Template talk:Infobox union by country

Discussion

(Copied from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Organized Labour)

I added a new infobox - it's for the list of Trade unions in country articles. It is currently on the Trade unions in Afghanistan, Trade unions in Burkina Faso and Trade unions in Germany articles. Have a look, and tinker at will. Originally it was going to be larger (See Labor unions in the United States) but I think there are too many different forms of stats and lists to find an easy way to stadardize. --Bookandcoffee 18:54, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

I see you have been busy again. It's an interesting idea. Personally I like those info boxes. Just some comments on this one ...

1. I think the question of trade union density is important - it's a much better measure than just membership numbers (although they are clearly interesting);

2. You are probably right about the US example being too complicated. In many countries that information would just not be available and, as you say, there is no guarantee that the information would collated in a similar way;

3. it is confusing to pose the question 'Member of the ILO' because trade unions cannot be members of the ILO (which is sort of implied) - it is, of course, the country that is an ILO member and that is a Government decision. It might just be a question of wording to make this clear;

4. I know the ILO Conventions have long names, but to just quote the Covention number (whilst convenient) does not necessarily help the uninitiated;

5. there are 8 core Conventions. You have obviously picked on the two most important ones, have you thought about trying to include the others?

- Dave Smith 01:05, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the input Dave,

1. How would you like to see density defined? As a percentage in government/non-government? Those kind of numbers? Or by industry? If you can give me an idea I’ll try to match it in the box. There are percentage and demographics fields already included, maybe we can refine the description of what should be included in those fields?

2. Yeah, not to mention the reliability (on both sides) of the numbers...

3. That’s a really good point - it’s not clear is it. Does it work to change the wording to “Canada is a member of the ILO”? I think it's worth including, but I’m all ears for a better way to describe it.

4. Yeah, Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 is a lot of words to shoehorn into a small space. :) You can mouse over it to expand the text, but that isn't obvious is it.

5. I’ll expand it to include the entire core. That may help address the problem above too, as a sub-heading like “Core Conventions” might give a clue to the ratification list that follows.--Bookandcoffee 02:02, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

So I started to add the rest of the core conventions into the box (see Trade unions in Germany) - but they seem a little out of place. Does Minimum Age Convention, 1973 relate directly to "Trade unions in..." Just thinking out loud here, but it seems to be reaching to include the convention within the perview of trade unions, when I would think it is of course larger than just a trade union issue.--Bookandcoffee 03:23, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeees, I can see that. I was also wondering about the Primary Trade Union Legislation. We only really have one, but in the UK it might be difficult with the myriad of laws that Thatcher passed. I'm wondering whether a slightly different info-box might serve a different purpose. You could think about having a box just on the ILO bits. That is country membership plus what has been ratified and keeping that separate from the other information. I'm thinking out load here too - and it's nearly midnight here so this is probably going to be my last posting for this evening. I'll check you on this tomorrow. - Dave Smith 04:00, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

1. In many countries, labour statistics are simply not available or are not very sophisticated. I would think in terms of density within the country. Or maybe national, public sector, private sector (ah definitions, I know ...). I was really thinking of my country just as an example. I could probably get TU density for the country, but a public/private sector break down would be very difficult. I wouldn't want to lose the actual figures though. It can give the reader an idea of the size of the movement. In Trinidad, for instance, our total TU membership is about 90,000 which about 18% TU density. Compared to the US our numbers are small but our density is higher - so you get a slightly better picture of the strength of the movement. I think the important point is to give the reader some grasp of what the movement looks like in that country. On the demographics question, I didn't instinctively know what you meant here until I went to the info-box page and saw your definitions. I wonder how many people would do that.;

2. You could think about a half way measure. I get the impression that if a field is left black it simply does not show up. So you could put in some additional bits of information so that if it can be obtained at least there is room for it;

3. I agree that it's an important piece of information - and easily available from the ILO too (which is nice). The ILO talks about being 'a member state'. Maybe something like 'Country is a member (or member state) of the ILO'

4. I see you've been playing with the Afghan info-box as we speak :-) You could drop the word 'Convention" in the name because you have a heading which makes it clear this it is a list of Conventions. Maybe if you changed the heading to 'Core Conventions ratified' you could then simply have a 'Yes' or 'No' against each one. Is it possible to develop a table which would help to keep the name of the Convention and the Yes/No in columns? Most Conventions have a recognisable shortened name which I see you've started to use. There would still be nothing to stop you doing a 'mouse over' for the full title, year etc. for those who discover it. I can tell you like the techie bits so go play ...;

5. I think you should try and include all the core Conventions even if they have not been ratified. A failure to ratify is as important piece of information as ratifying. Maybe you could have think about a standard URL at the bottom of the info-box making a link to the ILO Conventions site - it's here or the page giving details of which country has ratified what. This can be found here.

Dave Smith 03:41, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, it's set up to show "has not ratified" where appliciable. The ILO link comes through the convention article page as well. Have a look at Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 and you'll see ratification dates, as well as a direct link to the ILO page. I'm going to let this sit tonight as well. Cheers.--Bookandcoffee 04:18, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

I had a look at the changes you made and your comments below. I think it's moving in the right direction. It's a question of getting a balance and I think we are probably there unless any of the other activists on this portal come up with any new suggestions. - Dave Smith 19:37, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Core conventions and the ILO

I took the expanded list of conventions back out. It seemed to be straying from "Trade unions in...". They might be better fitted to an ILO in Canada article, with a general discussion, including the core conventions.

I also tinkered with the "member of the ILO" line. It now reads "Country is a member of the ILO", with an optional field to add the country name so that it reads "Germany is a member of the ILO" (Trade unions in Germany)

Union density

I reworded the names of the data fields. They are now more generic, as union_percentage1 and union_percentage2 and have a short commented out note in the code so later editors have an idea what is needed.

Primary trade union legislation

I left this alone. There are stacks of different legislation, true, but it seems to me that many countries can point to one or two pieces that are understood as "primary". However, I'm talking from a pretty small base of knowledge, so I could just be full of it. :)--Bookandcoffee 18:15, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Update

Turns out ILO membership is a slightly complicated issue when it comes to subnational autonimous jurisdictions. Eg, when the UK ratifies a convention, UK dependencies and territories do not automatically become subject to the convention, they must ratify/ascent to it themselves. Have adapted the template to reflect this. --Goldsztajn (talk) 12:15, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

rights violations

I have incorporated a parameter that allows editors to add the status of trade unions rights with reference to ITUC Global Rights Index. --Goldsztajn (talk) 22:59, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Goldsztajn, I notice that the Global Rights Index doesn't have a page, and it's somewhat unusual to see a redlink in an infobox. Could we create the page (or redirect) if it's justified, or remove the link if it's not? {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 20:52, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi Sdkb - apologies, and thanks for the nudge. It was on my to do list following my edits to the infobox...lots of other issues intervened on the way. Problem now solved. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 23:16, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

declaration vs ratification

Further to the details regarding conventions and sub national autonomous territories (eg Saint Helena, Zanzibar etc), conventions are not ratified but declared. The template will now switch to "declaration" when ILO membership is set to "other".--Goldsztajn (talk) 10:48, 23 October 2019 (UTC)