International Unit Labour Cost Position Has Slightly Deteriorated in 2007
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2007, a working hour cost Austrian manufacturers 29.90 €, 7.8 percent more than the average of the other EU-15 countries. This amount consists of a wage share of 15.88 € plus 14.02 € in non-wage labour costs. At 88.3 percent, the incidental costs were slightly lower than in the previous year. In 2007, Austria ranked 11th in the international labour cost hierarchy. Labour was most expensive in Norway (one working hour in manufacturing was 33 percent more expensive than in Austria), followed by Belgium (+20 percent), Sweden (+17 percent), Denmark and Germany (+10 percent). Thanks to the exchange rate, Switzerland improved its position, although a working hour was still more expensive (by 8 percent) than in Austria. In France and the Netherlands the working hour cost more, in Finland the same as in Austria. In the UK and Ireland, manufacturers paid 10 percent less; in Italy the cost was one fifth lower than in Austria. The euro appreciation reduced the cost of a working hour in the USA; hence labour was in the USA by a quarter and in Japan by almost 40 percent cheaper than in Austria. In the new EU countries, labour cost a fraction of the Austrian rate: in Hungary, Estonia and the Czech Republic it was just about 20 percent, in Poland, Lithuania and Latvia 15 percent, and in Romania and Bulgaria less than 10 percent.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".