Data for 2015
Compliance with Labour Rights, 2015
2015, as ILO’s 2026 release gives it · stored as published, never rewritten
Compliance with Labour Rights, 2015 covers 185 countries. United Arab Emirates is highest, at 10.00; 10 countries share the lowest reading, 0.00. The middle country reads 1.52.
Compliance with Labour Rights · Data for 2015
HighestUnited Arab Emirates
10.00Lowest10 countries share it
0.00Shaded by value in five groups of equal size, darkest at the lowest end. A higher value is the worse result.
01Values only
The table
Every country and every column of Compliance with Labour Rights, 2015, as published. The file carries values only, so no position is shown. “=” marks a shared position.
Showing 25 of 185 countries · select a heading to sort
| United Arab EmiratesAREWestern Asia | 10.00 | — |
 IranIRNSouthern Asia | 9.23 | — |
 QatarQATWestern Asia | 8.59 | — |
 VietnamVNMSouth-eastern Asia | 8.28 | — |
 ChinaCHNEastern Asia | 8.13 | — |
 BelarusBLREastern Europe | 7.52 | — |
 SudanSDNNorthern Africa | 6.86 | — |
 VenezuelaVENSouth America | 6.80 | — |
 SyriaSYRWestern Asia | 6.65 | — |
 Saudi ArabiaSAUWestern Asia | 6.64 | — |
 EgyptEGYNorthern Africa | 6.52 | — |
 LibyaLBYNorthern Africa | 6.49 | — |
 IraqIRQWestern Asia | 6.48 | — |
 ThailandTHASouth-eastern Asia | 6.12 | — |
 LaosLAOSouth-eastern Asia | 6.02 | — |
 GuatemalaGTMCentral America | 5.94 | — |
 CubaCUBCaribbean | 5.83 | — |
 South KoreaKOREastern Asia | 5.71 | — |
 ZimbabweZWEEastern Africa | 5.64 | — |
 MalaysiaMYSSouth-eastern Asia | 5.51 | — |
 FijiFJIMelanesia | 5.09 | — |
 BangladeshBGDSouthern Asia | 4.97 | — |
 IndiaINDSouthern Asia | 4.93 | — |
 AfghanistanAFGSouthern Asia | 4.72 | — |
 Equatorial GuineaGNQMiddle Africa | 4.62 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 PeruPERSouth America | 4.50 | — |
 PakistanPAKSouthern Asia | 4.41 | — |
 BahrainBHRWestern Asia | 4.38 | — |
 LebanonLBNWestern Asia | 4.35 | — |
 PanamaPANCentral America | 4.31 | — |
 PhilippinesPHLSouth-eastern Asia | 4.20 | — |
 ColombiaCOLSouth America | 4.14 | — |
 MoroccoMARNorthern Africa | 4.10 | — |
 MaldivesMDVSouthern Asia | 4.07 | — |
 CambodiaKHMSouth-eastern Asia | 3.96 | — |
 IndonesiaIDNSouth-eastern Asia | 3.96 | — |
 OmanOMNWestern Asia | 3.78 | — |
 HondurasHNDCentral America | 3.71 | — |
 TürkiyeTURWestern Asia | 3.71 | — |
 EcuadorECUSouth America | 3.67 | — |
 El SalvadorSLVCentral America | 3.65 | — |
 MexicoMEXCentral America | 3.61 | — |
 NepalNPLSouthern Asia | 3.57 | — |
 NigeriaNGAWestern Africa | 3.50 | — |
 EthiopiaETHEastern Africa | 3.32 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 KenyaKENEastern Africa | 3.27 | — |
 VanuatuVUTMelanesia | 3.23 | — |
 ParaguayPRYSouth America | 3.22 | — |
 JordanJORWestern Asia | 3.10 | — |
 MyanmarMMRSouth-eastern Asia | 3.06 | — |
 DR CongoCODMiddle Africa | 2.93 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 Guinea-BissauGNBWestern Africa | 2.83 | — |
 UzbekistanUZBCentral Asia | 2.73 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 United StatesUSANorthern America | 2.72 | — |
 SingaporeSGPSouth-eastern Asia | 2.70 | — |
 BruneiBRNSouth-eastern Asia | 2.58 | — |
 BoliviaBOLSouth America | 2.56 | — |
 EswatiniSWZSouthern Africa | 2.56 | — |
 Solomon IslandsSLBMelanesia | 2.55 | — |
 BahamasBHSCaribbean | 2.51 | — |
 EritreaERIEastern Africa | 2.41 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 RussiaRUSEastern Europe | 2.37 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 BurundiBDIEastern Africa | 2.28 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 ZambiaZMBEastern Africa | 2.21 | — |
 Sri LankaLKASouthern Asia | 2.18 | — |
 KuwaitKWTWestern Asia | 2.16 | — |
 AngolaAGOMiddle Africa | 2.09 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 BotswanaBWASouthern Africa | 2.03 | — |
 BrazilBRASouth America | 1.97 | — |
 Costa RicaCRICentral America | 1.95 | — |
 DjiboutiDJIEastern Africa | 1.90 | — |
 SomaliaSOMEastern Africa | 1.88 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 SenegalSENWestern Africa | 1.84 | — |
 Trinidad and TobagoTTOCaribbean | 1.84 | — |
 MauritaniaMRTWestern Africa | 1.83 | — |
 TunisiaTUNNorthern Africa | 1.83 | — |
 ChileCHLSouth America | 1.82 | — |
 ArgentinaARGSouth America | 1.80 | — |
 Dominican RepublicDOMCaribbean | 1.79 | — |
 TanzaniaTZAEastern Africa | 1.77 | — |
 RomaniaROUEastern Europe | 1.76 | — |
 RwandaRWAEastern Africa | 1.75 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 Marshall IslandsMHLMicronesia | 1.72 | — |
 KazakhstanKAZCentral Asia | 1.70 | — |
 GambiaGMBWestern Africa | 1.64 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 MozambiqueMOZEastern Africa | 1.63 | — |
 GhanaGHAWestern Africa | 1.62 | — |
 Central African RepublicCAFMiddle Africa | 1.61 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 KiribatiKIRMicronesia | 1.61 | — |
 SerbiaSRBSouthern Europe | 1.60 | — |
 MauritiusMUSEastern Africa | 1.55 | — |
 CameroonCMRMiddle Africa | 1.54 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 SamoaWSMPolynesia | 1.52 | — |
 LiberiaLBRWestern Africa | 1.49 | — |
 NigerNERWestern Africa | 1.47 | — |
 UgandaUGAEastern Africa | 1.46 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 LesothoLSOSouthern Africa | 1.45 | — |
 MaliMLIWestern Africa | 1.44 | — |
 HaitiHTICaribbean | 1.43 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 TurkmenistanTKMCentral Asia | 1.43 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 TuvaluTUVPolynesia | 1.43 | — |
 CanadaCANNorthern America | 1.41 | — |
 PalauPLWMicronesia | 1.39 | — |
 ComorosCOMEastern Africa | 1.35 | — |
 São Tomé and PríncipeSTPMiddle Africa | 1.34 | — |
 AlgeriaDZANorthern Africa | 1.30 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 TogoTGOWestern Africa | 1.29 | — |
 New ZealandNZLAustralia and New Zealand | 1.28 | — |
 Papua New GuineaPNGMelanesia | 1.27 | — |
 BulgariaBGREastern Europe | 1.26 | — |
 MadagascarMDGEastern Africa | 1.26 | — |
 MaltaMLTSouthern Europe | 1.26 | — |
 SeychellesSYCEastern Africa | 1.26 | — |
 UruguayURYSouth America | 1.25 | — |
 JamaicaJAMCaribbean | 1.23 | — |
 ArmeniaARMWestern Asia | 1.22 | — |
 GeorgiaGEOWestern Asia | 1.22 | — |
 South SudanSSDEastern Africa | 1.10 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 JapanJPNEastern Asia | 1.09 | — |
 YemenYEMWestern Asia | 1.08 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 MoldovaMDAEastern Europe | 1.06 | — |
 MontenegroMNESouthern Europe | 1.05 | — |
 GreeceGRCSouthern Europe | 1.02 | — |
 SpainESPSouthern Europe | 1.00 | — |
 PortugalPRTSouthern Europe | 0.98 | — |
 South AfricaZAFSouthern Africa | 0.98 | — |
 PolandPOLEastern Europe | 0.95 | — |
 HungaryHUNEastern Europe | 0.89 | — |
 AlbaniaALBSouthern Europe | 0.88 | — |
 Burkina FasoBFAWestern Africa | 0.86 | — |
 Saint Vincent and the GrenadinesVCTCaribbean | 0.85 | — |
 Côte d’IvoireCIVWestern Africa | 0.77 | — |
 Sierra LeoneSLEWestern Africa | 0.75 | — |
 UkraineUKREastern Europe | 0.74 | — |
 NamibiaNAMSouthern Africa | 0.73 | — |
 Antigua and BarbudaATGCaribbean | 0.72 | — |
 AustraliaAUSAustralia and New Zealand | 0.72 | — |
 IrelandIRLNorthern Europe | 0.72 | — |
 GrenadaGRDCaribbean | 0.71 | — |
 ChadTCDMiddle Africa | 0.70 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 Saint Kitts and NevisKNACaribbean | 0.68 | — |
 GuineaGINWestern Africa | 0.67 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 Republic of the CongoCOGMiddle Africa | 0.67 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 Cabo VerdeCPVWestern Africa | 0.65 | — |
 CroatiaHRVSouthern Europe | 0.57 | — |
 United KingdomGBRNorthern Europe | 0.57 | — |
 BeninBENWestern Africa | 0.55 | — |
 AzerbaijanAZEWestern Asia | 0.54 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 BarbadosBRBCaribbean | 0.54 | — |
 ItalyITASouthern Europe | 0.54 | — |
 TajikistanTJKCentral Asia | 0.54 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 BelizeBLZCentral America | 0.53 | — |
 DenmarkDNKNorthern Europe | 0.53 | — |
 GuyanaGUYSouth America | 0.53 | — |
 Timor-LesteTLSSouth-eastern Asia | 0.50 | — |
 Saint LuciaLCACaribbean | 0.39 | — |
 GermanyDEUWestern Europe | 0.38 | — |
 FranceFRAWestern Europe | 0.36 | — |
 NicaraguaNICCentral America | 0.36 | — |
 BelgiumBELWestern Europe | 0.35 | — |
 KyrgyzstanKGZCentral Asia | 0.35 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 LatviaLVANorthern Europe | 0.35 | — |
 SwitzerlandCHEWestern Europe | 0.35 | — |
 Bosnia and HerzegovinaBIHSouthern Europe | 0.34 | — |
 GabonGABMiddle Africa | 0.34 | The score should be treated with care due to the possibility of insufficient information in the textual sources, based on comparison with an externally produced indicator (see Metadata, point 4.f.) |
 MalawiMWIEastern Africa | 0.34 | — |
 North MacedoniaMKDSouthern Europe | 0.20 | — |
 LuxembourgLUXWestern Europe | 0.19 | — |
 CzechiaCZEEastern Europe | 0.18 | — |
 IcelandISLNorthern Europe | 0.18 | — |
 LithuaniaLTUNorthern Europe | 0.18 | — |
 NetherlandsNLDWestern Europe | 0.18 | — |
 SloveniaSVNSouthern Europe | 0.18 | — |
 DominicaDMACaribbean | 0.17 | — |
 SwedenSWENorthern Europe | 0.15 | — |
 AustriaAUTWestern Europe | 0.00 | — |
 CyprusCYPWestern Asia | 0.00 | — |
 EstoniaESTNorthern Europe | 0.00 | — |
 FinlandFINNorthern Europe | 0.00 | — |
 IsraelISRWestern Asia | 0.00 | — |
 MongoliaMNGEastern Asia | 0.00 | — |
 NorwayNORNorthern Europe | 0.00 | — |
 San MarinoSMRSouthern Europe | 0.00 | — |
 SlovakiaSVKEastern Europe | 0.00 | — |
 SurinameSURSouth America | 0.00 | — |
02In 2015
At either end
The 5 countries at each end of the headline.
Highest
- United Arab Emirates10.00
- Iran9.23
- Qatar8.59
- Vietnam8.28
- China8.13
Lowest
- Slovakiashared0.00
- Surinameshared0.00
- San Marinoshared0.00
- Norwayshared0.00
- Mongoliashared0.00
A higher value is the worse result. The middle country reads 1.52. “Shared” marks a value another country also holds.
03Caveats
Read before you use
What this edition’s numbers are and are not, worked out from the file itself.
One year of the 2026 release
Every year in this series comes from ILO’s 2026 release, recalculated on one method. It can differ from what was first published for 2015.
144 distinct values among 185
Values are stored exactly as published, to 2 decimals. 10 countries share 0.00. Countries sharing a value share a position too.
Which end is better
A higher value is the worse result.
159 empty cells
An empty cell means the publisher gave no figure. It is never a zero.
04The files
Download and cite
The table as a file, digit for digit, what this site changed, and a citation for this edition.
- .csv
For a spreadsheet or code
185 rows · 10.0 KB · UTF-8, opens in Excel
Opens with 11 lines of source notes; the table starts on row 13.
Download labour-rights-compliance-2015-nations-inquiry.csv - ↗
The publisher’s original
ILO’s own file, on its own site.
https://rplumber.ilo.org/data/indicator/?id=SDG_0882_NOC_RT&format=.csv&channel=ilostat
What this site changed: Reshaped into one row per country: regional and income-group totals are left out, only the columns listed are kept, each row gets its ISO 3166 code, and some country names are brought to one spelling. No value is recalculated, rescaled or rounded.
Licence: CC BY 4.0. Share, adapt and use commercially. Credit the publisher and say if you changed anything.
Cite this edition
International Labour Organization (ILO) (2015). Compliance with Labour Rights, 2015 [data set], describing 2015. As held by Nations Inquiry, https://nationsinquiry.com/datasets/labour-rights-compliance/2015
0510 held
Other years
‹ The year before
This is the first year held here.
The year after ›
Compliance with Labour Rights, 2016187 countries
All of them
Compliance with Labour Rights: every year10 held, with the data dictionary, coverage and licence.
How it has moved, charted by country
06Questions
Compliance with Labour Rights, 2015: questions and answers
Which country has the highest labour rights compliance in Compliance with Labour Rights, 2015?
United Arab Emirates, at 10.00, of the 185 countries in the file.
What year does Compliance with Labour Rights, 2015 describe?
2015.
How many countries does Compliance with Labour Rights, 2015 cover?
185.
Where can I download Compliance with Labour Rights, 2015?
On this page, as a CSV file holding every value exactly as published, or from the publisher’s own site, linked below.
Is Compliance with Labour Rights, 2015 the newest?
No. The newest held here is Compliance with Labour Rights, 2024.