Minimum qualifying period for unjust dismissal (WoL, V2))
| Quick info | |
|---|---|
| Data type | Numeric |
| Scale | Metric |
| Value labels | not applicable |
| Technical name | labor_priv_sen_quali |
| Category | Labour and labour market |
| Label | Minimum qualifying period of service for normal case of unjust dismissal |
| Related indicators | |
Records whether the legal protection against dismissal only applies after a certain length of service.
Legal protection against arbitrary, unjustified dismissals arises from the recognition of the existential threat posed to an employee by a dismissal by an employer. Among other things, it is a concretisation of the right to work under Article 6 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR).
The CESCR emphasises the following when interpreting Article 6 of the ICESCR: ‘The right to work, as guaranteed in the ICESCR, affirms the obligation of States parties to assure individuals their right to freely chosen or accepted work, including the right not to be deprived of work unfairly. This definition underlines the fact that respect for the individual and his dignity is expressed through the freedom of the individual regarding the choice to work, while emphasising the importance of work for personal development as well as for social and economic inclusion. (...) Violations of the obligation to protect (...) include omissions such as (...) the failure to protect workers against unlawful dismissal’ (CESCR, General Comment No. 18 (2005), E/C.12/GC/18).
It can be limited in time in two ways: through the introduction of a probationary period during which the dismissal is at will; by determining that full protection against dismissal may only apply after a certain length of service.
During the initial period after hiring, the low threshold for both parties to terminate the contract is intended to give the parties the opportunity to decide whether the working relationship should be continued or whether it is unsuitable in practice. In the event of dismissal, the employee pays for the freedom to have had the opportunity themselves, albeit at the high price of their livelihood. That is why the probationary period is also included in the coding of this variable, although it has an objective justification.
In the early stages following employment, the minimal barrier for either party to end the agreement is designed to allow both sides to evaluate whether the employment relationship should continue or if it proves to be impractical. Upon dismissal, the employee bears the cost of having had the same chance, albeit at the steep expense of losing their means of living. The inclusion of the probationary period in the coding of this variable is thus justified by objective reasoning.
However, the restriction of protection against dismissal along a period of employment to be achieved has no protective dimension for the employee. There is no objective reason why the need for protection against arbitrary dismissal should decrease with shorter periods of employment. Indeed, workers who frequently switch jobs may require additional safeguards, as their circumstances diverge from the standard employment relationship, on which labour protection is tailored. A restriction of protection against dismissal serves only to enable employers to part with these employees more flexibly.
This variable is derived and minimally modified from the CBR Labour Regulation Index Dataset (‘CBR-LRI’), which provides data on employment law across 117 countries spanning the years from (in most instances) 1970 to 2022, with the exception of post-socialist countries (refer to Adams et al. 2017, 2023). The current CBR-LRI data points were reviewed, and any discrepancies in values were adjusted in accordance with the WoL coding rules. Additionally, data points from before 1970 or equivalent timeframes for former Soviet bloc countries were included (cf. Fechner/Carlino 2025). In addition to the 115 countries with populations exceeding 500,000 as classified by CBR-LRI, 37 more countries have been included (cf. Fechner/Carlino 2025). Core differences concerning the original CBR-LRI data:
Coding rules
CBR-LRI original with inverted values: Measures the period of service required before a worker qualifies for general protection against unjust dismissal. Normalise the score so that 3 years or more = 0, 0 months = 1. SPE/WoL: values inverted: 3 years or more = 1, 0 months or no regulation = 0.
For detailed coding rules, please consult Fechner/Carlino 2025.
Bibliographic info
Citation: Fechner, Heiner and Marina Carlino (2025). Worlds of Labour (WoL) Leximetric Dataset. University of Bremen.
Related publications: 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
Carlino, Marina, Fechner, Heiner, and Schäfer, Andrea (2025). 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. pp.53-83
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
Dingeldey, Irene, 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
Fechner, Heiner, and Marina Carlino (2025). Coding Legal Segmentation in Employment Law. The Worlds of Labour (WoL) Dataset. SFB 1342 Technical Paper Series, 22. Bremen: SFB 1342. https://doi.org/10.26092/elib/4191
Misc
Project manager(s):
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.
- Version 0.001: Initial release
Revisions: No revisions yet.
This is the first version of the dataset of the thoroughly revised Version 2 WoL template; for the first time, all variables including those originally stemming from CBR-LRI have been coded/revised under WoL criteria. A preliminary version with compiled data (CBR-LRI and WoL) has been published in WeSIS marked by "CBR-LRI-based" and "WoL, V1".
Sources
Own coding, partially based on coding by CBR-LRI.
Fechner, Heiner, and Marina Carlino (2025). Coding Legal Segmentation in Employment Law. The Worlds of Labour (WoL) Dataset. SFB 1342 Technical Paper Series, 22. Bremen: SFB 1342. https://doi.org/10.26092/elib/4191
Partially identical (after revision by WoL) with the original CBR-LRI coding, to be found in:
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
