The method is based on the coding of textual sources (see above) against a list of evaluation criteria and then converting the coding into indicators. For the list of evaluation criteria, see Table 1 and 2 (pp. 6-12.) at: https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---dgreports/---stat/documents/meetingdocument/wcms_648636.pdf

The indicator has a range from 0 to 10, with 0 being the best possible score (indicating higher levels of compliance with FACB rights) and 10 the worst (indicating lower levels of compliance with FACB rights). For the purpose of computation, in the first step, the coding of textual sources is transformed into a binary coding, with 1 assigned to observed non-compliance and 0 to no observed non-compliance (unweighted raw scores). The binary coding is then multiplied by the weights as derived from the Delphi method (weighted raw scores). The final scores are the weighted raw scores normalized in a range from 0 to 10.

Using the Delphi Method to Construct Evaluation Criteria Weights

The weights were constructed with the use of the Delphi method. The application of the Delphi method involved two rounds of surveys conducted via email of internationally-recognized experts in labour law having knowledge of the ILO’s supervisory system and particular knowledge of FACB rights as defined by the ILO. Regional representation was another consideration. Experts remained anonymous with respect to each other throughout the process.

Applying the weights, normalization and default scores

The raw coding uses the letters “a” through “g” (with each letter corresponding to one of the seven textual sources) to represent coded violations of FACB rights for each evaluation criteria, yielding a column of 180 cells for any given country and year. In order to apply the weights, any cell containing one or more letters is assigned a value of 1 and any blank cell for which there are no coded violations is assigned a value of 0, creating a binary coding column. The number of letters in a cell does not affect the construction of the binary coding column, in order to avoid double-counting given that the textual sources commonly reference each other. The cells of the column of weights are then multiplied by corresponding cells of the binary coding column and summing across the cells of the resultant column yields a weighted non-normalized score for any given country and year.

To normalize the indicators over time, 95 is assigned as the maximum weighted non-normalized score for the indicator. This roughly equals to the maximum weighted non-normalized score of one-half of the countries having the most coded violations of FACB rights of workers and their organizations for the years 2000, 2005, 2009 and 2012. The highest weighted non-normalized score for several countries hovered around 80. On this basis, the non-normalized score for any given country and year is normalized to range in value from 0 to 10, the best and worst possible scores respectively. In the future, if any country should receive a non-normalized score of greater than 95, this will be capped at 95, yielding a normalized score of 10.^{^[6]}

In addition, the method applies the notion that general prohibitions in law imply general prohibitions in practice (though not vice versa). In terms of coding, this means that – both for workers and employers -the direct coding of “General prohibition of the right to establish and join organizations” in law automatically triggers the coding of “General prohibition of the development of independent organizations” in practice; the direct coding of “General prohibition of the right to collective bargaining” in law automatically triggers the coding of the “General prohibition of collective bargaining” in practice ; and, finally, for workers, the direct coding of “General prohibition of the right to strike” in law automatically triggers the coding of the “General prohibition of strikes” in practice .

Based on the decisions adopted by the tripartite technical committee set up to further address refinements to the methodology, in addition to the above normalization rules, a “load” of 3.5 will be added to the normalized score of the country in cases of all-encompassing violations of FACB rights, that is, for “General prohibition of the right to establish and join organizations” in law, “General prohibition of the development of independent organizations” in practice, “General prohibition of the right to collective bargaining” in law, and “General prohibition of collective bargaining” in practice.

Table 1. Hypothetical Example of Coding and Indicator Construction (for a Single Country and Year)

Evaluation Criteria		Textual coding	Binary coding	Weights	Binary coding x Weights
	Ia. Fundamental civil liberties in law
2	Infringements of trade unionists' basic freedoms	a	1	1,93	1,93
	Ib. Fundamental civil liberties in practice
6	Killing or disappearance of trade unionists in relation to their trade union activities	af	1	2,00	2,00
9	Other violent actions against trade unionists in relation to their trade union activities	af	1	1,82	1,82
12	Arrest, detention, imprisonment, charging and fining of trade unionists in relation to their trade union activities	af	1	1,95	1,95
	IIa. Right of workers to establish and join organizations in law
24	Exclusion of workers from the right to establish and join organizations	a	1	1,86	1,86
30	Lack of adequate legal guarantees against anti-union discriminatory measures	a	1	1,75	1,75
33	Infringements of the right to establish and join federations/confederations/international organizations	abf	1	1,73	1,73
	IIb. Right of workers to establish and join organizations in practice
37	Previous authorization requirements	af	1	1,70	1,70
42	Committed against trade union officials re violation no. 41	f	1	1,89	1,89
43	Lack of guarantee of due process and/or justice re violation no. 41	f	1	1,80	1,80
	IIIa. Other union activities in law
49	Infringements of the right to freely elect representatives	a	1	1,80	1,80
50	Infringements of the right to freely organize and control financial administration	ab	1	1,59	1,59
52	Prohibition of all political activities	ab	1	1,73	1,73
	IVa. Right to collective bargaining in law
66	Acts of interference in collective bargaining	a	1	1,66	1,66
	IVb. Right to collective bargaining in practice
72	Exclusion of workers from the right to collective bargaining	a	1	1,84	1,84

	Sum (non-normalized score)		15		27,05
	Normalized score (0 = best, 10 = worst)¹				2,85

¹ The formula used is: (x*10/95), where x = the weighted non-normalized score for a given country and year and is capped at 95.

⁶

The formula is thus: (x*10/95), where x = the weighted non-normalized score for a given country and year and is capped at 95. ↑

Hesin internet-kagin er ikki longur stuðlaður

Rætta uppseting: 8.8.2