Irene Dingeldey, Ulrich Mückenberger
<li> Student assistants (alphabetical ordering): Max Anders, Julia Bode, Jessica Bonn, Daniel Euler, Jan-Christopher Floren, Maxime Fischer, Jennifer Götte, Eliko Hagen, Désirée Hoppe, Irina Kyburz, Alexandra Kojnow, Tarek Mahmalat, Karolin Meyer, Oguz Mermut, Johanna Nold, Tanusha Pali, Gerrit Pantel, Johannes Ramsauer, Max Sudhoff, Kristina Walter, Caroline Zambiasi
</ul>
|datarelease = <ul><li>Version 0.001: Initial release with data from CBR-LRI published in April 2017 (data for the period from (in most cases) 1970 to 2013) + supplemented data points from WoL, V1</li></ul> <ul><li>Version 0.002: Updated with data from CBR-LRI 2023, V2* (data for the period from (in most cases) 1970 to 2022) + supplemented data points from WoL, V2</li></ul>
|revisions = No revisions yet
|sources =
<ul>
<li>Deakin, Simon, Johna Armour and Mathias Siems (2023). CBR Leximetric Datasets [Updated 2023]. Apollo - University of Cambridge Repository. https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.9130
<li> The sources used for coding the WoL-values are described in WESIS with “n. k.” for “not known”, information on sources can be found in the column 'source' in the Excel files (for more information on sources pls contact the person responsible for data coding – see the entry: Project manager(s)) -.
</ul>
}}

The law determines the legal status of the worker (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)

2025-12-15T16:43:52Z

Hfechner: Created page with "{{Indicator |datatype = Numeric |scale = Metric |valuelabels = not applicable |techname = labor_work_def |category = Labour and labour market |l..."

{{Indicator
|datatype = Numeric
|scale = Metric
|valuelabels = not applicable
|techname = labor_work_def
|category = [[Labour and labour market |Labour and labour market]]
|label = The law determines the legal status of the worker (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)
|relatedindicators =
<ul>
<li>[[Part-time workers have the right to equal treatment (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Fixed-term contracts are allowed only for limited duration (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Maximum duration of fixed-term contracts (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Agency work is prohibited or strictly controlled (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Agency workers have the right to equal treatment (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
</ul>
|description =
"The law determines the legal status of the worker" measures the kind of legal relationship in the country's statutory or case law and relevant court decisions determining the worker's legal status. The variable is based on the CBR-LRI 1 indicator "The law, as opposed to the contracting parties, determines the legal status of the worker" (see Adams et al. 2017, 2023:14). To create a new scale for the variable "The law determines the legal status of the worker", the CBR-LRI (1)'s initial values were reversed. The variable now ranges from 0 to 1, where "1" means the parties are free to stipulate that the relationship is one of self-employment as opposed to employee status, and "0" means that the law requires employee status if specific requirements are met (such as the type of payment or the ratio of hiring).
Values in between describe, for example: 
* 0.5 = the law allows the issue of status to be determined by the nature of the contract made by the parties 
The original variable is taken from the CBR Labour Regulation Index Dataset (‘CBR-LRI’), which provides data on labour laws in 117 countries for the period from (in most cases) 1970 to 2022, except for post-socialist countries (see Adams et al. 2017, 2023). The existing CBR-LRI data points were supplemented with data points prior to 1970 or corresponding points in time for socialist countries (see coding rules). In addition, data points for a further 36 countries were added (see coding rules). The CBR Labour Regulation Index Dataset was coded using provisions of law and relevant court decisions, which are taken from secondary sources, national law databases, and ILO NATLEX data (see Adams et al. 2017, 2023). The supplemented data points were coded using statutory law, only. The combined data points with reversed scale result in the World of Labour Dataset (WoL) (for first version V1, 1970-2013 see Dingeldey et al. 2022).
|codingrules =
The scale ranges from 0 to 1, where meeting specific criteria is required by law to qualify as an employee, represented by a score of "0" (Dingeldey et al. 2022). A missing value (-999) means the law has not been coded for this country year for multiple reasons or in the case of supplemented data points there is ‘no information available’. Statutory law is coded for the year in which it comes into force. Until the law was altered, the coding values were carried over for the ensuing years. As a result, the values between the years when the statutory legislation is in effect are an “estimate” of the legal standards/norms based on former law. 
The coding template (algorithm) with the definition of the variable and instructions for the coding process is described Dingeldey et al. (2022, Online Supplement; Adams et al. 2023, on the variable 'The law, as opposed to the contracting parties, determines the legal status of the worker' see 2023:14). Dingeldey et al. (2022) describe the value of the variable "The law, as opposed to the contracting parties, determines the legal status of the worker" as "1= the parties are free to stipulate that the relationship is one of self-employment as opposed to employee status; 0.5=the law allows the issue of status to be determined by the nature of the contract made by the parties; 0=the law mandates employee status if certain criteria are met (such as form of payment, du-ration of hiring); further gradations between 0 and 1 reflect changes in the strength of law (reversed scale)" (2022, Online Supplement,https://academic.oup.com/ilj/article/51/3/560/6325574#supplementary-data). 
Dingeldey et al. (2022) assess the scale level as “The nature of each indicator’s scale depended on the number of possible states that we could envisage for that variable; in the end, all indicators that we developed had either binary (true and false) or graduated scales, some of which, drawing on the CBR, were ordinal in nature, and some cardinal (in the case, for example, of certain working time standards).” (p. 582). 
The scale level for WESIS was set uniformly to metric for all CBR-LRI and supplemented data points in the 1st project phase of CRC 1342; this is retained because all variables are coded on a 0-1 scale, with 1- and/or 2-digit decimal. Users should use the WESIS scale level with caution and consult the coding template (algorithm) and values.
There is a break in time series within countries (in most cases 1880 to 1969 and 1970 to 2022, except for post-socialist countries) and limited comparability between countries [see 2] due to coverage of legal text during coding:
<ul>
<li>Variable values are based on statutory law, only for the period 1880-1969 (see WoL data points) [1880-1979/89 [see 1]] + 36 additional countries [see 2] for all time points available </li>
<li>Variable values are based on provisions of law, relevant court decisions or collective agreement (see CBR Leximetric Datasets, Deakin et al. 2023) for the period 1970-2022 [1980-2022 [see 3]] </li>
</ul>
 
<ul>
<li>[1] Applies to the following countries: Namibia, Zimbabwe.</li>
<li>[2] Applies to all countries not covered by CBR Leximetric Datasets (see Deakin et al 2023): Albania, Benin, Bosnia/Herzegovina, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo, El Salvador, Eritrea, Gambia, Guatemala, Guinea, Hong Kong, Haiti, Iraq, Jamaica, Kuwait, Laos, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritania, Mozambique, Nepal, Niger, North Korea, Papua New Guinea, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Tajikistan, Togo, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan for all times points available.</li>
<li>[3] Applies to the following countries: (1991-2022) Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Croatia, Estonia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Macedonia, Moldova, Serbia, Slovenia, Ukraine; (1990-2022) Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Namibia, Poland, Romania, Vietnam; (1992/3/5-2022) Cambodia, Russia, Slovakia, Yemen; (1980/6-2022) China, United Arab Emirates, Zimbabwe; (2006-2022) Montenegro. </li>
<li>[4] Important note: The (supplemented) data points of the variable are stored in extensive Excel tables, in which the corresponding sources, i.e. legal extracts and sources of these extracts, are also documented as the basis for the coded data points. A publication of the version: 0.002 Excel tables in GESIS is planned.</li>
</ul>
|citation =
Carlino, Marina, Irene Dingeldey, Heiner Fechner, Ulrich Mückenberger and Andrea Schäfer (2024). Compiled WoL and CBR Leximetric Datasets [Updated 2024]. University of Bremen
|relatedpublications =
<ul>
<li>Adams, Zoe, Bhumika Billa, Louise Bishop, Simon Deakin and Tvisha Shroff (2023). CBR Labour Regulation Index (Dataset of 117 Countries, 1970-2022) - Codes and Sources. Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge. at: https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.9130.2</li>
<li>Carlino, Marina, Fechner, Heiner, and Schäfer, Andrea (2025, forthcoming). Using leximetrics for coding legal segmentation in employment law: The development and potential of the Worlds of Labour database. In I. Dingeldey, H. Fechner, & U. Mückenberger (Eds.), Constructing Worlds of Labour. Coverage and Generosity of Labour Law as Outcomes of Regulatory Social Policy. Palgrave Macmillan. p.53-83 </li>
<li>Deakin, Simon, Johna Armour and Mathias Siems (2023). CBR Leximetric Datasets [Updated 2023]. Apollo - University of Cambridge Repository. https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.9130.2</li>
<li>Dingeldey, Irene, Heiner Fechner, Jean-Yves Gerlitz, Jenny Hahs and Ulrich Mückenberger (2022). Worlds of Labour: Introducing the Standard-Setting, Privileging and Equalising Typology as a Measure of Legal Segmentation in Labour Law, Industrial Law Journal, 51(3): 560–597, https://doi.org/10.1093/indlaw/dwab016</li>
</ul>
|projectmanagers =
Responsible for data editing, description (WESIS) and entry: Andrea Schäfer (2021-2025), Jenny Hahs (2018-21), Jean-Yves Gerlitz (2018-20); Responsible for data coding: Heiner Fechner (2018-2025), Marina Carlino (2022-2025); Principal Investigator: Irene Dingeldey, Ulrich Mückenberger; Student assistants (alphabetical ordering): Max Anders, Julia Bode, Jessica Bonn, Daniel Euler, Jan-Christopher Floren, Maxime Fischer, Jennifer Götte, Eliko Hagen, Désirée Hoppe, Irina Kyburz, Alexandra Kojnow, Tarek Mahmalat, Karolin Meyer, Oguz Mermut, Johanna Nold, Tanusha Pali, Gerrit Pantel, Johannes Ramsauer, Max Sudhoff, Kristina Walter, Caroline Zambiasi
|datarelease =
<ul>
<li>Version 0.001: Initial release with data from CBR-LRI published in April 2017 (data for the period from (in most cases) 1970 to 2013) + supplemented data points from WoL, V1</li>
<li>Version 0.002: Updated with data from CBR-LRI 2023, V2* (data for the period from (in most cases) 1970 to 2022) + supplemented data points from WoL, V2</li>
</ul>|revisions = No revisions yet
|sources =
<ul>
<li>Deakin, Simon, Johna Armour and Mathias Siems (2023). CBR Leximetric Datasets [Updated 2023]. Apollo - University of Cambridge Repository. https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.9130.2</li>
<li>The sources used for coding the WoL-values are described in WESIS with “n. k.” for “not known”, information on sources can be found in the column 'source' in the Excel files (for more information on sources pls contact the person responsible for data coding – see entry: Project manager(s)) -. </li>
</ul>
}}

The law determines the legal status of the worker

2025-12-15T16:43:08Z

Hfechner: Redirected page to The law determines the legal status of the worker (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)

#REDIRECT [[The law determines the legal status of the worker (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]

Part-time workers have the right to equal treatment (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)

2025-12-15T16:42:38Z

Hfechner: Created page with "{{Indicator |datatype = Numeric |scale = Metric |valuelabels = not applicable |techname = labor_ptemp_et |category = Labour and labour market..."

{{Indicator
|datatype = Numeric
|scale = Metric
|valuelabels = not applicable
|techname = labor_ptemp_et
|category = [[Labour and labour market |Labour and labour market]]
|label = Part-time workers have the right to equal treatment (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)
|relatedindicators =
<ul>
<li>[[Dismissing costs for part-time workers is proportional (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Fixed-term contracts are allowed only for limited duration (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Fixed-term workers have the right to equal treatment (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Maximum duration of fixed-term contracts (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Agency work is prohibited or strictly controlled (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Agency workers have the right to equal treatment (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
</ul>
|description =
"Part-time workers have the right to equal treatment" measures the equality in the country's statutory or case law and relevant court decisions in equal treatment for part-time workers. The scale ranges from 0 to 1.
Values in between describe, for example: 
* 1 = the legal system recognises a right to equal treatment
* 0.5 = the legal system recog-nises a more limited right to equal treatment
* 0 = neither of the above
This variable is taken from the CBR Labour Regulation Index Dataset (‘CBR-LRI’), which provides data on labour laws in 117 countries for the period from (in most cases) 1970 to 2022, except for post-socialist countries (see Adams et al. 2017, 2023). The existing CBR-LRI data points were supplemented with data points prior to 1970 or corresponding points in time for socialist countries (see coding rules). In addition, data points for a further 36 countries were added (see coding rules).
The CBR Labour Regulation Index Dataset was coded using provisions of law and relevant court decisions, which are taken from secondary sources, national law databases, and ILO NATLEX data (see Adams et al. 2017, 2023). The supplemented data points were coded using statutory law, only. The combined data points result in the World of Labour Dataset (WoL) (for first version V1, 1970-2013 see Dingeldey et al. 2022).
|codingrules =
The score is normalised on a 0-1 scale, with "1" corresponding to a legal system recognizing a right to equal treatment and "0" to all other legal norms (see Adams et al. 2023, Dingeldey et al. 2022). A missing value (-999) means the law has not been coded for this country year for multiple reasons or in case of supplemented data points there is ‘no information available’. Statutory law is coded for the year in which it comes into force. Until the law was altered, the coding values were carried over for the ensuing years. As a result, the values between the years when the statutory legislation is in effect are an “estimate” of the legal standards/norms based on former law. 
The coding template (algorithm) with the definition of the variable and instructions for the coding process is described in Adams et al. (2017, 2023) and Dingeldey et al. (2022, Online Supplement). As Adams et al. (2023) describe, the value of the variable "Part-time workers have the right to equal treatment with full-time workers" "Equals 1 if the legal system recognises a right to equal treatment for part-time workers (as, for example, in the case of EC Directive 97/81/EC. Equals 0.5 if the legal system recognises a limited right to equal treatment for part-time workers based on e.g. anti-discrimination law. Equals 0.25 if there is a right to equality based on a general right of workers not be treated arbitrarily or unequally in employment. Equals 0 if neither of the above. Scope for scores between 0 and 1 to reflect changes in the strength of the law." (2023:14). 
Dingeldey et al. (2022) describe the value of the variable "Part-time workers have the right to equal treatment with full-time workers" as "1=the legal system recognises a right to equal treatment (for example EC Directive 97/81/EC); 0.5=the legal system recog-nises a more limited right to equal treatment (via, e.g., sex dis-crimination law or a more general right of workers not be treated arbitrarily); 0=neither of the above; further gradations between 0 and 1 reflect changes in the strength of law" (2022, Online Supplement,https://academic.oup.com/ilj/article/51/3/560/6325574#supplementary-data). 
The Assessment of the scale level in Dingeldey et al. (2022) and Adams et al. (2017, 2023) and the description of the values in the template differ. As Adams et al. (2023) state “Some indicators use binary coding but most use non-binary or graduated scores. The template indicates the approach to scoring in each case. Some indicators are expressed as cardinal variables (for example, those relating to minimum qualifying periods of continuous employment) but most are expressed on an ordinal scale.” (p. 7) and Dingeldey et al. (2022) state “The nature of each indicator’s scale depended on the number of possible states that we could envisage for that variable; in the end, all indicators that we developed had either binary (true and false) or graduated scales, some of which, drawing on the CBR, were ordinal in nature, and some cardinal (in the case, for example, of certain working time standards).” (p. 582). 
The scale level for WESIS was set uniformly to metric for all CBR-LRI and supplemented data points in the 1st project phase of CRC 1342; this is retained because all variables are coded on a 0-1 scale, with 1- and/or 2-digit decimal. Users should use the WESIS scale level with caution and consult the coding template (algorithm) and values. 
There is a break in time series within countries (in most cases 1880 to 1969 and 1970 to 2022, except for post-socialist countries) and limited comparability between countries [see 2] due to coverage of legal text during coding:
<ul>
<li>Variable values are based on statutory law, only for the period 1880-1969 (see WoL data points) [1880-1979/89 [see 1]] + 36 additional countries [see 2] for all time points available </li>
<li>Variable values are based on provisions of law, relevant court decisions or collective agreement (see CBR Leximetric Datasets, Deakin et al. 2023) for the period 1970-2022 [1980-2022 [see 3]] </li>
</ul>
 
<ul>
<li>[1] Applies to the following countries: Namibia, Zimbabwe.</li>
<li>[2] Applies to all countries not covered by CBR Leximetric Datasets (see Deakin et al 2023): Albania, Benin, Bosnia/Herzegovina, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo, El Salvador, Eritrea, Gambia, Guatemala, Guinea, Hong Kong, Haiti, Iraq, Jamaica, Kuwait, Laos, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritania, Mozambique, Nepal, Niger, North Korea, Papua New Guinea, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Tajikistan, Togo, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan for all times points available.</li>
<li>[3] Applies to the following countries: (1991-2022) Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Croatia, Estonia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Macedonia, Moldova, Serbia, Slovenia, Ukraine; (1990-2022) Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Namibia, Poland, Romania, Vietnam; (1992/3/5-2022) Cambodia, Russia, Slovakia, Yemen; (1980/6-2022) China, United Arab Emirates, Zimbabwe; (2006-2022) Montenegro. </li>
<li>[4] Important note: The (supplemented) data points of the variable are stored in extensive Excel tables, in which the corresponding sources, i.e. legal extracts and sources of these extracts, are also documented as the basis for the coded data points. A publication of the version: 0.002 Excel tables in GESIS is planned.</li>
</ul>|citation =
Carlino, Marina, Irene Dingeldey, Heiner Fechner, Ulrich Mückenberger and Andrea Schäfer (2024). Compiled WoL and CBR Leximetric Datasets [Updated 2024]. University of Bremen
|relatedpublications =
<ul>
<li>Adams, Zoe, Bhumika Billa, Louise Bishop, Simon Deakin and Tvisha Shroff (2023). CBR Labour Regulation Index (Dataset of 117 Countries, 1970-2022) - Codes and Sources. Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge. at: https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.9130.2</li>
<li>Carlino, Marina, Fechner, Heiner, and Schäfer, Andrea (2025, forthcoming). Using leximetrics for coding legal segmentation in employment law: The development and potential of the Worlds of Labour database. In I. Dingeldey, H. Fechner, & U. Mückenberger (Eds.), Constructing Worlds of Labour. Coverage and Generosity of Labour Law as Outcomes of Regulatory Social Policy. Palgrave Macmillan. p.53-83 </li>
<li>Deakin, Simon, Johna Armour and Mathias Siems (2023). CBR Leximetric Datasets [Updated 2023]. Apollo - University of Cambridge Repository. https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.9130.2</li>
<li>Dingeldey, Irene, Heiner Fechner, Jean-Yves Gerlitz, Jenny Hahs and Ulrich Mückenberger (2022). Worlds of Labour: Introducing the Standard-Setting, Privileging and Equalising Typology as a Measure of Legal Segmentation in Labour Law, Industrial Law Journal, 51(3): 560–597, https://doi.org/10.1093/indlaw/dwab016</li>
</ul>
|projectmanagers =
Responsible for data editing, description (WESIS) and entry: Andrea Schäfer (2021-2025), Jenny Hahs (2018-21), Jean-Yves Gerlitz (2018-20); Responsible for data coding: Heiner Fechner (2018-2025), Marina Carlino (2022-2025); Principal Investigator: Irene Dingeldey, Ulrich Mückenberger; Student assistants (alphabetical ordering): Max Anders, Julia Bode, Jessica Bonn, Daniel Euler, Jan-Christopher Floren, Maxime Fischer, Jennifer Götte, Eliko Hagen, Désirée Hoppe, Irina Kyburz, Alexandra Kojnow, Tarek Mahmalat, Karolin Meyer, Oguz Mermut, Johanna Nold, Tanusha Pali, Gerrit Pantel, Johannes Ramsauer, Max Sudhoff, Kristina Walter, Caroline Zambiasi
|datarelease =
<ul>
<li>Version 0.001: Initial release with data from CBR-LRI published in April 2017 (data for the period from (in most cases) 1970 to 2013) + supplemented data points from WoL, V1</li>
<li>Version 0.002: Updated with data from CBR-LRI 2023, V2* (data for the period from (in most cases) 1970 to 2022) + supplemented data points from WoL, V2</li>
</ul>
|revisions = No revisions yet
|sources =
<ul>
<li>Deakin, Simon, Johna Armour and Mathias Siems (2023). CBR Leximetric Datasets [Updated 2023]. Apollo - University of Cambridge Repository. https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.9130.2</li>
<li>The sources used for coding the WoL-values are described in WESIS with “n. k.” for “not known”, information on sources can be found in the column 'source' in the Excel files (for more information on sources pls contact the person responsible for data coding – see entry: Project manager(s)) -. </li>
</ul>
}}

Part-time workers have the right to equal treatment

2025-12-15T16:41:57Z

Hfechner: Redirected page to Part-time workers have the right to equal treatment (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)

#REDIRECT [[Part-time workers have the right to equal treatment (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]

Dismissing costs for part-time workers is proportional (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)

2025-12-15T16:40:22Z

Hfechner: Created page with "{{Indicator |datatype = Numeric |scale = Metric |valuelabels = not applicable |techname = labor_pt_dis_cost |category = Labour and labour market..."

{{Indicator
|datatype = Numeric
|scale = Metric
|valuelabels = not applicable
|techname = labor_pt_dis_cost
|category = [[Labour and labour market |Labour and labour market]]
|label = Dismissing costs for part-time workers is proportional (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)
|relatedindicators =
<ul>
<li>[[Part-time workers have the right to equal treatment (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Fixed-term contracts are allowed only for limited duration (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Fixed-term workers have the right to equal treatment (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Maximum duration of fixed-term contracts (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Agency work is prohibited or strictly controlled (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Agency workers have the right to equal treatment (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
</ul>
|description =
"Dismissing costs for part-time workers is proportional" measures the proportionality in the country's statutory or case law and relevant court decisions in terms of cost of dismissing part-time vs full-time workers. The score is standardized on a scale of 0-1, where "1" represents the scenario where part-time workers have equivalent rights to full-time workers regarding dismissal protection, and "0" represents the opposite.
This variable is taken from the CBR Labour Regulation Index Dataset (‘CBR-LRI’), which provides data on labour laws in 117 countries for the period from (in most cases) 1970 to 2022, except for post-socialist countries (see Adams et al. 2017, 2023). The existing CBR-LRI data points were supplemented with data points prior to 1970 or corresponding points in time for socialist countries (see coding rules). In addition, data points for a further 36 countries were added (see coding rules).
The CBR Labour Regulation Index Dataset was coded using provisions of law and relevant court decisions, which are taken from secondary sources, national law databases, and ILO NATLEX data (see Adams et al. 2017, 2023). The supplemented data points were coded using statutory law, only. The combined data points result in the World of Labour Dataset (WoL) (for first version V1, 1970-2013 see Dingeldey et al. 2022).
|codingrules =
The score is standardized on a scale of 0-1, where "1" represents the scenario where part-time workers have equivalent rights to full-time workers regarding dismissal protection, and "0" represents the opposite (see Adams et al. 2023, Dingeldey et al. 2022). A missing value (-999) means the law has not been coded for this country year for multiple reasons or in case of supplemented data points there is ‘no information available’. Statutory law is coded for the year in which it comes into force. Until the law was altered, the coding values were carried over for the ensuing years. As a result, the values between the years when the statutory legislation is in effect are an “estimate” of the legal standards/norms based on former law. 
The coding template (algorithm) with the definition of the variable and instructions for the coding process is described in Adams et al. (2017, 2023) and Dingeldey et al. (2022, Online Supplement). As Adams et al. (2023) describe, the value of the variable "The cost of dismissing part-time workers is equal in proportionate terms to the cost of dismissing full-time workers" "Equals 1 if as a matter of law part-time workers enjoy proportionate rights to full-time workers in respect of dismissal protection (notice periods, severance pay and unjust dismissal protection). Equals 0 otherwise. Scope for further gradation 0 and 1 to reflect changes in the strength of the law." (2023:14/15). 
Dingeldey et al. (2022) describe the value of the variable "The cost of dismissing part-time workers is equal in proportionate terms to the cost of dismissing full-time workers" as "1=as a matter of law part-time workers enjoy proportionate rights to full-time workers in respect of dismissal protection; 0=otherwise; gradations between 0 and 1 reflect changes in the strength of law" (2022, Online Supplement,https://academic.oup.com/ilj/article/51/3/560/6325574#supplementary-data). 
The Assessment of the scale level in Dingeldey et al. (2022) and Adams et al. (2017, 2023) and the description of the values in the template differ. As Adams et al. (2023) state “Some indicators use binary coding but most use non-binary or graduated scores. The template indicates the approach to scoring in each case. Some indicators are expressed as cardinal variables (for example, those relating to minimum qualifying periods of continuous employment) but most are expressed on an ordinal scale.” (p. 7) and Dingeldey et al. (2022) state “The nature of each indicator’s scale depended on the number of possible states that we could envisage for that variable; in the end, all indicators that we developed had either binary (true and false) or graduated scales, some of which, drawing on the CBR, were ordinal in nature, and some cardinal (in the case, for example, of certain working time standards).” (p. 582). 
The scale level for WESIS was set uniformly to metric for all CBR-LRI and supplemented data points in the 1st project phase of CRC 1342; this is retained because all variables are coded on a 0-1 scale, with 1- and/or 2-digit decimal. Users should use the WESIS scale level with caution and consult the coding template (algorithm) and values. 
There is a break in time series within countries (in most cases 1880 to 1969 and 1970 to 2022, except for post-socialist countries) and limited comparability between countries [see 2] due to coverage of legal text during coding:
<ul>
<li>Variable values are based on statutory law, only for the period 1880-1969 (see WoL data points) [1880-1979/89 [see 1]] + 36 additional countries [see 2] for all time points available </li>
<li>Variable values are based on provisions of law, relevant court decisions or collective agreement (see CBR Leximetric Datasets, Deakin et al. 2023) for the period 1970-2022 [1980-2022 [see 3]] </li>
</ul>
 
<ul>
<li>[1] Applies to the following countries: Namibia, Zimbabwe.</li>
<li>[2] Applies to all countries not covered by CBR Leximetric Datasets (see Deakin et al 2023): Albania, Benin, Bosnia/Herzegovina, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo, El Salvador, Eritrea, Gambia, Guatemala, Guinea, Hong Kong, Haiti, Iraq, Jamaica, Kuwait, Laos, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritania, Mozambique, Nepal, Niger, North Korea, Papua New Guinea, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Tajikistan, Togo, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan for all times points available.</li>
<li>[3] Applies to the following countries: (1991-2022) Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Croatia, Estonia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Macedonia, Moldova, Serbia, Slovenia, Ukraine; (1990-2022) Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Namibia, Poland, Romania, Vietnam; (1992/3/5-2022) Cambodia, Russia, Slovakia, Yemen; (1980/6-2022) China, United Arab Emirates, Zimbabwe; (2006-2022) Montenegro. </li>
<li>[4] Important note: The (supplemented) data points of the variable are stored in extensive Excel tables, in which the corresponding sources, i.e. legal extracts and sources of these extracts, are also documented as the basis for the coded data points. A publication of the version: 0.002 Excel tables in GESIS is planned.</li>
</ul>
|citation =
Carlino, Marina, Irene Dingeldey, Heiner Fechner, Ulrich Mückenberger and Andrea Schäfer (2024). Compiled WoL and CBR Leximetric Datasets [Updated 2024]. University of Bremen
|relatedpublications =
<ul>
<li>Adams, Zoe, Bhumika Billa, Louise Bishop, Simon Deakin and Tvisha Shroff (2023). CBR Labour Regulation Index (Dataset of 117 Countries, 1970-2022) - Codes and Sources. Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge. at: https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.9130.2</li>
<li>Carlino, Marina, Fechner, Heiner, and Schäfer, Andrea (2025, forthcoming). Using leximetrics for coding legal segmentation in employment law: The development and potential of the Worlds of Labour database. In I. Dingeldey, H. Fechner, & U. Mückenberger (Eds.), Constructing Worlds of Labour. Coverage and Generosity of Labour Law as Outcomes of Regulatory Social Policy. Palgrave Macmillan. p.53-83 </li>
<li>Deakin, Simon, Johna Armour and Mathias Siems (2023). CBR Leximetric Datasets [Updated 2023]. Apollo - University of Cambridge Repository. https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.9130.2</li>
<li>Dingeldey, Irene, Heiner Fechner, Jean-Yves Gerlitz, Jenny Hahs and Ulrich Mückenberger (2022). Worlds of Labour: Introducing the Standard-Setting, Privileging and Equalising Typology as a Measure of Legal Segmentation in Labour Law, Industrial Law Journal, 51(3): 560–597, https://doi.org/10.1093/indlaw/dwab016</li>
</ul>
|projectmanagers =
Responsible for data editing, description (WESIS) and entry: Andrea Schäfer (2021-2025), Jenny Hahs (2018-21), Jean-Yves Gerlitz (2018-20); Responsible for data coding: Heiner Fechner (2018-2025), Marina Carlino (2022-2025); Principal Investigator: Irene Dingeldey, Ulrich Mückenberger; Student assistants (alphabetical ordering): Max Anders, Julia Bode, Jessica Bonn, Daniel Euler, Jan-Christopher Floren, Maxime Fischer, Jennifer Götte, Eliko Hagen, Désirée Hoppe, Irina Kyburz, Alexandra Kojnow, Tarek Mahmalat, Karolin Meyer, Oguz Mermut, Johanna Nold, Tanusha Pali, Gerrit Pantel, Johannes Ramsauer, Max Sudhoff, Kristina Walter, Caroline Zambiasi
|datarelease =
<ul>
<li>Version 0.001: Initial release with data from CBR-LRI published in April 2017 (data for the period from (in most cases) 1970 to 2013) + supplemented data points from WoL, V1</li>
<li>Version 0.002: Updated with data from CBR-LRI 2023, V2* (data for the period from (in most cases) 1970 to 2022) + supplemented data points from WoL, V2</li>
</ul>
|revisions = No revisions yet
|sources =
<ul>
<li>Deakin, Simon, Johna Armour and Mathias Siems (2023). CBR Leximetric Datasets [Updated 2023]. Apollo - University of Cambridge Repository. https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.9130.2</li>
<li>The sources used for coding the WoL-values are described in WESIS with “n. k.” for “not known”, information on sources can be found in the column 'source' in the Excel files (for more information on sources pls contact the person responsible for data coding – see entry: Project manager(s)) -. </li>
</ul>
}}

Fixed-term contracts are allowed only for work of limited duration

2025-12-15T16:40:08Z

Hfechner:

{{Indicator
|datatype = Numeric
|scale = Metric
|valuelabels = not applicable
|techname = labor_fx_limit_new
|category = [[Labour and labour market |Labour and labour market]]
|label = Fixed-term contracts are allowed only for work of limited duration (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)
|relatedindicators =
<ul>
<li>[[Part-time workers have the right to equal treatment (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Dismissing costs for part-time workers is proportional (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Fixed-term workers have the right to equal treatment (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Maximum duration of fixed-term contracts (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Agency work is prohibited or strictly controlled (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Agency workers have the right to equal treatment (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
</ul>
|description =
"Fixed-term contracts are allowed only for work of limited duration" measures the constraints in the country's statutory or case law and relevant court decisions on the conclusion of a fixed-term contract. The score is standardized on a scale of 0-1, where "1" represents the scenario where the law imposes a substantive constraint on the conclusion of a fixed-term contract, and "0" represents the opposite.
This variable is taken from the CBR Labour Regulation Index Dataset (‘CBR-LRI’), which provides data on labour laws in 117 countries for the period from (in most cases) 1970 to 2022, except for post-socialist countries (see Adams et al. 2017, 2023). The existing CBR-LRI data points were supplemented with data points prior to 1970 or corresponding points in time for socialist countries (see coding rules). In addition, data points for a further 36 countries were added (see coding rules). The CBR Labour Regulation Index Dataset was coded using provisions of law and relevant court decisions, which are taken from secondary sources, national law databases, and ILO NATLEX data (see Adams et al. 2017, 2023). The supplemented data points were coded using statutory law, only. The combined data points result in the World of Labour Dataset (WoL) (for first version V1, 1970-2013 see Dingeldey et al. 2022).
|codingrules =
The score is standardized on a scale of 0-1, where "1" represents the scenario where the law imposes a substantive constraint on the conclusion of a fixed-term contract, and "0" represents the opposite (see Adams et al. 2023, Dingeldey et al. 2022).
Statutory law is coded for the year in which it comes into force. Until the law was altered, the coding values were carried over for the ensuing years. As a result, the values between the years when the statutory legislation is in effect are an “estimate” of the legal standards/norms based on former law. A missing value (-999) means the law has not been coded for this country year for multiple reasons or in case of supplemented data points there is ‘no information available’. 
The coding template (algorithm) with the definition of the variable and instructions for the coding process is described in Adams et al. (2017, 2023) and Dingeldey et al. (2022, Online Supplement). As Adams et al. (2023) describe, the value of the variable "Fixed-term contracts are allowed only for work of limited duration" "Equals 1 if the law imposes a substantive constraint on the conclusion of a fixed-term contract, by, for example, allowing temporary hirings only for jobs which are temporary by nature, training, seasonal work, replacement of workers on maternity or sick leave, or other specified reasons. Equals 0 otherwise. Scope for gradation between 0 and 1 to reflect changes in the strength of the law." (2023:15). 
Dingeldey et al. (2022) describe the value of the variable "Fixed-term contracts are allowed only for work of limited duration" as the "1=the law imposes a substantive constraint on the conclusion of a fixed-term contract; 0=otherwise; gradations between 0 and 1 reflect changes in the strength of law" (2022, Online Supplement,https://academic.oup.com/ilj/article/51/3/560/6325574#supplementary-data). 
The Assessment of the scale level in Dingeldey et al. (2022) and Adams et al. (2017, 2023) and the description of the values in the template differ. As Adams et al. (2023) state “Some indicators use binary coding but most use non-binary or graduated scores. The template indicates the approach to scoring in each case. Some indicators are expressed as cardinal variables (for example, those relating to minimum qualifying periods of continuous employment) but most are expressed on an ordinal scale.” (p. 7) and Dingeldey et al. (2022) state “The nature of each indicator’s scale depended on the number of possible states that we could envisage for that variable; in the end, all indicators that we developed had either binary (true and false) or graduated scales, some of which, drawing on the CBR, were ordinal in nature, and some cardinal (in the case, for example, of certain working time standards).” (p. 582).
The scale level for WESIS was set uniformly to metric for all CBR-LRI and supplemented data points in the 1st project phase of CRC 1342; this is retained because all variables are coded on a 0-1 scale, with 1- and/or 2-digit decimal. Users should use the WESIS scale level with caution and consult the coding template (algorithm) and values. 
There is a break in time series within countries (in most cases 1880 to 1969 and 1970 to 2022, except for post-socialist countries) and limited comparability between countries [see 2] due to coverage of legal text during coding:
<ul>
<li>Variable values are based on statutory law, only for the period 1880-1969 (see WoL data points) [1880-1979/89 [see 1]] + 36 additional countries [see 2] for all time points available </li>
<li>Variable values are based on provisions of law, relevant court decisions or collective agreement (see CBR Leximetric Datasets, Deakin et al. 2023) for the period 1970-2022 [1980-2022 [see 3]] </li>
</ul>
 
<ul>
<li>[1] Applies to the following countries: Namibia, Zimbabwe.</li>
<li>[2] Applies to all countries not covered by CBR Leximetric Datasets (see Deakin et al 2023): Albania, Benin, Bosnia/Herzegovina, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo, El Salvador, Eritrea, Gambia, Guatemala, Guinea, Hong Kong, Haiti, Iraq, Jamaica, Kuwait, Laos, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritania, Mozambique, Nepal, Niger, North Korea, Papua New Guinea, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Tajikistan, Togo, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan for all times points available.</li>
<li>[3] Applies to the following countries: (1991-2022) Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Croatia, Estonia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Macedonia, Moldova, Serbia, Slovenia, Ukraine; (1990-2022) Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Namibia, Poland, Romania, Vietnam; (1992/3/5-2022) Cambodia, Russia, Slovakia, Yemen; (1980/6-2022) China, United Arab Emirates, Zimbabwe; (2006-2022) Montenegro. </li>
<li>[4] Important note: The (supplemented) data points of the variable are stored in extensive Excel tables, in which the corresponding sources, i.e. legal extracts and sources of these extracts, are also documented as the basis for the coded data points. A publication of the version: 0.002 Excel tables in GESIS is planned.</li>
</ul>
|citation =
Carlino, Marina, Irene Dingeldey, Heiner Fechner, Ulrich Mückenberger and Andrea Schäfer (2024). Compiled WoL and CBR Leximetric Datasets [Updated 2024]. University of Bremen
|relatedpublications =
<ul>
<li>Adams, Zoe, Bhumika Billa, Louise Bishop, Simon Deakin and Tvisha Shroff (2023). CBR Labour Regulation Index (Dataset of 117 Countries, 1970-2022) - Codes and Sources. Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge. at: https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.9130.2</li>
<li>Carlino, Marina, Fechner, Heiner, and Schäfer, Andrea (2025, forthcoming). Using leximetrics for coding legal segmentation in employment law: The development and potential of the Worlds of Labour database. In I. Dingeldey, H. Fechner, & U. Mückenberger (Eds.), Constructing Worlds of Labour. Coverage and Generosity of Labour Law as Outcomes of Regulatory Social Policy. Palgrave Macmillan. p.53-83 </li>
<li>Deakin, Simon, Johna Armour and Mathias Siems (2023). CBR Leximetric Datasets [Updated 2023]. Apollo - University of Cambridge Repository. https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.9130.2</li>
<li>Dingeldey, Irene, Heiner Fechner, Jean-Yves Gerlitz, Jenny Hahs and Ulrich Mückenberger (2022). Worlds of Labour: Introducing the Standard-Setting, Privileging and Equalising Typology as a Measure of Legal Segmentation in Labour Law, Industrial Law Journal, 51(3): 560–597, https://doi.org/10.1093/indlaw/dwab016</li>
</ul>
|projectmanagers =
Responsible for data editing, description (WESIS) and entry: Andrea Schäfer (2021-2025), Jenny Hahs (2018-21), Jean-Yves Gerlitz (2018-20); Responsible for data coding: Heiner Fechner (2018-2025), Marina Carlino (2022-2025); Principal Investigator: Irene Dingeldey, Ulrich Mückenberger; Student assistants (alphabetical ordering): Max Anders, Julia Bode, Jessica Bonn, Daniel Euler, Jan-Christopher Floren, Maxime Fischer, Jennifer Götte, Eliko Hagen, Désirée Hoppe, Irina Kyburz, Alexandra Kojnow, Tarek Mahmalat, Karolin Meyer, Oguz Mermut, Johanna Nold, Tanusha Pali, Gerrit Pantel, Johannes Ramsauer, Max Sudhoff, Kristina Walter, Caroline Zambiasi
|datarelease =
<ul>
<li>Version 0.001: Initial release with data from CBR-LRI published in April 2017 (data for the period from (in most cases) 1970 to 2013) + supplemented data points from WoL, V1</li>
<li>Version 0.002: Updated with data from CBR-LRI 2023, V2* (data for the period from (in most cases) 1970 to 2022) + supplemented data points from WoL, V2</li>
</ul>
|revisions = No revisions yet
|sources =
<ul>
<li>Deakin, Simon, Johna Armour and Mathias Siems (2023). CBR Leximetric Datasets [Updated 2023]. Apollo - University of Cambridge Repository. https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.9130.2</li>
<li>The sources used for coding the WoL-values are described in WESIS with “n. k.” for “not known”, information on sources can be found in the column 'source' in the Excel files (for more information on sources pls contact the person responsible for data coding – see entry: Project manager(s)) -. </li>
</ul>
}}

Dismissing costs for part-time workers is proportional

2025-12-15T16:34:04Z

Hfechner: Redirected page to Dismissing costs for part-time workers is proportional (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)

#REDIRECT [[Dismissing costs for part-time workers is proportional (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]

Fixed-term contracts are allowed only for work of limited duration (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)

2025-12-15T16:33:10Z

Hfechner: Created page with "{{Indicator |datatype = Numeric |scale = Metric |valuelabels = not applicable |techname = labor_fx_limit_new |category = [[Labour and labour market |Labour and labour market]..."

{{Indicator
|datatype = Numeric
|scale = Metric
|valuelabels = not applicable
|techname = labor_fx_limit_new
|category = [[Labour and labour market |Labour and labour market]]
|label = Fixed-term contracts are allowed only for work of limited duration (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)
|relatedindicators =
<ul>
<li>[[Annual leave entitlements (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Public holiday entitlements (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Overtime premia (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Weekend working (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Duration of the normal working week (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Maximum daily working time (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
</ul>
|description =
"Fixed-term contracts are allowed only for work of limited duration" measures the constraints in the country's statutory or case law and relevant court decisions on the conclusion of a fixed-term contract. The score is standardized on a scale of 0-1, where "1" represents the scenario where the law imposes a substantive constraint on the conclusion of a fixed-term contract, and "0" represents the opposite.
This variable is taken from the CBR Labour Regulation Index Dataset (‘CBR-LRI’), which provides data on labour laws in 117 countries for the period from (in most cases) 1970 to 2022, except for post-socialist countries (see Adams et al. 2017, 2023). The existing CBR-LRI data points were supplemented with data points prior to 1970 or corresponding points in time for socialist countries (see coding rules). In addition, data points for a further 36 countries were added (see coding rules). The CBR Labour Regulation Index Dataset was coded using provisions of law and relevant court decisions, which are taken from secondary sources, national law databases, and ILO NATLEX data (see Adams et al. 2017, 2023). The supplemented data points were coded using statutory law, only. The combined data points result in the World of Labour Dataset (WoL) (for first version V1, 1970-2013 see Dingeldey et al. 2022).
|codingrules =
The score is standardized on a scale of 0-1, where "1" represents the scenario where the law imposes a substantive constraint on the conclusion of a fixed-term contract, and "0" represents the opposite (see Adams et al. 2023, Dingeldey et al. 2022).
Statutory law is coded for the year in which it comes into force. Until the law was altered, the coding values were carried over for the ensuing years. As a result, the values between the years when the statutory legislation is in effect are an “estimate” of the legal standards/norms based on former law. A missing value (-999) means the law has not been coded for this country year for multiple reasons or in case of supplemented data points there is ‘no information available’. 
The coding template (algorithm) with the definition of the variable and instructions for the coding process is described in Adams et al. (2017, 2023) and Dingeldey et al. (2022, Online Supplement). As Adams et al. (2023) describe, the value of the variable "Fixed-term contracts are allowed only for work of limited duration" "Equals 1 if the law imposes a substantive constraint on the conclusion of a fixed-term contract, by, for example, allowing temporary hirings only for jobs which are temporary by nature, training, seasonal work, replacement of workers on maternity or sick leave, or other specified reasons. Equals 0 otherwise. Scope for gradation between 0 and 1 to reflect changes in the strength of the law." (2023:15). 
Dingeldey et al. (2022) describe the value of the variable "Fixed-term contracts are allowed only for work of limited duration" as the "1=the law imposes a substantive constraint on the conclusion of a fixed-term contract; 0=otherwise; gradations between 0 and 1 reflect changes in the strength of law" (2022, Online Supplement,https://academic.oup.com/ilj/article/51/3/560/6325574#supplementary-data). 
The Assessment of the scale level in Dingeldey et al. (2022) and Adams et al. (2017, 2023) and the description of the values in the template differ. As Adams et al. (2023) state “Some indicators use binary coding but most use non-binary or graduated scores. The template indicates the approach to scoring in each case. Some indicators are expressed as cardinal variables (for example, those relating to minimum qualifying periods of continuous employment) but most are expressed on an ordinal scale.” (p. 7) and Dingeldey et al. (2022) state “The nature of each indicator’s scale depended on the number of possible states that we could envisage for that variable; in the end, all indicators that we developed had either binary (true and false) or graduated scales, some of which, drawing on the CBR, were ordinal in nature, and some cardinal (in the case, for example, of certain working time standards).” (p. 582).
The scale level for WESIS was set uniformly to metric for all CBR-LRI and supplemented data points in the 1st project phase of CRC 1342; this is retained because all variables are coded on a 0-1 scale, with 1- and/or 2-digit decimal. Users should use the WESIS scale level with caution and consult the coding template (algorithm) and values. 
There is a break in time series within countries (in most cases 1880 to 1969 and 1970 to 2022, except for post-socialist countries) and limited comparability between countries [see 2] due to coverage of legal text during coding:
<ul>
<li>Variable values are based on statutory law, only for the period 1880-1969 (see WoL data points) [1880-1979/89 [see 1]] + 36 additional countries [see 2] for all time points available </li>
<li>Variable values are based on provisions of law, relevant court decisions or collective agreement (see CBR Leximetric Datasets, Deakin et al. 2023) for the period 1970-2022 [1980-2022 [see 3]] </li>
</ul>
 
<ul>
<li>[1] Applies to the following countries: Namibia, Zimbabwe.</li>
<li>[2] Applies to all countries not covered by CBR Leximetric Datasets (see Deakin et al 2023): Albania, Benin, Bosnia/Herzegovina, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo, El Salvador, Eritrea, Gambia, Guatemala, Guinea, Hong Kong, Haiti, Iraq, Jamaica, Kuwait, Laos, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritania, Mozambique, Nepal, Niger, North Korea, Papua New Guinea, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Tajikistan, Togo, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan for all times points available.</li>
<li>[3] Applies to the following countries: (1991-2022) Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Croatia, Estonia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Macedonia, Moldova, Serbia, Slovenia, Ukraine; (1990-2022) Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Namibia, Poland, Romania, Vietnam; (1992/3/5-2022) Cambodia, Russia, Slovakia, Yemen; (1980/6-2022) China, United Arab Emirates, Zimbabwe; (2006-2022) Montenegro. </li>
<li>[4] Important note: The (supplemented) data points of the variable are stored in extensive Excel tables, in which the corresponding sources, i.e. legal extracts and sources of these extracts, are also documented as the basis for the coded data points. A publication of the version: 0.002 Excel tables in GESIS is planned.</li>
</ul>
|citation =
Carlino, Marina, Irene Dingeldey, Heiner Fechner, Ulrich Mückenberger and Andrea Schäfer (2024). Compiled WoL and CBR Leximetric Datasets [Updated 2024]. University of Bremen
|relatedpublications =
<ul>
<li>Adams, Zoe, Bhumika Billa, Louise Bishop, Simon Deakin and Tvisha Shroff (2023). CBR Labour Regulation Index (Dataset of 117 Countries, 1970-2022) - Codes and Sources. Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge. at: https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.9130.2</li>
<li>Carlino, Marina, Fechner, Heiner, and Schäfer, Andrea (2025, forthcoming). Using leximetrics for coding legal segmentation in employment law: The development and potential of the Worlds of Labour database. In I. Dingeldey, H. Fechner, & U. Mückenberger (Eds.), Constructing Worlds of Labour. Coverage and Generosity of Labour Law as Outcomes of Regulatory Social Policy. Palgrave Macmillan. p.53-83 </li>
<li>Deakin, Simon, Johna Armour and Mathias Siems (2023). CBR Leximetric Datasets [Updated 2023]. Apollo - University of Cambridge Repository. https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.9130.2</li>
<li>Dingeldey, Irene, Heiner Fechner, Jean-Yves Gerlitz, Jenny Hahs and Ulrich Mückenberger (2022). Worlds of Labour: Introducing the Standard-Setting, Privileging and Equalising Typology as a Measure of Legal Segmentation in Labour Law, Industrial Law Journal, 51(3): 560–597, https://doi.org/10.1093/indlaw/dwab016</li>
</ul>
|projectmanagers =
Responsible for data editing, description (WESIS) and entry: Andrea Schäfer (2021-2025), Jenny Hahs (2018-21), Jean-Yves Gerlitz (2018-20); Responsible for data coding: Heiner Fechner (2018-2025), Marina Carlino (2022-2025); Principal Investigator: Irene Dingeldey, Ulrich Mückenberger; Student assistants (alphabetical ordering): Max Anders, Julia Bode, Jessica Bonn, Daniel Euler, Jan-Christopher Floren, Maxime Fischer, Jennifer Götte, Eliko Hagen, Désirée Hoppe, Irina Kyburz, Alexandra Kojnow, Tarek Mahmalat, Karolin Meyer, Oguz Mermut, Johanna Nold, Tanusha Pali, Gerrit Pantel, Johannes Ramsauer, Max Sudhoff, Kristina Walter, Caroline Zambiasi
|datarelease =
<ul>
<li>Version 0.001: Initial release with data from CBR-LRI published in April 2017 (data for the period from (in most cases) 1970 to 2013) + supplemented data points from WoL, V1</li>
<li>Version 0.002: Updated with data from CBR-LRI 2023, V2* (data for the period from (in most cases) 1970 to 2022) + supplemented data points from WoL, V2</li>
</ul>
|revisions = No revisions yet
|sources =
<ul>
<li>Deakin, Simon, Johna Armour and Mathias Siems (2023). CBR Leximetric Datasets [Updated 2023]. Apollo - University of Cambridge Repository. https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.9130.2</li>
<li>The sources used for coding the WoL-values are described in WESIS with “n. k.” for “not known”, information on sources can be found in the column 'source' in the Excel files (for more information on sources pls contact the person responsible for data coding – see entry: Project manager(s)) -. </li>
</ul>
}}

Fixed-term contracts are allowed only for work of limited duration

2025-12-15T16:32:17Z

Hfechner: Redirected page to Fixed-term contracts are allowed only for work of limited duration (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)

#REDIRECT [[Fixed-term contracts are allowed only for work of limited duration (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]

Fixed-term workers have the right to equal treatment (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)

2025-12-15T16:31:45Z

Hfechner: Created page with "{{Indicator |datatype = Numeric |scale = Metric |valuelabels = not applicable |techname = labor_fxemp_et |category = Labour and labour market..."

{{Indicator
|datatype = Numeric
|scale = Metric
|valuelabels = not applicable
|techname = labor_fxemp_et
|category = [[Labour and labour market |Labour and labour market]]
|label = Fixed-term workers have the right to equal treatment (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)
|relatedindicators =
<ul>
<li>[[Dismissing costs for part-time workers is proportional (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Fixed-term contracts are allowed only for limited duration (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Part-time workers have the right to equal treatment (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Maximum duration of fixed-term contracts (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Agency work is prohibited or strictly controlled (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Agency workers have the right to equal treatment (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
</ul>
|description =
"Fixed-term workers have the right to equal treatment" measures the constraints in the country's statutory or case law and relevant court decisions in equal treatment of fixed-term versus permanent workers. The scale ranges from 0 to 1.
Values in between describe, for example: 
* 0.5 = the legal system recognises a more limited right to equal treatment 
This variable is taken from the CBR Labour Regulation Index Dataset (‘CBR-LRI’), which provides data on labour laws in 117 countries for the period from (in most cases) 1970 to 2022, except for post-socialist countries (see Adams et al. 2017, 2023). The existing CBR-LRI data points were supplemented with data points prior to 1970 or corresponding points in time for socialist countries (see coding rules). In addition, data points for a further 36 countries were added (see coding rules). The CBR Labour Regulation Index Dataset was coded using provisions of law and relevant court decisions, which are taken from secondary sources, national law databases, and ILO NATLEX data (see Adams et al. 2017, 2023). The supplemented data points were coded using statutory law, only. The combined data points result in the World of Labour Dataset (WoL) (for first version V1, 1970-2013 see Dingeldey et al. 2022).
|codingrules =
The score is normalised on a 0-1 scale, "1" corresponding to legal system recognises a right to equal treatment and "0" to legal system does not recognises a right to equal treatment (see Adams et al. 2023, Dingeldey et al. 2022). A missing value (-999) means the law has not been coded for this country year for multiple reasons or in case of supplemented data points there is ‘no information available’. Statutory law is coded for the year in which it comes into force. Until the law was altered, the coding values were carried over for the ensuing years. As a result, the values between the years when the statutory legislation is in effect are an “estimate” of the legal standards/norms based on former law. The coding template (algorithm) with the definition of the variable and instructions for the coding process is described in Adams et al. (2017, 2023) and Dingeldey et al. (2022, Online Supplement). 
As Adams et al. (2023) describe, the value of the variable "Fixed-term workers have the right to equal treatment with permanent workers" "Equals 1 if the legal system recognises a right to equal treatment for fixed-term workers (as, for example, in the case of EC Directive 99/70/EC). Equals 0.5 if the legal system recognises a limited right to equal treatment for fixed-term workers based on e.g. anti-discrimination law. Equals 0.25 if there is a right to equality based on a general right of workers not be treated arbitrarily or unequally in employment. Equals 0 if neither of the above. Scope for further gradation between 0 and 1 to reflect changes in the strength of the law." (2023:15). 
Dingeldey et al. (2022) describe the value of the variable "Fixed-term workers have the right to equal treatment with permanent workers" as "1=the legal system recognises a right to equal treatment (for example EC Directive 99/70/EC); 0.5=the legal system recognises a more limited right to equal treatment (via, e.g., more general right of workers not be treated arbitrarily); 0=neither of the above; further gradations between 0 and 1 reflect changes in the strength of law" (2022, Online Supplement,https://academic.oup.com/iljarticle/51/3/560/6325574#supplementary-data). 

The coding template (algorithm) with the definition of the variable and instructions for the coding process is described in Adams et al. (2017, 2023) and Dingeldey et al. (2022, Online Supplement). Assessment of the scale level in Dingeldey et al. (2022) and Adams et al. (2017, 2023) and the description of the values in the template differ. As Adams et al. (2023) state “Some indicators use binary coding but most use non-binary or graduated scores. The template indicates the approach to scoring in each case. Some indicators are expressed as cardinal variables (for example, those relating to minimum qualifying periods of continuous employment) but most are expressed on an ordinal scale.” (p. 7) and Dingeldey et al. (2022) state “The nature of each indicator’s scale depended on the number of possible states that we could envisage for that variable; in the end, all indicators that we developed had either binary (true and false) or graduated scales, some of which, drawing on the CBR, were ordinal in nature, and some cardinal (in the case, for example, of certain working time standards).” (p. 582).
The scale level for WESIS was set uniformly to metric for all CBR-LRI and supplemented data points in the 1st project phase of CRC 1342; this is retained because all variables are normalised on a 0-1 scale. Users should use the WESIS scale level with caution and consult the coding template (algorithm) and values. 
There is a break in time series within countries (in most cases 1880 to 1969 and 1970 to 2022, except for post-socialist countries) and limited comparability between countries [see 2] due to coverage of legal text during coding:
<ul>
<li>Variable values are based on statutory law, only for the period 1880-1969 (see WoL data points) [1880-1979/89 [see 1]] + 36 additional countries [see 2] for all time points available </li>
<li>Variable values are based on provisions of law, relevant court decisions or collective agreement (see CBR Leximetric Datasets, Deakin et al. 2023) for the period 1970-2022 [1980-2022 [see 3]] </li>
</ul>
 
<ul>
<li>[1] Applies to the following countries: Namibia, Zimbabwe.</li>
<li>[2] Applies to all countries not covered by CBR Leximetric Datasets (see Deakin et al 2023): Albania, Benin, Bosnia/Herzegovina, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo, El Salvador, Eritrea, Gambia, Guatemala, Guinea, Hong Kong, Haiti, Iraq, Jamaica, Kuwait, Laos, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritania, Mozambique, Nepal, Niger, North Korea, Papua New Guinea, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Tajikistan, Togo, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan for all times points available.</li>
<li>[3] Applies to the following countries: (1991-2022) Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Croatia, Estonia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Macedonia, Moldova, Serbia, Slovenia, Ukraine; (1990-2022) Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Namibia, Poland, Romania, Vietnam; (1992/3/5-2022) Cambodia, Russia, Slovakia, Yemen; (1980/6-2022) China, United Arab Emirates, Zimbabwe; (2006-2022) Montenegro. </li>
<li>[4] Important note: The (supplemented) data points of the variable are stored in extensive Excel tables, in which the corresponding sources, i.e. legal extracts and sources of these extracts, are also documented as the basis for the coded data points. A publication of the version: 0.002 Excel tables in GESIS is planned.</li>
</ul>
|citation =
Carlino, Marina, Irene Dingeldey, Heiner Fechner, Ulrich Mückenberger and Andrea Schäfer (2024). Compiled WoL and CBR Leximetric Datasets [Updated 2024]. University of Bremen
|relatedpublications =
<ul>
<li>Adams, Zoe, Bhumika Billa, Louise Bishop, Simon Deakin and Tvisha Shroff (2023). CBR Labour Regulation Index (Dataset of 117 Countries, 1970-2022) - Codes and Sources. Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge. at: https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.9130.2</li>
<li>Carlino, Marina, Fechner, Heiner, and Schäfer, Andrea (2025, forthcoming). Using leximetrics for coding legal segmentation in employment law: The development and potential of the Worlds of Labour database. In I. Dingeldey, H. Fechner, & U. Mückenberger (Eds.), Constructing Worlds of Labour. Coverage and Generosity of Labour Law as Outcomes of Regulatory Social Policy. Palgrave Macmillan. p.53-83 </li>
<li>Deakin, Simon, Johna Armour and Mathias Siems (2023). CBR Leximetric Datasets [Updated 2023]. Apollo - University of Cambridge Repository. https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.9130.2</li>
<li>Dingeldey, Irene, Heiner Fechner, Jean-Yves Gerlitz, Jenny Hahs and Ulrich Mückenberger (2022). Worlds of Labour: Introducing the Standard-Setting, Privileging and Equalising Typology as a Measure of Legal Segmentation in Labour Law, Industrial Law Journal, 51(3): 560–597, https://doi.org/10.1093/indlaw/dwab016</li>
</ul>
|projectmanagers =
Responsible for data editing, description (WESIS) and entry: Andrea Schäfer (2021-2025), Jenny Hahs (2018-21), Jean-Yves Gerlitz (2018-20); Responsible for data coding: Heiner Fechner (2018-2025), Marina Carlino (2022-2025); Principal Investigator: Irene Dingeldey, Ulrich Mückenberger; Student assistants (alphabetical ordering): Max Anders, Julia Bode, Jessica Bonn, Daniel Euler, Jan-Christopher Floren, Maxime Fischer, Jennifer Götte, Eliko Hagen, Désirée Hoppe, Irina Kyburz, Alexandra Kojnow, Tarek Mahmalat, Karolin Meyer, Oguz Mermut, Johanna Nold, Tanusha Pali, Gerrit Pantel, Johannes Ramsauer, Max Sudhoff, Kristina Walter, Caroline Zambiasi
|datarelease =
<ul>
<li>Version 0.001: Initial release with data from CBR-LRI published in April 2017 (data for the period from (in most cases) 1970 to 2013) + supplemented data points from WoL, V1</li>
<li>Version 0.002: Updated with data from CBR-LRI 2023, V2* (data for the period from (in most cases) 1970 to 2022) + supplemented data points from WoL, V2</li>
</ul>
|revisions = No revisions yet
|sources =
<ul>
<li>Deakin, Simon, Johna Armour and Mathias Siems (2023). CBR Leximetric Datasets [Updated 2023]. Apollo - University of Cambridge Repository. https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.9130.2</li>
<li>The sources used for coding the WoL-values are described in WESIS with “n. k.” for “not known”, information on sources can be found in the column 'source' in the Excel files (for more information on sources pls contact the person responsible for data coding – see entry: Project manager(s)) -. </li>
</ul>
}}

Fixed-term workers have the right to equal treatment

2025-12-15T16:31:07Z

Hfechner: Redirected page to Fixed-term workers have the right to equal treatment (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)

#REDIRECT [[Fixed-term workers have the right to equal treatment (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]

Maximum duration of fixed-term contracts (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)

2025-12-15T16:30:41Z

Hfechner: Created page with "{{Indicator |datatype = Numeric |scale = Metric |valuelabels = not applicable |techname = labor_max_fx_dur |category = Labour and labour market..."

{{Indicator
|datatype = Numeric
|scale = Metric
|valuelabels = not applicable
|techname = labor_max_fx_dur
|category = [[Labour and labour market |Labour and labour market]]
|label = Maximum duration of fixed-term contracts (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)
|relatedindicators =
<ul>
<li>[[Dismissing costs for part-time workers is proportional (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Fixed-term contracts are allowed only for limited duration (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Part-time workers have the right to equal treatment (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Fixed-term workers have the right to equal treatment (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Agency work is prohibited or strictly controlled (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Agency workers have the right to equal treatment (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
</ul>
|description =
"Maximum duration of fixed-term contracts" measures the maximum cumulative duration of fixed-term contracts permitted by law before the employment is deemed to be permanent. The score is normalised from 0 to 1, with "1" equals the maximum limit of 1 year or less and "0" the maximum limit of 10 years or more or if there is no legal limit.
This variable is taken from the CBR Labour Regulation Index Dataset (‘CBR-LRI’), which provides data on labour laws in 117 countries for the period from (in most cases) 1970 to 2022, except for post-socialist countries (see Adams et al. 2017, 2023). The existing CBR-LRI data points were supplemented with data points prior to 1970 or corresponding points in time for socialist countries (see coding rules). In addition, data points for a further 36 countries were added (see coding rules).
The CBR Labour Regulation Index Dataset was coded using provisions of law and relevant court decisions, which are taken from secondary sources, national law databases, and ILO NATLEX data (see Adams et al. 2017, 2023). The supplemented data points were coded using statutory law, only. The combined data points result in the World of Labour Dataset (WoL) (for first version V1, 1970-2013 see Dingeldey et al. 2022).
|codingrules =
The score is normalised on a 0-1 scale, with "1" equals the maximum limit of 1 year or less and "0" the maximum limit of 10 years or more or if there is no legal limit. (see Adams et al. 2023, Dingeldey et al. 2022). A missing value (-999) means the law has not been coded for this country year for multiple reasons or in case of supplemented data points there is ‘no information available’. Statutory law is coded for the year in which it comes into force. Until the law was altered, the coding values were carried over for the ensuing years. As a result, the values between the years when the statutory legislation is in effect are an “estimate” of the legal standards/norms based on former law. The coding template (algorithm) with the definition of the variable and instructions for the coding process is described in Adams et al. (2017, 2023) and Dingeldey et al. (2022, Online Supplement). 
As Adams et al. (2023) describe, the value of the variable "Maximum duration of fixed-term contracts" "Measures the maximum cumulative duration of fixed-term contracts permitted by law before the employment is deemed to be permanent (either alternatively to or in conjunction with rules governing the use of fixed term contracts, see variable 4 above). The score is normalised from 0 to 1, with higher values indicating a lower permitted duration. The score equals 1 if the maximum limit is 1 year or less and 0 if it is 10 years or more or if there is no legal limit." (2023:15). 
Dingeldey et al. (2022) describe the value of the variable "Maximum duration of fixed-term contracts" as "Measures the maximum cumulative duration of fixed-term contracts permitted by law before employment is deemed to be permanent; score normalised from 0 to 1, with higher values indicating a lower permitted duration; 1=maximum limit is less than 1 year; 0=maximum limit is 10 years or more/no limit" (2022, Online Supplement,https://academic.oup.com/ilj/article/51/3/560/6325574#supplementary-data). 
The Assessment of the scale level in Dingeldey et al. (2022) and Adams et al. (2017, 2023) and the description of the values in the template differ. As Adams et al. (2023) state “Some indicators use binary coding but most use non-binary or graduated scores. The template indicates the approach to scoring in each case. Some indicators are expressed as cardinal variables (for example, those relating to minimum qualifying periods of continuous employment) but most are expressed on an ordinal scale.” (p. 7) and Dingeldey et al. (2022) state “The nature of each indicator’s scale depended on the number of possible states that we could envisage for that variable; in the end, all indicators that we developed had either binary (true and false) or graduated scales, some of which, drawing on the CBR, were ordinal in nature, and some cardinal (in the case, for example, of certain working time standards).” (p. 582). 
The scale level for WESIS was set uniformly to metric for all CBR-LRI and supplemented data points in the 1st project phase of CRC 1342; this is retained because all variables are normalised on a 0-1 scale. Users should use the WESIS scale level with caution and consult the coding template (algorithm) and values. 
There is a break in time series within countries (in most cases 1880 to 1969 and 1970 to 2022, except for post-socialist countries) and limited comparability between countries [see 2] due to coverage of legal text during coding:
<ul>
<li>Variable values are based on statutory law, only for the period 1880-1969 (see WoL data points) [1880-1979/89 [see 1]] + 36 additional countries [see 2] for all time points available </li>
<li>Variable values are based on provisions of law, relevant court decisions or collective agreement (see CBR Leximetric Datasets, Deakin et al. 2023) for the period 1970-2022 [1980-2022 [see 3]] </li>
</ul>
 
<ul>
<li>[1] Applies to the following countries: Namibia, Zimbabwe.</li>
<li>[2] Applies to all countries not covered by CBR Leximetric Datasets (see Deakin et al 2023): Albania, Benin, Bosnia/Herzegovina, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo, El Salvador, Eritrea, Gambia, Guatemala, Guinea, Hong Kong, Haiti, Iraq, Jamaica, Kuwait, Laos, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritania, Mozambique, Nepal, Niger, North Korea, Papua New Guinea, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Tajikistan, Togo, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan for all times points available.</li>
<li>[3] Applies to the following countries: (1991-2022) Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Croatia, Estonia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Macedonia, Moldova, Serbia, Slovenia, Ukraine; (1990-2022) Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Namibia, Poland, Romania, Vietnam; (1992/3/5-2022) Cambodia, Russia, Slovakia, Yemen; (1980/6-2022) China, United Arab Emirates, Zimbabwe; (2006-2022) Montenegro. </li>
<li>[4] Important note: The (supplemented) data points of the variable are stored in extensive Excel tables, in which the corresponding sources, i.e. legal extracts and sources of these extracts, are also documented as the basis for the coded data points. A publication of the version: 0.002 Excel tables in GESIS is planned.</li>
</ul>
|citation =
Carlino, Marina, Irene Dingeldey, Heiner Fechner, Ulrich Mückenberger and Andrea Schäfer (2024). Compiled WoL and CBR Leximetric Datasets [Updated 2024]. University of Bremen
|relatedpublications =
<ul>
<li>Adams, Zoe, Bhumika Billa, Louise Bishop, Simon Deakin and Tvisha Shroff (2023). CBR Labour Regulation Index (Dataset of 117 Countries, 1970-2022) - Codes and Sources. Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge. at: https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.9130.2</li>
<li>Carlino, Marina, Fechner, Heiner, and Schäfer, Andrea (2025, forthcoming). Using leximetrics for coding legal segmentation in employment law: The development and potential of the Worlds of Labour database. In I. Dingeldey, H. Fechner, & U. Mückenberger (Eds.), Constructing Worlds of Labour. Coverage and Generosity of Labour Law as Outcomes of Regulatory Social Policy. Palgrave Macmillan. p.53-83 </li>
<li>Deakin, Simon, Johna Armour and Mathias Siems (2023). CBR Leximetric Datasets [Updated 2023]. Apollo - University of Cambridge Repository. https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.9130.2</li>
<li>Dingeldey, Irene, Heiner Fechner, Jean-Yves Gerlitz, Jenny Hahs and Ulrich Mückenberger (2022). Worlds of Labour: Introducing the Standard-Setting, Privileging and Equalising Typology as a Measure of Legal Segmentation in Labour Law, Industrial Law Journal, 51(3): 560–597, https://doi.org/10.1093/indlaw/dwab016</li>
</ul>
|projectmanagers =
Responsible for data editing, description (WESIS) and entry: Andrea Schäfer (2021-2025), Jenny Hahs (2018-21), Jean-Yves Gerlitz (2018-20); Responsible for data coding: Heiner Fechner (2018-2025), Marina Carlino (2022-2025); Principal Investigator: Irene Dingeldey, Ulrich Mückenberger; Student assistants (alphabetical ordering): Max Anders, Julia Bode, Jessica Bonn, Daniel Euler, Jan-Christopher Floren, Maxime Fischer, Jennifer Götte, Eliko Hagen, Désirée Hoppe, Irina Kyburz, Alexandra Kojnow, Tarek Mahmalat, Karolin Meyer, Oguz Mermut, Johanna Nold, Tanusha Pali, Gerrit Pantel, Johannes Ramsauer, Max Sudhoff, Kristina Walter, Caroline Zambiasi
|datarelease =
<ul>
<li>Version 0.001: Initial release with data from CBR-LRI published in April 2017 (data for the period from (in most cases) 1970 to 2013) + supplemented data points from WoL, V1</li>
<li>Version 0.002: Updated with data from CBR-LRI 2023, V2* (data for the period from (in most cases) 1970 to 2022) + supplemented data points from WoL, V2</li>
</ul>
|revisions = No revisions yet
|sources =
<ul>
<li>Deakin, Simon, Johna Armour and Mathias Siems (2023). CBR Leximetric Datasets [Updated 2023]. Apollo - University of Cambridge Repository. https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.9130.2</li>
<li>The sources used for coding the WoL-values are described in WESIS with “n. k.” for “not known”, information on sources can be found in the column 'source' in the Excel files (for more information on sources pls contact the person responsible for data coding – see entry: Project manager(s)) -. </li>
</ul>
}}

Maximum duration of fixed-term contracts

2025-12-15T16:30:01Z

Hfechner: Redirected page to Maximum duration of fixed-term contracts (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)

#REDIRECT [[Maximum duration of fixed-term contracts (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]

Agency work is prohibited or strictly controlled (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)

2025-12-15T16:29:16Z

Hfechner: Created page with "{{IndicatorForm |datatype=Numeric |scale=Metric |scale=Metric |scale=Metric |valuelabels=not applicable |techname=labor_awork_con |category=Labour and labour market |label=Age..."

{{IndicatorForm
|datatype=Numeric
|scale=Metric
|scale=Metric
|scale=Metric
|valuelabels=not applicable
|techname=labor_awork_con
|category=Labour and labour market
|label=Agency work is prohibited or strictly controlled (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)
|relatedindicators=<ul>
<li>[[Dismissing costs for part-time workers is proportional (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Fixed-term contracts are allowed only for limited duration (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Part-time workers have the right to equal treatment (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Maximum duration of fixed-term contracts (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Agency workers have the right to equal treatment (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Fixed-term workers have the right to equal treatment (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
</ul>
|description="Agency work is prohibited or strictly controlled" measures the prohibition in the country's statutory or case law and relevant court decisions for agency work. The scale ranges from 0 to 1. A score of "1" equals legal systems prohibiting the use of agency labour, whereas a score of "0" equals legal systems not prohibiting the use of agency labour.
Values in between describe, for example: 
* 0.5 = law places substantive constraints on use of agency labour (in the sense of allowing it only if certain conditions are satisfied, such as a demonstrable need on the part of the employer to meet fluctuations in labour demand) 
This variable is taken from the CBR Labour Regulation Index Dataset (‘CBR-LRI’), which provides data on labour laws in 117 countries for the period from (in most cases) 1970 to 2022, except for post-socialist countries (see Adams et al. 2017, 2023). The existing CBR-LRI data points were supplemented with data points prior to 1970 or corresponding points in time for socialist countries (see coding rules). In addition, data points for a further 36 countries were added (see coding rules). The CBR Labour Regulation Index Dataset was coded using provisions of law and relevant court decisions, which are taken from secondary sources, national law databases, and ILO NATLEX data (see Adams et al. 2017, 2023). The supplemented data points were coded using statutory law, only. The combined data points result in the World of Labour Dataset (WoL) (for first version V1, 1970-2013 see Dingeldey et al. 2022).
|codingrules=The score ranges from "1" if the legal system prohibits the use of agency labour and "0" if there are no legal constraints on the use of agency labour (see Adams et al. 2023, Dingeldey et al. 2022). A missing value (-999) means the law has not been coded for this country year for multiple reasons or in case of supplemented data points there is ‘no information available’. Statutory law is coded for the year in which it comes into force. Until the law was altered, the coding values were carried over for the ensuing years. As a result, the values between the years when the statutory legislation is in effect are an “estimate” of the legal standards/norms based on former law. 
The coding template (algorithm) with the definition of the variable and instructions for the coding process is described in Adams et al. (2017, 2023) and Dingeldey et al. (2022, Online Supplement). As Adams et al. (2023) describe, the value of the variable "Agency work is prohibited or strictly controlled" "Equals 1 if the legal system prohibits the use of agency labour. Equals 0.5 if it places substantive constraints on its use (in the sense of allowing it only if certain conditions are satisfied, such as a demonstrable need on the part of the employer to meet fluctuations in labour demand). Equals 0 if neither of the above.Scope for further gradation between 0 and 1 to reflect changes in the strength of the law." (2023:15/16). 
Dingeldey et al. (2022) describe the value of the variable "Agency work is prohibited or strictly controlled" as "1=the legal system prohibits the use of agency labour; 0.5=legal system places substantive constraints on the use of agency labour; 0=neither of the above; futher gradations between 0 and 1 reflect changes in the strength of law" (2022, Online Supplement,https://academic.oup.com/iljarticle/51/3/560/6325574#supplementary-data). 

Assessment of the scale level in Dingeldey et al. (2022) and Adams et al. (2017, 2023) and the description of the values in the template differ. As Adams et al. (2023) state “Some indicators use binary coding but most use non-binary or graduated scores. The template indicates the approach to scoring in each case. Some indicators are expressed as cardinal variables (for example, those relating to minimum qualifying periods of continuous employment) but most are expressed on an ordinal scale.” (p. 7) and Dingeldey et al. (2022) state “The nature of each indicator’s scale depended on the number of possible states that we could envisage for that variable; in the end, all indicators that we developed had either binary (true and false) or graduated scales, some of which, drawing on the CBR, were ordinal in nature, and some cardinal (in the case, for example, of certain working time standards).” (p. 582).
The scale level for WESIS was set uniformly to metric for all CBR-LRI and supplemented data points in the 1st project phase of CRC 1342; this is retained because all variables are coded on a 0-1 scale, with 1- and/or 2-digit decimal. Users should use the WESIS scale level with caution and consult the coding template (algorithm) and values. 
There is a break in time series within countries (in most cases 1880 to 1969 and 1970 to 2022, except for post-socialist countries) and limited comparability between countries [see 2] due to coverage of legal text during coding:
<ul>
<li>Variable values are based on statutory law, only for the period 1880-1969 (see WoL data points) [1880-1979/89 [see 1]] + 36 additional countries [see 2] for all time points available </li>
<li>Variable values are based on provisions of law, relevant court decisions or collective agreement (see CBR Leximetric Datasets, Deakin et al. 2023) for the period 1970-2022 [1980-2022 [see 3]] </li>
</ul>
 
<ul>
<li>[1] Applies to the following countries: Namibia, Zimbabwe.</li>
<li>[2] Applies to all countries not covered by CBR Leximetric Datasets (see Deakin et al 2023): Albania, Benin, Bosnia/Herzegovina, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo, El Salvador, Eritrea, Gambia, Guatemala, Guinea, Hong Kong, Haiti, Iraq, Jamaica, Kuwait, Laos, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritania, Mozambique, Nepal, Niger, North Korea, Papua New Guinea, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Tajikistan, Togo, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan for all times points available.</li>
<li>[3] Applies to the following countries: (1991-2022) Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Croatia, Estonia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Macedonia, Moldova, Serbia, Slovenia, Ukraine; (1990-2022) Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Namibia, Poland, Romania, Vietnam; (1992/3/5-2022) Cambodia, Russia, Slovakia, Yemen; (1980/6-2022) China, United Arab Emirates, Zimbabwe; (2006-2022) Montenegro. </li>
<li>[4] Important note: The (supplemented) data points of the variable are stored in extensive Excel tables, in which the corresponding sources, i.e. legal extracts and sources of these extracts, are also documented as the basis for the coded data points. A publication of the version: 0.002 Excel tables in GESIS is planned.</li>
</ul>
|citation=Carlino, Marina, Irene Dingeldey, Heiner Fechner, Ulrich Mückenberger and Andrea Schäfer (2024). Compiled WoL and CBR Leximetric Datasets [Updated 2024]. University of Bremen
|relatedpublications=<ul>
<li>Adams, Zoe, Bhumika Billa, Louise Bishop, Simon Deakin and Tvisha Shroff (2023). CBR Labour Regulation Index (Dataset of 117 Countries, 1970-2022) - Codes and Sources. Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge. at: https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.9130.2</li>
<li>Carlino, Marina, Fechner, Heiner, and Schäfer, Andrea (2025, forthcoming). Using leximetrics for coding legal segmentation in employment law: The development and potential of the Worlds of Labour database. In I. Dingeldey, H. Fechner, & U. Mückenberger (Eds.), Constructing Worlds of Labour. Coverage and Generosity of Labour Law as Outcomes of Regulatory Social Policy. Palgrave Macmillan. p.53-83 </li>
<li>Deakin, Simon, Johna Armour and Mathias Siems (2023). CBR Leximetric Datasets [Updated 2023]. Apollo - University of Cambridge Repository. https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.9130.2</li>
<li>Dingeldey, Irene, Heiner Fechner, Jean-Yves Gerlitz, Jenny Hahs and Ulrich Mückenberger (2022). Worlds of Labour: Introducing the Standard-Setting, Privileging and Equalising Typology as a Measure of Legal Segmentation in Labour Law, Industrial Law Journal, 51(3): 560–597, https://doi.org/10.1093/indlaw/dwab016</li>
</ul>
|projectmanagers=Responsible for data editing, description (WESIS) and entry: Andrea Schäfer (2021-2025), Jenny Hahs (2018-21), Jean-Yves Gerlitz (2018-20); Responsible for data coding: Heiner Fechner (2018-2025), Marina Carlino (2022-2025); Principal Investigator: Irene Dingeldey, Ulrich Mückenberger; Student assistants (alphabetical ordering): Max Anders, Julia Bode, Jessica Bonn, Daniel Euler, Jan-Christopher Floren, Maxime Fischer, Jennifer Götte, Eliko Hagen, Désirée Hoppe, Irina Kyburz, Alexandra Kojnow, Tarek Mahmalat, Karolin Meyer, Oguz Mermut, Johanna Nold, Tanusha Pali, Gerrit Pantel, Johannes Ramsauer, Max Sudhoff, Kristina Walter, Caroline Zambiasi
|datarelease=<ul>
<li>Version 0.001: Initial release with data from CBR-LRI published in April 2017 (data for the period from (in most cases) 1970 to 2013) + supplemented data points from WoL, V1</li>
<li>Version 0.002: Updated with data from CBR-LRI 2023, V2* (data for the period from (in most cases) 1970 to 2022) + supplemented data points from WoL, V2</li>
</ul>
|revisions=No revisions yet
|sources=<ul>
<li>Deakin, Simon, Johna Armour and Mathias Siems (2023). CBR Leximetric Datasets [Updated 2023]. Apollo - University of Cambridge Repository. https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.9130.2</li>
<li>The sources used for coding the WoL-values are described in WESIS with “n. k.” for “not known”, information on sources can be found in the column 'source' in the Excel files (for more information on sources pls contact the person responsible for data coding – see entry: Project manager(s)) -. </li>
</ul>
}}

Agency work is prohibited or strictly controlled

2025-12-15T16:28:28Z

Hfechner: Redirected page to Agency work is prohibited or strictly controlled (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)

#REDIRECT [[Agency work is prohibited or strictly controlled (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]

Agency workers have the right to equal treatment (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)

2025-12-15T16:27:57Z

Hfechner: Created page with "{{IndicatorForm |datatype=Numeric |scale=Metric |scale=Metric |scale=Metric |valuelabels=not applicable |techname=labor_awork_et |category=Labour and labour market |label=Agen..."

{{IndicatorForm
|datatype=Numeric
|scale=Metric
|scale=Metric
|scale=Metric
|valuelabels=not applicable
|techname=labor_awork_et
|category=Labour and labour market
|label=Agency workers have the right to equal treatment (CBR-LRI)
|relatedindicators=<ul>
<li>[[Dismissing costs for part-time workers is proportional (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Fixed-term contracts are allowed only for limited duration (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Part-time workers have the right to equal treatment (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Maximum duration of fixed-term contracts (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Agency work is prohibited or strictly controlled (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Fixed-term workers have the right to equal treatment (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]</li>
</ul>
|description="Agency workers have the right to equal treatment" measures the equality in the country's statutory or case law and relevant court decisions in equal treatment of agency workers. The scale ranges from 0 to 1.
Values in between describe, for example: 
* 1 = the legal system recognises a right to equal treatment for agency workers
* 0.5 = the legal system recognises a limited right to equal treatment based on e.g. anti-discrimination law, if this right permits a comparison with the user undertaking
* 0.25 = right to equality based on a general right of workers not be treated arbitrarily or unequally in employment, if this right permits a comparison with the user undertaking
* 0 = neither of the above 
This variable is taken from the CBR Labour Regulation Index Dataset (‘CBR-LRI’), which provides data on labour laws in 117 countries for the period from (in most cases) 1970 to 2022, except for post-socialist countries (see Adams et al. 2017, 2023). The existing CBR-LRI data points were supplemented with data points prior to 1970 or corresponding points in time for socialist countries (see coding rules). In addition, data points for a further 36 countries were added (see coding rules). The CBR Labour Regulation Index Dataset was coded using provisions of law and relevant court decisions, which are taken from secondary sources, national law databases, and ILO NATLEX data (see Adams et al. 2017, 2023). The supplemented data points were coded using statutory law, only. The combined data points result in the World of Labour Dataset (WoL) (for first version V1, 1970-2013 see Dingeldey et al. 2022).
|codingrules=The score is standardized on a scale of 0-1, where "1" represents the scenario where the legal system recognises a right to equal treatment for agency workers, in relation to permanent workers of the user undertaking, in respect of terms and conditions of employment in general, and "0" represents the opposite (see Adams et al. 2023, Dingeldey et al. 2022). A missing value (-999) means the law has not been coded for this country year for multiple reasons or in case of supplemented data points there is ‘no information available’. Statutory law is coded for the year in which it comes into force. Until the law was altered, the coding values were carried over for the ensuing years. As a result, the values between the years when the statutory legislation is in effect are an “estimate” of the legal standards/norms based on former law. 
The coding template (algorithm) with the definition of the variable and instructions for the coding process is described in Adams et al. (2017, 2023) and Dingeldey et al. (2022, Online Supplement). As Adams et al. (2023) describe, the value of the variable "Agency workers have the right to equal treatment with permanent workers of the user undertaking" "Equals 1 if the legal system recognises a right to equal treatment for agency workers, in relation to permanent workers of the user undertaking, in respect of terms and conditions of employment in general. Equals 0.5 if the legal system recognises a limited right to equal treatment based on e.g. anti-discrimination law, if this right permits a comparison with the user undertaking. Equals 0.25 if there is a right to equality based on a general right of workers not be treated arbitrarily or unequally in employment, if this right permits a comparison with the user undertaking. Equals 0 if neither of the above. Scope for further gradation between 0 and 1 to reflect changes in the strength of the law." (2023:16). 
Dingeldey et al. (2022) describe the value of the variable "Agency workers have the right to equal treatment with permanent workers of the user undertaking" as "1=the legal system recognises a right to equal treatment in respect of terms and conditions of employment in general; 0.5=the legal system recognises a more limited right to equal treatment (for example, in respect of antidiscrimination law); 0=neither of the above; further gradations between 0 and 1 reflect changes in the strength of law" (2022, Online Supplement,https://academic.oup.com/iljarticle/51/3/560/6325574#supplementary-data). 

Assessment of the scale level in Dingeldey et al. (2022) and Adams et al. (2017, 2023) and the description of the values in the template differ. As Adams et al. (2023) state “Some indicators use binary coding but most use non-binary or graduated scores. The template indicates the approach to scoring in each case. Some indicators are expressed as cardinal variables (for example, those relating to minimum qualifying periods of continuous employment) but most are expressed on an ordinal scale.” (p. 7) and Dingeldey et al. (2022) state “The nature of each indicator’s scale depended on the number of possible states that we could envisage for that variable; in the end, all indicators that we developed had either binary (true and false) or graduated scales, some of which, drawing on the CBR, were ordinal in nature, and some cardinal (in the case, for example, of certain working time standards).” (p. 582).
The scale level for WESIS was set uniformly to metric for all CBR-LRI and supplemented data points in the 1st project phase of CRC 1342; this is retained because all variables are coded on a 0-1 scale, with 1- and/or 2-digit decimal. Users should use the WESIS scale level with caution and consult the coding template (algorithm) and values. 
There is a break in time series within countries (in most cases 1880 to 1969 and 1970 to 2022, except for post-socialist countries) and limited comparability between countries [see 2] due to coverage of legal text during coding:
<ul>
<li>Variable values are based on statutory law, only for the period 1880-1969 (see WoL data points) [1880-1979/89 [see 1]] + 36 additional countries [see 2] for all time points available </li>
<li>Variable values are based on provisions of law, relevant court decisions or collective agreement (see CBR Leximetric Datasets, Deakin et al. 2023) for the period 1970-2022 [1980-2022 [see 3]] </li>
</ul>
 
<ul>
<li>[1] Applies to the following countries: Namibia, Zimbabwe.</li>
<li>[2] Applies to all countries not covered by CBR Leximetric Datasets (see Deakin et al 2023): Albania, Benin, Bosnia/Herzegovina, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo, El Salvador, Eritrea, Gambia, Guatemala, Guinea, Hong Kong, Haiti, Iraq, Jamaica, Kuwait, Laos, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritania, Mozambique, Nepal, Niger, North Korea, Papua New Guinea, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Tajikistan, Togo, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan for all times points available.</li>
<li>[3] Applies to the following countries: (1991-2022) Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Croatia, Estonia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Macedonia, Moldova, Serbia, Slovenia, Ukraine; (1990-2022) Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Namibia, Poland, Romania, Vietnam; (1992/3/5-2022) Cambodia, Russia, Slovakia, Yemen; (1980/6-2022) China, United Arab Emirates, Zimbabwe; (2006-2022) Montenegro. </li>
<li>[4] Important note: The (supplemented) data points of the variable are stored in extensive Excel tables, in which the corresponding sources, i.e. legal extracts and sources of these extracts, are also documented as the basis for the coded data points. A publication of the version: 0.002 Excel tables in GESIS is planned.</li>
</ul>
|citation=Carlino, Marina, Irene Dingeldey, Heiner Fechner, Ulrich Mückenberger and Andrea Schäfer (2024). Compiled WoL and CBR Leximetric Datasets [Updated 2024]. University of Bremen
|relatedpublications=<ul>
<li>Adams, Zoe, Bhumika Billa, Louise Bishop, Simon Deakin and Tvisha Shroff (2023). CBR Labour Regulation Index (Dataset of 117 Countries, 1970-2022) - Codes and Sources. Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge. at: https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.9130.2</li>
<li>Carlino, Marina, Fechner, Heiner, and Schäfer, Andrea (2025, forthcoming). Using leximetrics for coding legal segmentation in employment law: The development and potential of the Worlds of Labour database. In I. Dingeldey, H. Fechner, & U. Mückenberger (Eds.), Constructing Worlds of Labour. Coverage and Generosity of Labour Law as Outcomes of Regulatory Social Policy. Palgrave Macmillan. p.53-83 </li>
<li>Deakin, Simon, Johna Armour and Mathias Siems (2023). CBR Leximetric Datasets [Updated 2023]. Apollo - University of Cambridge Repository. https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.9130.2</li>
<li>Dingeldey, Irene, Heiner Fechner, Jean-Yves Gerlitz, Jenny Hahs and Ulrich Mückenberger (2022). Worlds of Labour: Introducing the Standard-Setting, Privileging and Equalising Typology as a Measure of Legal Segmentation in Labour Law, Industrial Law Journal, 51(3): 560–597, https://doi.org/10.1093/indlaw/dwab016</li>
</ul>
|projectmanagers=Responsible for data editing, description (WESIS) and entry: Andrea Schäfer (2021-2025), Jenny Hahs (2018-21), Jean-Yves Gerlitz (2018-20); Responsible for data coding: Heiner Fechner (2018-2025), Marina Carlino (2022-2025); Principal Investigator: Irene Dingeldey, Ulrich Mückenberger; Student assistants (alphabetical ordering): Max Anders, Julia Bode, Jessica Bonn, Daniel Euler, Jan-Christopher Floren, Maxime Fischer, Jennifer Götte, Eliko Hagen, Désirée Hoppe, Irina Kyburz, Alexandra Kojnow, Tarek Mahmalat, Karolin Meyer, Oguz Mermut, Johanna Nold, Tanusha Pali, Gerrit Pantel, Johannes Ramsauer, Max Sudhoff, Kristina Walter, Caroline Zambiasi
|datarelease=<ul>
<li>Version 0.001: Initial release with data from CBR-LRI published in April 2017 (data for the period from (in most cases) 1970 to 2013) + supplemented data points from WoL, V1</li>
<li>Version 0.002: Updated with data from CBR-LRI 2023, V2* (data for the period from (in most cases) 1970 to 2022) + supplemented data points from WoL, V2</li>
</ul>
|revisions=No revisions yet
|sources=<ul>
<li>Deakin, Simon, Johna Armour and Mathias Siems (2023). CBR Leximetric Datasets [Updated 2023]. Apollo - University of Cambridge Repository. https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.9130.2</li>
<li>The sources used for coding the WoL-values are described in WESIS with “n. k.” for “not known”, information on sources can be found in the column 'source' in the Excel files (for more information on sources pls contact the person responsible for data coding – see entry: Project manager(s)) -. </li>
</ul>
}}

Agency workers have the right to equal treatment

2025-12-15T16:27:29Z

Hfechner: Redirected page to Agency workers have the right to equal treatment (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)

#REDIRECT [[Agency workers have the right to equal treatment (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]

Legally mandated notice period increases with seniority (WoL V1)

2025-12-15T16:27:01Z

Hfechner: Created page with "{{IndicatorForm |datatype=Numeric |scale=Metric |scale=Metric |scale=Metric |valuelabels=Not applicable in the strict sense since the scale is quasi-metric, but for coding the..."

{{IndicatorForm
|datatype=Numeric
|scale=Metric
|scale=Metric
|scale=Metric
|valuelabels=Not applicable in the strict sense since the scale is quasi-metric, but for coding the following values were used for orientation:
<ul><li> 1 = the law provides increasing steps for more then 10 years</li></ul>
<ul><li> 0.75 = the law provides increasing steps from 5 up to 10 years</li></ul>
<ul><li> 0.5 = the law provides increasing steps from 2 and up to 5 years</li></ul>
<ul><li> 0.25 = the law provides increasing steps for up to 2 years</li></ul>
<ul><li> 0 = the law do not provides increasing steps / notice periods</li></ul>
New template for Version 2 adds: further gradations between 0 and 1 reflect changes in the strength of the law
|techname=labor_notped_sen
|category=Labour and labour market
|label=Legally mandated notice period increases with seniority (WoL V1)
|relatedindicators=<ul>
<li>[[Legally mandated severance compensation increases with seniority (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Seniority is a decisive redundancy selection criterion (WoL V1)]]</li>
</ul>
|description=This WoL indicator measures if notice periods for employees increases with seniority by law.

Labour law not only protects workers, but also creates segmentation by privileging the standard employment relationship through higher standards of protection. The standard employment relationship is the classic model of the permanent, full-time employee who is permanently employed by one employer. Other forms of work – part-time, temporary agency work, work under a fixed-term contract, frequent changes of employee – receive less protection, even though the employment relationships in which they are engaged already inherently entail greater social risks. This leads to a further disadvantage for employees who are already in a precarious position.

Length of service is a common factor for prioritisation. However, the purpose of prioritisation is not to protect older workers, who are assumed to be less able to find a new job – after all, prioritisation of length of service is often capped after about ten years. The situation of employees who frequently have to change employers is socially more precarious than that of those with many years of service. The purpose of prioritisation is thus evidently not to provide special protection, but to cement the standard employment relationship.

Employees are existentially dependent on the income from their employment relationship, so termination of this by the employer also means the termination of the employee's ability to make a living. A mandatory notice period gives the employee the opportunity to make other arrangements to make a living in good time , for example to look for another job. The longer the notice period, the greater the protection in this sense.
|codingrules=The WoL is a leximetric dataset on individual employment protection. It quantifies the strength of the standard-setting, privileging, and equalising function of individual labour law (see Dingeldey et al. 2022). The scale ranges from "0" to "1" where "0" indicates that statutory law does not prescribe notice periods for employees to increase with seniority and "1" indicates that statutory law prescribes notice periods for employees to increase with seniority in steps for more than 10 years. Coding instructions and description of indicators are laid down in a technical paper (Fechner/Carlino, forthcoming). For country-specific information see WoL documentation (forthcoming).
|citation=Irene Dingeldey, Heiner Fechner, Jean-Yves Gerlitz, Jenny Hahs, Ulrich Mückenberger, Worlds of Labour: Introducing the Standard-Setting, Privileging and Equalising Typology as a Measure of Legal Segmentation in Labour Law, Industrial Law Journal, Volume 51, Issue 3, September 2022, Pages 560–597, https://doi.org/10.1093/indlaw/dwab016
|relatedpublications=<ul>
<li>Mückenberger, Ulrich, 1985. "Die Krise des Normalarbeitsverhältnisses - Hat das Arbeitsrecht noch Zukunft?" ''Zeitschrift für Sozialreform'' 31: 415-434; 457-475.
</li>
<li>
Mückenberger, Ulrich, and Simon Deakin. 1989. "From Deregulation to a European Floor of Rights: Labour Law, Flexibilisation and the European Single Market." ''Zeitschrift Für Ausländisches Und Internationales Arbeits- Und Sozialrecht'' 3: 153–207.
</li>
<li>
Carlino, M., Fechner, H., & Schäfer, A. (2024). Using leximetrics for coding legal segmentation in employment law: The development and potential of the Worlds of Labour database. In I. Dingeldey, H. Fechner, & U. Mückenberger (Eds.), Constructing Worlds of Labour. Coverage and Generosity of Labour Law as Outcomes of Regulatory Social Policy. Palgrave Macmillan.
</li>
</ul>
|projectmanagers= Responsible for data coding: Heiner Fechner (2018-2025).
 Responsible for data editing and entry: Heiner Fechner (2024-2025), Andrea Schäfer (2021-2025), Jean-Yves Gerlitz (2018-2020).
 Principal Investigators: Irene Dingeldey, Ulrich Mückenberger.
 Student assistants (2018-2025): Julia Bode, Jessica Bonn, Daniel Euler, Maxime Fischer, Jan-Christopher Floren, Jennifer Götte, Désirée Hoppe, Irina Kyburz, Alexandra Kojnow, Tarek Mahmalat, Karolin Meyer, Johanna Nold, Tanusha Pali, Johannes Ramsauer, Max Sudhoff, Kristina Walter, Caroline Zambiasi.
|datarelease=<ul><li>Version 0.001: Initial release</li></ul>
|revisions=The template has been revised in 2024, but coding for the completion of the revised dataset is still ongoing; values in WeSIS Version 0.001 correspond to the original template.
|sources=Own coding.
}}

Legally mandated notice period increases with seniority

2025-12-15T16:26:20Z

Hfechner: Redirected page to Legally mandated notice period increases with seniority (WoL V1)

#REDIRECT [[Legally mandated notice period increases with seniority (WoL V1)]]

Legally mandated severance compensation increases with seniority (WoL V1)

2025-12-15T16:25:45Z

{{IndicatorForm
|datatype=Numeric
|scale=Metric
|scale=Metric
|scale=Metric
|valuelabels=Not applicable in the strict sense since the scale is quasi-metric, but for coding the following values were used for orientation:
<ul><li> 1 = the statutory law provides increasing steps each year of service</li></ul>
<ul><li> 0.67 = the statutory law provides increasing steps for each year of service but are capped</li></ul>
<ul><li> 0.33 = the statutory law provides increasing steps only once</li></ul>
<ul><li> 0 = the statutory law do not provides increasing steps / equal for all workers concerned</li></ul>
New template for Version 2 adds: further gradations between 0 and 1 reflect changes in the strength of the law
|techname=labor_redcomp_sen
|category=Labour and labour market
|label=Legally mandated severance compensation increases with seniority (WoL V1)
|relatedindicators=<ul>
<li>[[Legally mandated notice period increases with seniority (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Seniority is a decisive redundancy selection criterion (WoL V1)]]</li>
</ul>
|description=This WoL indicator measures whether and in which steps the severance pay due upon termination of the labour contract increases with progressive length of service.

Labour law not only protects workers, but also creates segmentation, by privileging the standard employment relationship through higher standards of protection. The standard employment relationship is the classic model of the permanent, full-time employee with long-term employment with one employer. Other forms of work – part-time, temporary agency work, work under a fixed-term contract, frequent changes of employee – receive less protection, even though the employment relationships in which they are found already inherently entail greater social risks. This leads to a further disadvantage for employees who are already in a precarious position.

Length of service is a common factor used for prioritisation. However, the purpose of prioritisation is not to protect older employees, who are assumed to have a harder time finding a new job – after all, the prioritisation of length of service is almost always capped after about ten years. The situation of employees who have to change employers frequently is socially more precarious than that of those with many years of service. The purpose of prioritisation is thus evidently not to provide special protection, but to cement the standard employment relationship.

Employees are existentially dependent on the income from their employment relationship, so termination of this by the employer also means the termination of the employee's ability to make a living. A mandatory severance payment upon termination somewhat cushions the consequences for the employee and provides them with a financial bridge from which they can look for other paid work. The higher the severance payment to be made, the greater the protection.
|codingrules=The WoL is a leximetric dataset on individual employment protection. It quantifies the strength of the standard-setting, privileging, and equalising function of individual labour law (see Dingeldey et al. 2022). The scale ranges from "0" to "1" where "1" corresponds to statutory law that prescribes severance or redundancy payments in case of dismissal to increase for at least 15 years, while "0" corresponds to no legislation or no consideration of seniority for the determination of severance/redundancy payments. Coding instructions and description of indicators are laid down in a technical paper (Fechner/Carlino, forthcoming). For country-specific information see WoL documentation (forthcoming).
|citation=Irene Dingeldey, Heiner Fechner, Jean-Yves Gerlitz, Jenny Hahs, Ulrich Mückenberger, Worlds of Labour: Introducing the Standard-Setting, Privileging and Equalising Typology as a Measure of Legal Segmentation in Labour Law, Industrial Law Journal, Volume 51, Issue 3, September 2022, Pages 560–597, https://doi.org/10.1093/indlaw/dwab016
|relatedpublications=<ul>
<li>Mückenberger, Ulrich, 1985. "Die Krise des Normalarbeitsverhältnisses - Hat das Arbeitsrecht noch Zukunft?" ''Zeitschrift für Sozialreform'' 31: 415-434; 457-475
</li>
<li>
Mückenberger, Ulrich, and Simon Deakin. 1989. "From Deregulation to a European Floor of Rights: Labour Law, Flexibilisation and the European Single Market." ''Zeitschrift Für Ausländisches Und Internationales Arbeits- Und Sozialrecht'' 3: 153–207.
</li>
<li>
Carlino, M., Fechner, H., & Schäfer, A. (2024). Using leximetrics for coding legal segmentation in employment law: The development and potential of the Worlds of Labour database. In I. Dingeldey, H. Fechner, & U. Mückenberger (Eds.), Constructing Worlds of Labour. Coverage and Generosity of Labour Law as Outcomes of Regulatory Social Policy. Palgrave Macmillan.
</li>
</ul>
|projectmanagers= Responsible for data coding: Heiner Fechner (2018-2025)
 Responsible for data editing and entry: Heiner Fechner (2024-2025), Andrea Schäfer (2021-2025), Jean-Yves Gerlitz (2018-2020)
 Principal Investigators: Irene Dingeldey, Ulrich Mückenberger
 Student assistants (2018-2025): Julia Bode, Jessica Bonn, Daniel Euler, Maxime Fischer, Jan-Christopher Floren, Jennifer Götte, Désirée Hoppe, Irina Kyburz, Alexandra Kojnow, Tarek Mahmalat, Karolin Meyer, Johanna Nold, Tanusha Pali, Johannes Ramsauer, Max Sudhoff, Kristina Walter, Caroline Zambiasi.
|datarelease=<ul><li>Version 0.001: Initial release</li></ul>
|revisions=The template has been revised in 2024, but coding for the completion of the revised dataset is still ongoing; values in WeSIS Version 0.001 correspond to the original template.
|sources=Own coding.
}}

Legally mandated severance compensation increases with seniority

2025-12-15T16:25:14Z

Hfechner: Redirected page to Legally mandated severance compensation increases with seniority (WoL V1)

#REDIRECT [[Legally mandated severance compensation increases with seniority (WoL V1)]]

Seniority is a decisive redundancy selection criterion (WoL V1)

2025-12-15T16:24:33Z

{{IndicatorForm
|datatype=Numeric
|scale=Metric
|scale=Metric
|scale=Metric
|valuelabels=Not applicable in the strict sense since the scale is quasi-metric, but for coding the following values were used for orientation:
Seniority is
<ul><li> 1 = the only factor taken into account</li></ul>
<ul><li> 0.5 = is one factor among several</li></ul>
<ul><li> 0 = is not taken into account / no selection regulation at all</li></ul>
New template for Version 2 adds: further gradations between 0 and 1 reflect changes in the strength of the law
|techname=labor_redsec_sen
|category=Labour and labour market
|label=Seniority is a decisive redundancy selection criterion (WoL V1)
|relatedindicators=<ul>
<li>[[Legally mandated notice period increases with seniority (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Legally mandated severance compensation increases with seniority (WoL V1)]]</li>
</ul>
|description=This WoL indicator measures whether a social selection is made in the event of redundancies for operational reasons and whether length of service is a factor to be taken into account in such a selection.

Labour law not only protects, but also segments, by privileging the standard employment relationship through higher standards of protection. The standard employment relationship is the classic model of the permanent, full-time employee with long-term employment with one employer. Other forms of work – part-time, temporary agency work, work under a fixed-term contract, frequent changes of employee – receive less protection, even though the employment relationships in which they are found already inherently entail greater social risks. This leads to a further disadvantage for employees who are already in a precarious position.

Length of service is a common factor used for prioritisation. However, the purpose of prioritisation is not to protect older employees, who are assumed to have a harder time finding a new job – after all, the prioritisation of length of service is almost always capped after about ten years. The situation of employees who have to change employers frequently is socially more precarious than that of those with many years of service. The purpose of prioritisation is thus apparently not to provide special protection, but to cement the standard employment relationship.

Employees are existentially dependent on the income from their employment relationship, so termination of this by the employer also means the termination of the employee's ability to make a living. However, redundancies for operational reasons are not individually but economically justified, so the question arises as to which employee will be made redundant. If the law defines criteria that take into account special protection needs and on the basis of which the employer has to make a social selection when determining the order of redundancies, the arbitrary determination of redundancies is taken away from the employer.
|codingrules=The WoL is a leximetric dataset on individual employment protection. It quantifies the strength of the standard-setting, privileging, and equalising function of individual labour law (see Dingeldey et al. 2022). The scale ranges from "0" to "1" where "1" corresponds to statutory regulation that establishes that seniority is the only legally set factor to be taken into account for selection in case of redundancy dismissals, while "0" applies if seniority is not to be taken into account in these cases. Coding instructions and description of indicators are laid down in a technical paper (Fechner/Carlino, forthcoming). For country-specific information see WoL documentation (forthcoming).
|citation=Irene Dingeldey, Heiner Fechner, Jean-Yves Gerlitz, Jenny Hahs, Ulrich Mückenberger, Worlds of Labour: Introducing the Standard-Setting, Privileging and Equalising Typology as a Measure of Legal Segmentation in Labour Law, Industrial Law Journal, Volume 51, Issue 3, September 2022, Pages 560–597, https://doi.org/10.1093/indlaw/dwab016
|relatedpublications=<ul>
<li>Mückenberger, Ulrich, 1985. "Die Krise des Normalarbeitsverhältnisses - Hat das Arbeitsrecht noch Zukunft?" ''Zeitschrift für Sozialreform'' 31: 415-434; 457-475
</li>
<li>
Mückenberger, Ulrich, and Simon Deakin. 1989. "From Deregulation to a European Floor of Rights: Labour Law, Flexibilisation and the European Single Market." ''Zeitschrift Für Ausländisches Und Internationales Arbeits- Und Sozialrecht'' 3: 153–207. </li>
</ul>
|projectmanagers=Responsible for data coding: Heiner Fechner (2018-2025)
Responsible for data editing and entry: Heiner Fechner (2024-2025), Andrea Schäfer (2021-2025), Jean-Yves Gerlitz (2018-2020)
Principal Investigators: Irene Dingeldey, Ulrich Mückenberger
Student assistants (2018-2025): Julia Bode, Jessica Bonn, Daniel Euler, Maxime Fischer, Jan-Christopher Floren, Jennifer Götte, Désirée Hoppe, Irina Kyburz, Alexandra Kojnow, Tarek Mahmalat, Karolin Meyer, Johanna Nold, Tanusha Pali, Johannes Ramsauer, Max Sudhoff, Kristina Walter, Caroline Zambiasi.
|datarelease=<ul><li>Version 0.001: Initial release</li></ul>
|revisions=The template has been revised in 2024, but coding for the complete dataset is still ongoing; values in WeSIS Version 0.001 correspond to the original template.
|sources=Own coding.
}}

Seniority is a decisive redundancy selection criterion

2025-12-15T16:24:03Z

Hfechner: Redirected page to Seniority is a decisive redundancy selection criterion (WoL V1)

#REDIRECT [[Seniority is a decisive redundancy selection criterion (WoL V1)]]

Dismissal protection depends on size of enterprise (WoL V1)

2025-12-15T16:23:05Z

Dismissal protection depends on size of enterprise

2025-12-15T16:22:17Z

Hfechner: Redirected page to Dismissal protection depends on size of enterprise (WoL V1)

#REDIRECT [[Dismissal protection depends on size of enterprise (WoL V1)]]

Employees enjoy right to a general minimum wage

2025-12-15T16:21:45Z

Hfechner: Redirected page to Employees enjoy right to a general minimum wage (WoL V1)

#REDIRECT [[Employees enjoy right to a general minimum wage (WoL V1)]]

Employees enjoy right to a general minimum wage (WoL V1)

2025-12-15T16:21:14Z

Hfechner: Created page with "{{IndicatorForm |datatype=Numeric |scale=Metric |scale=Metric |scale=Metric |valuelabels=<ul><li> 1 = the law foresees an universal minimum wage </li></ul> <ul><li> 0.67 = the..."

{{IndicatorForm
|datatype=Numeric
|scale=Metric
|scale=Metric
|scale=Metric
|valuelabels=<ul><li> 1 = the law foresees an universal minimum wage </li></ul>
<ul><li> 0.67 = the law foresees differential minimum wages for sectors or professions without an universal wage floor</li></ul>
<ul><li> 0.33 = the law provides for the possibility to introduce minimum wages by sector, profession, region or otherwise</li></ul>
<ul><li> 0 = there is no minimum wage</li></ul>

quasi-metric scale; further gradations between 0 and 1 reflect changes in the strength of the law
|techname=labor_minwage
|category=Labour and labour market
|label=Employees enjoy right to a general minimum wage (WoL V1)
|relatedindicators=<ul>
<li>[[Law provides regulation of positive discrimination of women (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Law provides for equal access to employment for men and women (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Law provides regulation of positive discrimination of ethnicity/race (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Law provides for equal access to employment concerning ethnicity/race (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Law provides for equal working conditions for men and women (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Law provides for equal working conditions concerning ethnicity/race (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Equal pay for equal work is legally provided for (WoL V1)]]</li>
</ul>
|description=This WoL indicator measures if the law is guaranteeing a minimum wage for all employees or not.
|codingrules=The WoL is a leximetric dataset on individual employment protection. It quantifies the strength of the standard-setting, privileging, and equalising function of individual labour law (see Dingeldey et al. 2020). The scale ranges from "0" to "1" where "0" corresponds to no minimum wage regulation exists and "1" to the law is foreseeing a minimum wage for all employees. For country-specific information see WoL documentation (forthcoming).
|citation=Dingeldey, Irene, Heiner Fechner, Jean-Yves Gerlitz, Jenny Hahs, and Ulrich Mückenberger. 2020. "Measuring Legal Segmentation in Labour Law." ''SOCIUM SFB 1342 Working Papers No. 5'', Bremen: SOCIUM, University of Bremen. [https://www.socialpolicydynamics.de/f/90e3891ffd.pdf https://www.socialpolicydynamics.de/f/90e3891ffd.pdf]
|relatedpublications=<ul>
<li>Mückenberger, Ulrich, 1985. "Die Krise des Normalarbeitsverhältnisses - Hat das Arbeitsrecht noch Zukunft?" ''Zeitschrift für Sozialreform'' 31: 415-434; 457-475
</li>
<li>
Mückenberger, Ulrich, and Simon Deakin. 1989. "From Deregulation to a European Floor of Rights: Labour Law, Flexibilisation and the European Single Market." ''Zeitschrift Für Ausländisches Und Internationales Arbeits- Und Sozialrecht'' 3: 153–207. </li>
</ul>
|projectmanagers=Karolin Meyer, Jean-Yves Gerlitz, Andrea Schäfer
|datarelease=<ul><li>Version 0.001: Initial release</li></ul>
|revisions=No revisions yet
|sources=<ul>
<li> own coding</li>
</ul>
}}

Law provides regulation of positive discrimination of women

2025-12-15T16:20:03Z

Hfechner: Redirected page to Law provides regulation of positive discrimination of women (WoL V1)

#REDIRECT [[Law provides regulation of positive discrimination of women (WoL V1)]]

Law provides regulation of positive discrimination of ethnicity/race

2025-12-15T16:19:17Z

Hfechner: Redirected page to Law provides regulation of positive discrimination of ethnicity/race (WoL V1)

#REDIRECT [[Law provides regulation of positive discrimination of ethnicity/race (WoL V1)]]

Law provides regulation of positive discrimination of ethnicity/race (WoL V1)

2025-12-15T16:18:50Z

Hfechner: Created page with "{{IndicatorForm |datatype=Numeric |scale=Metric |scale=Metric |scale=Metric |valuelabels=<ul><li> 1 = the law prescribes positive discrimination</li></ul> <ul><li> 0.5 = the l..."

{{IndicatorForm
|datatype=Numeric
|scale=Metric
|scale=Metric
|scale=Metric
|valuelabels=<ul><li> 1 = the law prescribes positive discrimination</li></ul>
<ul><li> 0.5 = the law allows for positive discrimination</li></ul>
<ul><li> 0 = the law does not allow for positive discrimination</li></ul>

quasi-metric scale; further gradations between 0 and 1 reflect changes in the strength of the law
|techname=labor_posdis_ethn
|category=Labour and labour market
|label=Law provides regulation of positive discrimination of ethnicity/race (WoL V1)
|relatedindicators=<ul>
<li>[[Law provides regulation of positive discrimination of women (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Law provides for equal access to employment for men and women (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Law provides for equal access to employment concerning ethnicity/race (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Equal pay for equal work is legally provided for (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Law provides for equal working conditions for men and women (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Law provides for equal working conditions concerning ethnicity/race (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Employees enjoy right to a general minimum wage (WoL V1)]]</li>
</ul>
|description=This WoL indicator measures if the law allows positive discrimination to overcome labour discrimination of groups in terms of ethnicity/race or not.
|codingrules=The WoL is a leximetric dataset on individual employment protection. It quantifies the strength of the standard-setting, privileging, and equalising function of individual labour law (see Dingeldey et al. 2020). The scale ranges from "0" to "1" where "0" corresponds to no guarantee of positive discrimination concerning ethnicity/race exists and "1" to the law is prescribing positive discrimination concerning ethnicity/race to overcome labour discrimination. For country-specific information see WoL documentation (forthcoming).
|citation=Dingeldey, Irene, Heiner Fechner, Jean-Yves Gerlitz, Jenny Hahs, and Ulrich Mückenberger. 2020. "Measuring Legal Segmentation in Labour Law." ''SOCIUM SFB 1342 Working Papers No. 5'', Bremen: SOCIUM, University of Bremen. [https://www.socialpolicydynamics.de/f/90e3891ffd.pdf https://www.socialpolicydynamics.de/f/90e3891ffd.pdf]
|relatedpublications=<ul>
<li>Mückenberger, Ulrich, 1985. "Die Krise des Normalarbeitsverhältnisses - Hat das Arbeitsrecht noch Zukunft?" ''Zeitschrift für Sozialreform'' 31: 415-434; 457-475
</li>
<li>
Mückenberger, Ulrich, and Simon Deakin. 1989. "From Deregulation to a European Floor of Rights: Labour Law, Flexibilisation and the European Single Market." ''Zeitschrift Für Ausländisches Und Internationales Arbeits- Und Sozialrecht'' 3: 153–207. </li>
</ul>
|projectmanagers=Karolin Meyer, Jean-Yves Gerlitz, Andrea Schäfer
|datarelease=<ul><li>Version 0.001: Initial release</li></ul>
|revisions=No revisions yet
|sources=<ul>
<li> own coding </li>
</ul>
}}

Law provides regulation of positive discrimination of women (WoL V1)

2025-12-15T16:17:38Z

{{IndicatorForm
|datatype=Numeric
|scale=Metric
|scale=Metric
|scale=Metric
|valuelabels=<ul><li> 1 = the law prescribes positive discrimination (affirmative action)</li></ul>
<ul><li> 0.5 = the law allows for positive discrimination </li></ul>
<ul><li> 0 = the law does not allow for positive discrimination</li></ul>

quasi-metric scale; further gradations between 0 and 1 reflect changes in the strength of the law
|techname=labor_posdis_gend
|category=Labour and labour market
|label=Law provides regulation of positive discrimination of women (WoL V1)
|relatedindicators=<ul>
<li>[[Law provides for equal access to employment for men and women (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Law provides for equal access to employment concerning ethnicity/race (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Law provides regulation of positive discrimination of ethnicity/race (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Equal pay for equal work is legally provided for (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Law provides for equal working conditions for men and women (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Law provides for equal working conditions concerning ethnicity/race (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Employees enjoy right to a general minimum wage (WoL V1)]]</li>
</ul>
|description=This WoL indicator measures if the law is prescribing positive discrimination of women or not.
|codingrules=The WoL is a leximetric dataset on individual employment protection. It quantifies the strength of the standard-setting, privileging, and equalising function of individual labour law (see Dingeldey et al. 2020). The scale ranges from "0" to "1" where "0" corresponds to the law does not allow positive discrimination of women and "1" to the law is prescribing positive discrimination of women. For country-specific information see WoL documentation (forthcoming).
|citation=Dingeldey, Irene, Heiner Fechner, Jean-Yves Gerlitz, Jenny Hahs, and Ulrich Mückenberger. 2020. "Measuring Legal Segmentation in Labour Law." ''SOCIUM SFB 1342 Working Papers No. 5'', Bremen: SOCIUM, University of Bremen. [https://www.socialpolicydynamics.de/f/90e3891ffd.pdf https://www.socialpolicydynamics.de/f/90e3891ffd.pdf]
|relatedpublications=<ul>
<li>Mückenberger, Ulrich, 1985. "Die Krise des Normalarbeitsverhältnisses - Hat das Arbeitsrecht noch Zukunft?" ''Zeitschrift für Sozialreform'' 31: 415-434; 457-475
</li>
<li>
Mückenberger, Ulrich, and Simon Deakin. 1989. "From Deregulation to a European Floor of Rights: Labour Law, Flexibilisation and the European Single Market." ''Zeitschrift Für Ausländisches Und Internationales Arbeits- Und Sozialrecht'' 3: 153–207. </li>
</ul>
|projectmanagers=Karolin Meyer, Jean-Yves Gerlitz, Andrea Schäfer
|datarelease=<ul><li>Version 0.001: Initial release</li></ul>
|revisions=No revisions yet
|sources=<ul>
<li> own coding </li>
</ul>
}}

Law provides for equal working conditions concerning ethnicity/race

2025-12-15T16:13:46Z

Hfechner: Redirected page to Law provides for equal working conditions concerning ethnicity/race (WoL V1)

#REDIRECT [[Law provides for equal working conditions concerning ethnicity/race (WoL V1)]]

Law provides for equal working conditions for men and women

2025-12-15T16:13:31Z

Hfechner: Replaced content with "#REDIRECT Law provides for equal working conditions for men and women (WoL V1)"

#REDIRECT [[Law provides for equal working conditions for men and women (WoL V1)]]

Law provides for equal working conditions for men and women (WoL V1)

2025-12-15T16:12:07Z

{{IndicatorForm
|datatype=Numeric
|scale=Metric
|scale=Metric
|scale=Metric
|valuelabels=Not applicable in the strict sense since the scale is quasi-metric, but for coding the following values were used for orientation:
<ul><li> 1 = the law guarantees non-discrimination in terms of general working conditions</li></ul>
<ul><li> 0.5 = the law guarantees equal pay for equal work (only original template)</li></ul>
<ul><li> 0 = there is no such guarantee existing</li></ul>

New template for Version 2 adds: further gradations between 0 and 1 reflect changes in the strength of the law; 
moves equal pay for equal work to
"[[Equal pay for work of equal value is legally provided for]]"
|techname=labor_eqwc_gend
|category=Labour and labour market
|label=Law provides for equal working conditions for men and women (WoL V1)
|relatedindicators=<ul>
<li>[[Law prescribes special measures for women (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Law provides for equal access to employment for men and women (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Law provides regulation of special measures concerning ethnicity/race (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Law provides for equal access to employment concerning ethnicity/race (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Law provides for equal working conditions concerning ethnicity/race (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Equal pay for work of equal value is legally provided for (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Employees enjoy right to a universal minimum wage (WoL V1)]]</li>
</ul>
|description=This WoL indicator measures the extent and strength of women's legal equality in terms of working conditions.

The unequal treatment of women that has developed over thousands of years of patriarchy cannot be overcome by simply banning unequal treatment. To end this tradition of discrimination and unequal treatment, antidiscrimination law has been introduced, with gender discrimination being among the first to be adressed. This variable exclusively covers legislation concerning working conditions, although general antidiscrimination norms covering both access to work and working conditions are to be considered as well.

''Original template:'' The structure is simplified aiming to reduce complexity of coding. Any antidiscrimination legislation prohibiting female discrimination is covered. Since equal pay for equal work-rules are special forms of antidiscrimination law, they are given an intermediate value since they are not covered by the equal pay-standard in "[[Equal pay for work of equal value is legally provided for]]". It does not make a difference whether gender discrimination is explicitly covered or not by antidiscrimination legislation, nor the degree, if it is covered by the objective of the norm.

''Revised template:'' the modification should make developments visible and better represent the complex development of antidiscrimination legislation concerning gender. From a general prohibition of discrimination, a differentiation between direct and indirect discrimination has been developed, among others. Since individual complaints will seldom be made against the employer in an ongoing employment relationship, the law may provide for collective bodies to engage in defense and on behalf of employees and foresee special procedures. Short time limits to complain against discrimination may frustrate activities to engage against discrimination and thus reduce effects of the law.

Gender is not the only factor that can make it more difficult for women to enter and remain in the labour market. In many cases, gender interacts with other factors such as social class, ethnicity, racialised characteristics, disability, sexual orientation or other factors. These factors can be additive, but they can also be inextricably linked (intersectional discrimination). The strength of legal provisions for active equality can therefore be seen from whether the law merely prescribes simple equality measures, such as special measures for care responsibilities, or whether it prescribes more complex measures, such as preferential treatment or even the targeted active combating of multiple, including intersectional, discrimination.
|codingrules=The WoL is a leximetric dataset on individual employment protection. It quantifies the strength of the standard-setting, privileging, and equalising function of individual labour law (see Dingeldey et al. 2022). The scale ranges from "0" to "1" where "0" corresponds to the absence of a legal guarantee of non-discrimination in working conditions based on gender and "1" to the full existence of a such a guarantee. Coding instructions and description of indicators are laid down in a technical paper (Fechner/Carlino, forthcoming). For country-specific information see WoL documentation (forthcoming).
|citation=Irene Dingeldey, Heiner Fechner, Jean-Yves Gerlitz, Jenny Hahs, Ulrich Mückenberger, Worlds of Labour: Introducing the Standard-Setting, Privileging and Equalising Typology as a Measure of Legal Segmentation in Labour Law, Industrial Law Journal, Volume 51, Issue 3, September 2022, Pages 560–597, https://doi.org/10.1093/indlaw/dwab016
|relatedpublications=<ul>
<li>Mückenberger, Ulrich, 1985. "Die Krise des Normalarbeitsverhältnisses - Hat das Arbeitsrecht noch Zukunft?" ''Zeitschrift für Sozialreform'' 31: 415-434; 457-475
</li>
<li>
Mückenberger, Ulrich, and Simon Deakin. 1989. "From Deregulation to a European Floor of Rights: Labour Law, Flexibilisation and the European Single Market." ''Zeitschrift Für Ausländisches Und Internationales Arbeits- Und Sozialrecht'' 3: 153–207.
</li>
<li>
Carlino, M., Fechner, H., & Schäfer, A. (2024). Using leximetrics for coding legal segmentation in employment law: The development and potential of the Worlds of Labour database. In I. Dingeldey, H. Fechner, & U. Mückenberger (Eds.), Constructing Worlds of Labour. Coverage and Generosity of Labour Law as Outcomes of Regulatory Social Policy. Palgrave Macmillan.
</li>
</ul>
|projectmanagers= Responsible for data coding: Heiner Fechner (2018-2025)
 Responsible for data editing and entry: Heiner Fechner (2024-2025), Andrea Schäfer (2021-2025), Jean-Yves Gerlitz (2018-2020)
 Principal Investigators: Irene Dingeldey, Ulrich Mückenberger
 Student assistants (2018-2025): Julia Bode, Jessica Bonn, Daniel Euler, Maxime Fischer, Jan-Christopher Floren, Jennifer Götte, Désirée Hoppe, Irina Kyburz, Alexandra Kojnow, Tarek Mahmalat, Karolin Meyer, Johanna Nold, Tanusha Pali, Johannes Ramsauer, Max Sudhoff, Kristina Walter, Caroline Zambiasi.
|datarelease=<ul><li>Version 0.001: Initial release</li></ul>
|revisions=The template has been revised in 2024, but coding for the completion of the revised dataset is still ongoing; values in WeSIS Version 0.001 correspond to the original template.
|sources=Own coding.
}}

Law provides for equal working conditions for men and women

2025-12-15T16:11:20Z

Hfechner: Redirected page to Law provides for equal working conditions for men and women (WoL V1)

#REDIRECT [[Law provides for equal working conditions for men and women (WoL V1)]]
{{IndicatorForm
|datatype=Numeric
|scale=Metric
|scale=Metric
|scale=Metric
|valuelabels=Not applicable in the strict sense since the scale is quasi-metric, but for coding the following values were used for orientation:
<ul><li> 1 = the law guarantees non-discrimination in terms of general working conditions</li></ul>
<ul><li> 0.5 = the law guarantees equal pay for equal work (only original template)</li></ul>
<ul><li> 0 = there is no such guarantee existing</li></ul>

New template for Version 2 adds: further gradations between 0 and 1 reflect changes in the strength of the law; 
moves equal pay for equal work to
"[[Equal pay for work of equal value is legally provided for]]"
|techname=labor_eqwc_gend
|category=Labour and labour market
|label=Law provides for equal working conditions for men and women (WoL V1)
|relatedindicators=<ul>
<li>[[Law prescribes special measures for women (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Law provides for equal access to employment for men and women (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Law provides regulation of special measures concerning ethnicity/race (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Law provides for equal access to employment concerning ethnicity/race (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Law provides for equal working conditions concerning ethnicity/race (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Equal pay for work of equal value is legally provided for (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Employees enjoy right to a universal minimum wage (WoL V1)]]</li>
</ul>
|description=This WoL indicator measures the extent and strength of women's legal equality in terms of working conditions.

The unequal treatment of women that has developed over thousands of years of patriarchy cannot be overcome by simply banning unequal treatment. To end this tradition of discrimination and unequal treatment, antidiscrimination law has been introduced, with gender discrimination being among the first to be adressed. This variable exclusively covers legislation concerning working conditions, although general antidiscrimination norms covering both access to work and working conditions are to be considered as well.

''Original template:'' The structure is simplified aiming to reduce complexity of coding. Any antidiscrimination legislation prohibiting female discrimination is covered. Since equal pay for equal work-rules are special forms of antidiscrimination law, they are given an intermediate value since they are not covered by the equal pay-standard in "[[Equal pay for work of equal value is legally provided for]]". It does not make a difference whether gender discrimination is explicitly covered or not by antidiscrimination legislation, nor the degree, if it is covered by the objective of the norm.

''Revised template:'' the modification should make developments visible and better represent the complex development of antidiscrimination legislation concerning gender. From a general prohibition of discrimination, a differentiation between direct and indirect discrimination has been developed, among others. Since individual complaints will seldom be made against the employer in an ongoing employment relationship, the law may provide for collective bodies to engage in defense and on behalf of employees and foresee special procedures. Short time limits to complain against discrimination may frustrate activities to engage against discrimination and thus reduce effects of the law.

Gender is not the only factor that can make it more difficult for women to enter and remain in the labour market. In many cases, gender interacts with other factors such as social class, ethnicity, racialised characteristics, disability, sexual orientation or other factors. These factors can be additive, but they can also be inextricably linked (intersectional discrimination). The strength of legal provisions for active equality can therefore be seen from whether the law merely prescribes simple equality measures, such as special measures for care responsibilities, or whether it prescribes more complex measures, such as preferential treatment or even the targeted active combating of multiple, including intersectional, discrimination.
|codingrules=The WoL is a leximetric dataset on individual employment protection. It quantifies the strength of the standard-setting, privileging, and equalising function of individual labour law (see Dingeldey et al. 2022). The scale ranges from "0" to "1" where "0" corresponds to the absence of a legal guarantee of non-discrimination in working conditions based on gender and "1" to the full existence of a such a guarantee. Coding instructions and description of indicators are laid down in a technical paper (Fechner/Carlino, forthcoming). For country-specific information see WoL documentation (forthcoming).
|citation=Irene Dingeldey, Heiner Fechner, Jean-Yves Gerlitz, Jenny Hahs, Ulrich Mückenberger, Worlds of Labour: Introducing the Standard-Setting, Privileging and Equalising Typology as a Measure of Legal Segmentation in Labour Law, Industrial Law Journal, Volume 51, Issue 3, September 2022, Pages 560–597, https://doi.org/10.1093/indlaw/dwab016
|relatedpublications=<ul>
<li>Mückenberger, Ulrich, 1985. "Die Krise des Normalarbeitsverhältnisses - Hat das Arbeitsrecht noch Zukunft?" ''Zeitschrift für Sozialreform'' 31: 415-434; 457-475
</li>
<li>
Mückenberger, Ulrich, and Simon Deakin. 1989. "From Deregulation to a European Floor of Rights: Labour Law, Flexibilisation and the European Single Market." ''Zeitschrift Für Ausländisches Und Internationales Arbeits- Und Sozialrecht'' 3: 153–207.
</li>
<li>
Carlino, M., Fechner, H., & Schäfer, A. (2024). Using leximetrics for coding legal segmentation in employment law: The development and potential of the Worlds of Labour database. In I. Dingeldey, H. Fechner, & U. Mückenberger (Eds.), Constructing Worlds of Labour. Coverage and Generosity of Labour Law as Outcomes of Regulatory Social Policy. Palgrave Macmillan.
</li>
</ul>
|projectmanagers= Responsible for data coding: Heiner Fechner (2018-2025)
 Responsible for data editing and entry: Heiner Fechner (2024-2025), Andrea Schäfer (2021-2025), Jean-Yves Gerlitz (2018-2020)
 Principal Investigators: Irene Dingeldey, Ulrich Mückenberger
 Student assistants (2018-2025): Julia Bode, Jessica Bonn, Daniel Euler, Maxime Fischer, Jan-Christopher Floren, Jennifer Götte, Désirée Hoppe, Irina Kyburz, Alexandra Kojnow, Tarek Mahmalat, Karolin Meyer, Johanna Nold, Tanusha Pali, Johannes Ramsauer, Max Sudhoff, Kristina Walter, Caroline Zambiasi.
|datarelease=<ul><li>Version 0.001: Initial release</li></ul>
|revisions=The template has been revised in 2024, but coding for the completion of the revised dataset is still ongoing; values in WeSIS Version 0.001 correspond to the original template.
|sources=Own coding.
}}

Employees enjoy right to a universal minimum wage (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)

2025-12-15T16:09:59Z

Hfechner: Redirected page to Employees enjoy right to a universal minimum wage (WoL V1)

#REDIRECT [[Employees enjoy right to a universal minimum wage (WoL V1)]]

Employees enjoy right to a universal minimum wage (WoL V1)

2025-12-15T16:09:08Z

{{IndicatorForm
|datatype=Numeric
|scale=Metric
|scale=Metric
|scale=Metric
|valuelabels=Not applicable in the strict sense since the scale is quasi-metric, but for coding the following values were used for orientation:
<ul><li> up to 1 = a universal minimum wage is legally foreseen.</li></ul>
<ul><li> up to 0,67 = the law foresees differential minimum wages regulated by sector or profession without a universal wage floor.</li></ul>
<ul><li> up to 0,33 = the law provides for the possibility to introduce minimum wages by sector, profession, region or otherwise on an occasional basis.</li></ul>
<ul><li> 0 = otherwise.</li></ul>
Scope for further gradations between 0 and 1 to reflect changes in the strength of the statutory law.
|techname=labor_minwage
|category=Labour and labour market
|label=Employees enjoy right to a universal minimum wage (WoL V1)
|relatedindicators=<ul>
<li>[[Law provides for equal access to employment for men and women (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Law provides for equal working conditions for men and women (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Law prescribes special measures for women (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Law provides for equal access to employment concerning ethnicity/race (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Law provides for equal working conditions concerning ethnicity/race (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Law provides regulation of special measures concerning ethnicity/race (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Equal pay for work of equal value is legally provided for (WoL V1)]]</li>
</ul>
|description=This WoL indicator measures whether and to what extent a statutory minimum wage is provided for. It does not measure the level of the minimum wage or the age gradation.

In an employment relationship, the employee transfers the power of disposition over their productive labour to their employer for a fixed period of time in exchange for a wage. The amount of the wage is generally determined by the contractual parties.

However, there is an elementary contradiction of interests in the wage negotiation: for the employer, wages are costs that they want to keep as low as possible. For employees, on the other hand, the level of pay determines the extent of their opportunities for reproduction and social participation – so they have an interest in the highest possible pay. Without legal/collective regulation, this contradiction is resolved in favour of the employers by competing among employees: the pay that has to be paid is the lowest amount for which an employee can be found.

In this race to the bottom, there are periods of increased unemployment and underemployment, in particular, when wage levels are not even high enough to fully cover basic reproduction costs (housing, nutrition, clothing, health) or to enable a minimum standard of living. Politically undesirable consequences such as the endangerment of public health due to malnutrition, the increase in crime and homelessness – or, where applicable, the burden on the social system – can be limited or combated by the state through the introduction of a minimum wage.

By setting minimum wages or sanctioning autonomous minimum wage instruments, the state sets a lower minimum level of pay. This sets a minimum level of economic equality in the sense of equalising, in order to limit the competition of underbidding anchored in the logic of the market.
|codingrules=The WoL is a leximetric dataset on individual employment protection. It quantifies the strength of the standard-setting, privileging, and equalising function of individual labour law (see Dingeldey et al. 2022). The scale ranges from "0" to "1" where "0" corresponds to the absence of any legal regulation of minimum wages, values up to "0,33" correspond to the legal possibility to introduce sectoral minimum wages, up to "0,67" corresponds to the prescription of sectoral minimum wages without a universal minimum wage, and "1" corresponds to the legal regulation of a universal minimum wage. Coding instructions and description of indicators are laid down in a technical paper (Fechner/Carlino, forthcoming). For country-specific information see WoL documentation (forthcoming).
|citation=Irene Dingeldey, Heiner Fechner, Jean-Yves Gerlitz, Jenny Hahs, Ulrich Mückenberger, Worlds of Labour: Introducing the Standard-Setting, Privileging and Equalising Typology as a Measure of Legal Segmentation in Labour Law, Industrial Law Journal, Volume 51, Issue 3, September 2022, Pages 560–597, https://doi.org/10.1093/indlaw/dwab016
|relatedpublications=<ul>
<li>Mückenberger, Ulrich, 1985. "Die Krise des Normalarbeitsverhältnisses - Hat das Arbeitsrecht noch Zukunft?" ''Zeitschrift für Sozialreform'' 31: 415-434; 457-475
</li>
<li>
Mückenberger, Ulrich, and Simon Deakin. 1989. "From Deregulation to a European Floor of Rights: Labour Law, Flexibilisation and the European Single Market." ''Zeitschrift Für Ausländisches Und Internationales Arbeits- Und Sozialrecht'' 3: 153–207.
</li>
<li>
Carlino, M., Fechner, H., & Schäfer, A. (2024). Using leximetrics for coding legal segmentation in employment law: The development and potential of the Worlds of Labour database. In I. Dingeldey, H. Fechner, & U. Mückenberger (Eds.), Constructing Worlds of Labour. Coverage and Generosity of Labour Law as Outcomes of Regulatory Social Policy. Palgrave Macmillan.
</li>
</ul>
|projectmanagers= Responsible for data coding: Heiner Fechner (2018-2025)
 Responsible for data editing and entry: Heiner Fechner (2024-2025), Andrea Schäfer (2021-2025), Jean-Yves Gerlitz (2018-2020)
 Principal Investigators: Irene Dingeldey, Ulrich Mückenberger
 Student assistants (2018-2025): Julia Bode, Jessica Bonn, Daniel Euler, Maxime Fischer, Jan-Christopher Floren, Jennifer Götte, Désirée Hoppe, Irina Kyburz, Alexandra Kojnow, Tarek Mahmalat, Karolin Meyer, Johanna Nold, Tanusha Pali, Johannes Ramsauer, Max Sudhoff, Kristina Walter, Caroline Zambiasi.
|datarelease=<ul><li>Version 0.001: Initial release</li></ul>
|revisions=The template has been revised in 2024, but coding for the completion of the revised dataset is still ongoing; values in WeSIS Version 0.001 correspond to the original template. The revision concerns primarily wording (no fundamental change in content), and furthermore the introduction of finer differentiations.
|sources=Own coding.
}}
{{#default_form:IndicatorForm}}

Equal pay for equal work is legally provided for (WoL V1)

2025-12-15T16:05:40Z

{{IndicatorForm
|datatype=Numeric
|scale=Metric
|scale=Metric
|scale=Metric
|valuelabels=Not applicable in the strict sense since the scale is quasi-metric, but for coding the following values were used for orientation:
<ul><li>1 = equal pay for work of equal value is guaranteed by law</li></ul>
<ul><li>0 = there is no legal provision.</li></ul>
New template for Version 2 adds: further gradations between 0 and 1 reflect changes in the strength of the law
|techname=labor_eqpay
|category=Labour and labour market
|label=Equal pay for work of equal value for is legally provided for (WoL V1)
|relatedindicators=<ul>
<li>[[Law provides for equal access to employment for men and women (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Law prescribes special measures for women (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Law provides regulation of special measures concerning ethnicity/race (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Law provides for equal access to employment concerning ethnicity/race (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Law provides for equal working conditions concerning ethnicity/race (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Employees enjoy right to a universal minimum wage (WoL V1)]]</li>
</ul>
|description=This WoL indicator measures the strength of regulation for gender equality in terms of pay determination.

The principle of equal pay developed in the context of ILO and other international human rights instruments forms part of the general principle of non-discrimination concerning labour conditions. In terms of remuneration, its meaning is twofold. On the one hand, there is the narrower principle of equal pay for equal work. On the other hand, there is the wider principle of equal pay for work of equal value. Although it certainly also contains the idea that equal work should be paid equally, it has a proper meaning beyond “equal pay for equal work”. Coding shall only cover legislation that explicitly covers the wider dimension.

Legislation is considered to fully fall under this indicator if the principle of equal pay reaches beyond (i) the same or similar work, (ii) the same establishment, and (iii) jobs carried out by both sexes. In other words, legislation must allow for the comparison of work which, on first view, is different, carried out in different places and potentially even for different employers, and guarantee that jobs effectively carried out only by women or men can also be compared.

As potential actors, next to employers and workers also the authors of collective agreements can be addressed by the legal norm. Since the wage finding machinery can differ widely from country to country and the objective is to detect its introduction into law, not its efficiency, it shall be sufficient if the principle is established as binding either employers directly or the authors of collective agreements. Legislation covering only one branch or the public sector will not suffice; the norm or set of norms should be recognizable as aiming to realise the general principle for waged labour or at least blue-collar workers.

The strength of the law may be influenced vertically, e.g. by partial regulation for large sectors such as the public sector, and horizontally by the level of regulation (e.g. business unit, company, sectoral collective agreements, and in general for all private and collective agreements). The more restricted the scope of application, the lower the value assigned. For instance, a simple mandatory "equal pay for equal work" rule should not exceed 0.15 points.

The indicator especially refers to gender discrimination. Thus, legislation restricted to equal pay for work with equal value with an explicit gender perspective (Article 2 ILO C-100) is especially valued.
|codingrules=The WoL is a leximetric dataset on individual employment protection. It quantifies the strength of the standard-setting, privileging, and equalising function of individual labour law (see Dingeldey et al. 2022). The scale ranges from "0" to "1" where "1" applies if equal pay for work of equal value is fully guaranteed by statutory law, while "0" applies if there is no such legal provision at all or a gender differentiation of payment is prescribed. Coding instructions and description of indicators are laid down in a technical paper (Fechner/Carlino, forthcoming). For country-specific information see WoL documentation (forthcoming).
|citation=Irene Dingeldey, Heiner Fechner, Jean-Yves Gerlitz, Jenny Hahs, Ulrich Mückenberger, Worlds of Labour: Introducing the Standard-Setting, Privileging and Equalising Typology as a Measure of Legal Segmentation in Labour Law, Industrial Law Journal, Volume 51, Issue 3, September 2022, Pages 560–597, https://doi.org/10.1093/indlaw/dwab016
|relatedpublications=<ul>
<li>Mückenberger, Ulrich, 1985. "Die Krise des Normalarbeitsverhältnisses - Hat das Arbeitsrecht noch Zukunft?" ''Zeitschrift für Sozialreform'' 31: 415-434; 457-475.
</li>
<li>
Mückenberger, Ulrich, and Simon Deakin. 1989. "From Deregulation to a European Floor of Rights: Labour Law, Flexibilisation and the European Single Market." ''Zeitschrift Für Ausländisches Und Internationales Arbeits- Und Sozialrecht'' 3: 153–207.
</li>
<li>
Carlino, M., Fechner, H., & Schäfer, A. (2024). Using leximetrics for coding legal segmentation in employment law: The development and potential of the Worlds of Labour database. In I. Dingeldey, H. Fechner, & U. Mückenberger (Eds.), Constructing Worlds of Labour. Coverage and Generosity of Labour Law as Outcomes of Regulatory Social Policy. Palgrave Macmillan.
</li>
</ul>
|projectmanagers= Responsible for data coding: Heiner Fechner (2018-2025).
 Responsible for data editing and entry: Heiner Fechner (2024-2025), Andrea Schäfer (2021-2025), Jean-Yves Gerlitz (2018-2020).
 Principal Investigators: Irene Dingeldey, Ulrich Mückenberger.
 Student assistants (2018-2025): Julia Bode, Jessica Bonn, Daniel Euler, Maxime Fischer, Jan-Christopher Floren, Jennifer Götte, Désirée Hoppe, Irina Kyburz, Alexandra Kojnow, Tarek Mahmalat, Karolin Meyer, Johanna Nold, Tanusha Pali, Johannes Ramsauer, Max Sudhoff, Kristina Walter, Caroline Zambiasi.
|datarelease=<ul><li>Version 0.001: Initial release</li></ul>
|revisions=The template has been revised in 2024 to allow for a more differentiated picture, but coding for the completion of the revised dataset is still ongoing; values in WeSIS Version 0.001 correspond to the original template.
|sources=Own coding.
}}


{{#default_form:IndicatorForm}}

Equal pay for work of equal value is legally provided for (WoL V1)

2025-12-15T16:03:20Z

{{IndicatorForm
|datatype=Numeric
|scale=Metric
|scale=Metric
|scale=Metric
|valuelabels=Not applicable in the strict sense since the scale is quasi-metric, but for coding the following values were used for orientation:
<ul><li>1 = equal pay for work of equal value is guaranteed by law</li></ul>
<ul><li>0 = there is no legal provision.</li></ul>
New template for Version 2 adds: further gradations between 0 and 1 reflect changes in the strength of the law
|techname=labor_eqpay
|category=Labour and labour market
|label=Equal pay for work of equal value for is legally provided for (WoL V1)
|relatedindicators=<ul>
<li>[[Law provides for equal access to employment for men and women (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Law prescribes special measures for women]]</li>
<li>[[Law provides regulation of special measures concerning ethnicity/race (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Law provides for equal access to employment concerning ethnicity/race (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Equal pay for equal work is legally provided for (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Law provides for equal working conditions concerning ethnicity/race (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Employees enjoy right to a universal minimum wage (WoL V1)]]</li>
</ul>
|description=This WoL indicator measures the strength of regulation for gender equality in terms of pay determination.

The principle of equal pay developed in the context of ILO and other international human rights instruments forms part of the general principle of non-discrimination concerning labour conditions. In terms of remuneration, its meaning is twofold. On the one hand, there is the narrower principle of equal pay for equal work. On the other hand, there is the wider principle of equal pay for work of equal value. Although it certainly also contains the idea that equal work should be paid equally, it has a proper meaning beyond “equal pay for equal work”. Coding shall only cover legislation that explicitly covers the wider dimension.

Legislation is considered to fully fall under this indicator if the principle of equal pay reaches beyond (i) the same or similar work, (ii) the same establishment, and (iii) jobs carried out by both sexes. In other words, legislation must allow for the comparison of work which, on first view, is different, carried out in different places and potentially even for different employers, and guarantee that jobs effectively carried out only by women or men can also be compared.

As potential actors, next to employers and workers also the authors of collective agreements can be addressed by the legal norm. Since the wage finding machinery can differ widely from country to country and the objective is to detect its introduction into law, not its efficiency, it shall be sufficient if the principle is established as binding either employers directly or the authors of collective agreements. Legislation covering only one branch or the public sector will not suffice; the norm or set of norms should be recognizable as aiming to realise the general principle for waged labour or at least blue-collar workers.

The strength of the law may be influenced vertically, e.g. by partial regulation for large sectors such as the public sector, and horizontally by the level of regulation (e.g. business unit, company, sectoral collective agreements, and in general for all private and collective agreements). The more restricted the scope of application, the lower the value assigned. For instance, a simple mandatory "equal pay for equal work" rule should not exceed 0.15 points.

The indicator especially refers to gender discrimination. Thus, legislation restricted to equal pay for work with equal value with an explicit gender perspective (Article 2 ILO C-100) is especially valued.
|codingrules=The WoL is a leximetric dataset on individual employment protection. It quantifies the strength of the standard-setting, privileging, and equalising function of individual labour law (see Dingeldey et al. 2022). The scale ranges from "0" to "1" where "1" applies if equal pay for work of equal value is fully guaranteed by statutory law, while "0" applies if there is no such legal provision at all or a gender differentiation of payment is prescribed. Coding instructions and description of indicators are laid down in a technical paper (Fechner/Carlino, forthcoming). For country-specific information see WoL documentation (forthcoming).
|citation=Irene Dingeldey, Heiner Fechner, Jean-Yves Gerlitz, Jenny Hahs, Ulrich Mückenberger, Worlds of Labour: Introducing the Standard-Setting, Privileging and Equalising Typology as a Measure of Legal Segmentation in Labour Law, Industrial Law Journal, Volume 51, Issue 3, September 2022, Pages 560–597, https://doi.org/10.1093/indlaw/dwab016
|relatedpublications=<ul>
<li>Mückenberger, Ulrich, 1985. "Die Krise des Normalarbeitsverhältnisses - Hat das Arbeitsrecht noch Zukunft?" ''Zeitschrift für Sozialreform'' 31: 415-434; 457-475.
</li>
<li>
Mückenberger, Ulrich, and Simon Deakin. 1989. "From Deregulation to a European Floor of Rights: Labour Law, Flexibilisation and the European Single Market." ''Zeitschrift Für Ausländisches Und Internationales Arbeits- Und Sozialrecht'' 3: 153–207.
</li>
<li>
Carlino, M., Fechner, H., & Schäfer, A. (2024). Using leximetrics for coding legal segmentation in employment law: The development and potential of the Worlds of Labour database. In I. Dingeldey, H. Fechner, & U. Mückenberger (Eds.), Constructing Worlds of Labour. Coverage and Generosity of Labour Law as Outcomes of Regulatory Social Policy. Palgrave Macmillan.
</li>
</ul>
|projectmanagers= Responsible for data coding: Heiner Fechner (2018-2025).
 Responsible for data editing and entry: Heiner Fechner (2024-2025), Andrea Schäfer (2021-2025), Jean-Yves Gerlitz (2018-2020).
 Principal Investigators: Irene Dingeldey, Ulrich Mückenberger.
 Student assistants (2018-2025): Julia Bode, Jessica Bonn, Daniel Euler, Maxime Fischer, Jan-Christopher Floren, Jennifer Götte, Désirée Hoppe, Irina Kyburz, Alexandra Kojnow, Tarek Mahmalat, Karolin Meyer, Johanna Nold, Tanusha Pali, Johannes Ramsauer, Max Sudhoff, Kristina Walter, Caroline Zambiasi.
|datarelease=<ul><li>Version 0.001: Initial release</li></ul>
|revisions=The template has been revised in 2024 to allow for a more differentiated picture, but coding for the completion of the revised dataset is still ongoing; values in WeSIS Version 0.001 correspond to the original template.
|sources=Own coding.
}}


{{#default_form:IndicatorForm}}

Equal pay for work of equal value is legally provided for

2025-12-15T16:02:39Z

Hfechner: Redirected page to Equal pay for work of equal value is legally provided for (WoL V1)

#REDIRECT [[Equal pay for work of equal value is legally provided for (WoL V1)]]

Law provides regulation of special measures concerning ethnicity/race (WoL V1)

2025-12-15T15:57:09Z

{{IndicatorForm
|datatype=Numeric
|scale=Metric
|scale=Metric
|scale=Metric
|valuelabels=Not applicable in the strict sense since the scale is quasi-metric, but for coding the following values were used for orientation:
''Original template:''
<ul><li> 1 = the law prescribes positive discrimination (affirmative action/special measures) in order to overcome racial/ethnic discrimination in employment relationships</li></ul>
<ul><li> 0,5 = the law allows for positive discrimination in order to overcome racial/ethnic discrimination in employment relationships</li></ul>
<ul><li> 0 = the law does not allow for positive discrimination</li></ul>

''Revised template:''
<ul><li> 1 = the law prescribes special measures (e.g. affirmative action) in order to overcome structural racial/ethnic discrimination, including complex forms of discrimination</li></ul>
<ul><li> 0,5 = the law allows for such special measures to be taken</li></ul>
<ul><li> 0 = the law does not allow for such special measures</li></ul>
Scope for further gradations between 0 and 1 to reflect changes in the strength of the law.
|techname=labor_posdis_ethn
|category=Labour and labour market
|label=Law provides regulation of special measures concerning ethnicity/race (WoL V1)
|relatedindicators=<ul>
<li>[[Law provides for equal access to employment concerning ethnicity/race (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Law provides for equal working conditions concerning ethnicity/race (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Law provides for equal access to employment for men and women (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Law provides for equal working conditions for men and women (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Law prescribes special measures for women (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Equal pay for work of equal value is legally provided for (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Employees enjoy right to a universal minimum wage (WoL V1)]]</li>
</ul>
|description=Measures the presence and strength of regulation to enable and mandate the active equalisation of historically racially or ethnically disadvantaged groups.

The discrimination of people of other skin colours and ascribed ‘races’, which developed historically in the context of slavery and servitude, particularly in connection with the introduction of capitalist structures in Europe and the Americas, has resulted in persistent socio-economic inequality in many parts of the world, including corresponding disadvantages in labour markets. To counteract the perpetuation of these socially embedded structures of inequality, a wide range of special measures is also used here.

As early as 1996, the ILO defined special measures as follows: ‘These programmes of corrective measures are, in most cases, well defined and multi-faceted: whether they are presented as positive discrimination programmes in favour of certain categories of specially disadvantaged workers, or as practical activities, in particular in the area of training and education, or in the form of some other pragmatic solution, they are an offshoot of the realisation that the prohibition of discrimination is not enough to make it disappear in practice, even if the prescriptive mechanisms are applied correctly.’

The ascribed ‘race’, ethnicity or national origin is not the only factor that can make it more difficult for ethnic, national or racially disadvantaged minorities to access and remain in the labour market. In many cases, these characteristics interact with other factors such as social class, gender, disability, sexual orientation or other factors. These factors can have an additive effect, but they can also be inextricably linked (intersectional discrimination). The strength of legal regulations for active equality can therefore be seen from whether only simple equality measures such as special measures for care responsibilities are prescribed, or whether more complex measures such as preferential treatment up to the targeted active combating of multiple, including intersectional, discrimination are prescribed by law. With this variable, it is important to pay close attention to whether ‘race’ and/or ethnic and/or national origin are explicitly listed in the law.

The characteristics of racial discrimination and targeted measures against it are discussed in detail in the ILO General Survey on Equality in Employment and Occupation of 1996, with country examples provided.
|codingrules=The WoL is a leximetric dataset on individual employment protection. It quantifies the strength of the standard-setting, privileging, and equalising function of individual labour law (see Dingeldey et al. 2022). The scale ranges from "0" to "1" where "0" corresponds to the absence of a law prescribing special measures to overcome ethnic/racial discrimination in employment, "0,5" corresponds to the explicit legal possibility to introduce special measures, and "1" to the legal prescription of such special measures. Coding instructions and description of indicators are laid down in a technical paper (Fechner/Carlino, forthcoming). For country-specific information see WoL documentation (forthcoming).
|citation=Irene Dingeldey, Heiner Fechner, Jean-Yves Gerlitz, Jenny Hahs, Ulrich Mückenberger, Worlds of Labour: Introducing the Standard-Setting, Privileging and Equalising Typology as a Measure of Legal Segmentation in Labour Law, Industrial Law Journal, Volume 51, Issue 3, September 2022, Pages 560–597, https://doi.org/10.1093/indlaw/dwab016
|relatedpublications=<ul>
<li>Mückenberger, Ulrich, 1985. "Die Krise des Normalarbeitsverhältnisses - Hat das Arbeitsrecht noch Zukunft?" ''Zeitschrift für Sozialreform'' 31: 415-434; 457-475
</li>
<li>
Mückenberger, Ulrich, and Simon Deakin. 1989. "From Deregulation to a European Floor of Rights: Labour Law, Flexibilisation and the European Single Market." ''Zeitschrift Für Ausländisches Und Internationales Arbeits- Und Sozialrecht'' 3: 153–207.
</li>
<li>
Carlino, M., Fechner, H., & Schäfer, A. (2024). Using leximetrics for coding legal segmentation in employment law: The development and potential of the Worlds of Labour database. In I. Dingeldey, H. Fechner, & U. Mückenberger (Eds.), Constructing Worlds of Labour. Coverage and Generosity of Labour Law as Outcomes of Regulatory Social Policy. Palgrave Macmillan.
</li>
</ul>
|projectmanagers= Responsible for data coding: Heiner Fechner (2018-2025)
 Responsible for data editing and entry: Heiner Fechner (2024-2025), Andrea Schäfer (2021-2025), Jean-Yves Gerlitz (2018-2020)
 Principal Investigators: Irene Dingeldey, Ulrich Mückenberger
 Student assistants (2018-2025): Julia Bode, Jessica Bonn, Daniel Euler, Maxime Fischer, Jan-Christopher Floren, Jennifer Götte, Désirée Hoppe, Irina Kyburz, Alexandra Kojnow, Tarek Mahmalat, Karolin Meyer, Johanna Nold, Tanusha Pali, Johannes Ramsauer, Max Sudhoff, Kristina Walter, Caroline Zambiasi.
|datarelease=<ul><li>Version 0.001: Initial release</li></ul>
|revisions=The template has been revised in 2024, but coding for the completion of the revised dataset is still ongoing; values in WeSIS Version 0.001 correspond to the original template. The revision concerns primarily wording (no fundamental change in content), and furthermore the introduction of finer differentiations.
|sources=Own coding.
}}
{{#default_form:IndicatorForm}}

Law provides regulation of special measures concerning ethnicity/race

2025-12-15T15:30:55Z

Hfechner: Redirected page to Law provides regulation of special measures concerning ethnicity/race (WoL V1)

#REDIRECT [[Law provides regulation of special measures concerning ethnicity/race (WoL V1)]]

Law provides for equal access to employment for men and women

2025-12-15T14:48:22Z

Hfechner: Redirected page to Law provides for equal access to employment for men and women (WoL V1)

#REDIRECT [[Law provides for equal access to employment for men and women (WoL V1)]]

Law provides for equal access to employment for men and women (WoL V1)

2025-12-15T14:47:55Z

{{IndicatorForm
|datatype=Numeric
|scale=Metric
|scale=Metric
|scale=Metric
|valuelabels=Not applicable in the strict sense since the scale is quasi-metric, but for coding the following values were used for orientation:
<ul><li> 1 = the law guarantees non-discrimination</li></ul>
<ul><li> 0 = there is no such guarantee existing</li></ul>

New template for Version 2 adds: further gradations between 0 and 1 reflect changes in the strength of the law
|techname=labor_eqacc_gend
|category=Labour and labour market
|label=Law provides for equal access to employment for men and women (WoL V1)
|relatedindicators=<ul>
<li>[[Law provides regulation of positive discrimination of women (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Law provides for equal access to employment concerning ethnicity/race (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Law provides regulation of positive discrimination of ethnicity/race (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Equal pay for equal work is legally provided for (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Law provides for equal working conditions for men and women (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Law provides for equal working conditions concerning ethnicity/race (WoL V1)]]</li>
<li>[[Employees enjoy right to a general minimum wage (WoL V1)]]</li>
</ul>
|description=This WoL indicator measures the extent and strength of gender equality in statutory law with regard to the application and recruitment process.

In many parts of the world, patriarchal social structures have produced a standard employment relationship that, in its original design, corresponds to the male main or sole wage earner marriage and assigns to women primarily unpaid reproductive work. In many ways, labour-related laws have hindered or even prevented women from working on an equal footing. At the same time, stereotypical ideas have become entrenched in societies, perpetuating these older normative models of gender division.

The variable starts from this point and asks when and to what extent anti-discrimination law was introduced and strengthened to support women's access to gainful employment and to promote gender equality by prohibiting discrimination based on gender.
|codingrules=The WoL is a leximetric dataset on individual employment protection. It quantifies the strength of the standard-setting, privileging, and equalising function of individual labour law (see Dingeldey et al. 2022). The scale ranges from "0" to "1" where "0" corresponds to the absence of a guarantee of non-discrimination concerning the application and contracting phase concerning gender exists, and "1" to the law that guarantees non-discrimination based on the gender in terms of access to employment. Coding instructions and description of indicators are laid down in a technical paper (Fechner/Carlino, forthcoming). For country-specific information see WoL documentation (forthcoming).
|citation=Irene Dingeldey, Heiner Fechner, Jean-Yves Gerlitz, Jenny Hahs, Ulrich Mückenberger, Worlds of Labour: Introducing the Standard-Setting, Privileging and Equalising Typology as a Measure of Legal Segmentation in Labour Law, Industrial Law Journal, Volume 51, Issue 3, September 2022, Pages 560–597, https://doi.org/10.1093/indlaw/dwab016
|relatedpublications=<ul>
<li>Mückenberger, Ulrich, 1985. "Die Krise des Normalarbeitsverhältnisses - Hat das Arbeitsrecht noch Zukunft?" ''Zeitschrift für Sozialreform'' 31: 415-434; 457-475
</li>
<li>
Mückenberger, Ulrich, and Simon Deakin. 1989. "From Deregulation to a European Floor of Rights: Labour Law, Flexibilisation and the European Single Market." ''Zeitschrift Für Ausländisches Und Internationales Arbeits- Und Sozialrecht'' 3: 153–207.
</li>
<li>
Carlino, M., Fechner, H., & Schäfer, A. (2024). Using leximetrics for coding legal segmentation in employment law: The development and potential of the Worlds of Labour database. In I. Dingeldey, H. Fechner, & U. Mückenberger (Eds.), Constructing Worlds of Labour. Coverage and Generosity of Labour Law as Outcomes of Regulatory Social Policy. Palgrave Macmillan.
</li>
</ul>
|projectmanagers= Responsible for data coding: Heiner Fechner (2018-2025)
 Responsible for data editing and entry: Heiner Fechner (2024-2025), Andrea Schäfer (2021-2025), Jean-Yves Gerlitz (2018-2020)
 Principal Investigators: Irene Dingeldey, Ulrich Mückenberger
 Student assistants (2018-2025): Julia Bode, Jessica Bonn, Daniel Euler, Maxime Fischer, Jan-Christopher Floren, Jennifer Götte, Désirée Hoppe, Irina Kyburz, Alexandra Kojnow, Tarek Mahmalat, Karolin Meyer, Johanna Nold, Tanusha Pali, Johannes Ramsauer, Max Sudhoff, Kristina Walter, Caroline Zambiasi.
|datarelease=<ul><li>Version 0.001: Initial release</li></ul>
|revisions=The template has been revised in 2024, but coding for the completion of the revised dataset is still ongoing; values in WeSIS Version 0.001 correspond to the original template.
|sources=Own coding.
}}

Law provides for equal access to employment for men and women

2025-12-15T14:47:40Z

Hfechner: Redirected page to Law provides for equal access to employment for men and women (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)

#REDIRECT [[Law provides for equal access to employment for men and women (CBR-LRI, WoL V1)]]