Internet address: http://www.bls.gov/fls USDL: 03-507 

Technical information: (202) 691-5654 For Release: 10:00 A.M. EDT 

Media contact: (202) 691-5902 Friday, September 26, 2003* 

*INFORMATION IN THIS RELEASE WAS UPDATED ON MAY 19, 2004. 

 SEE HTTP://WWW.BLS.GOV/FLS/HCOMPREPORT.HTM. 

INTERNATIONAL COMPARISONS OF HOURLY COMPENSATION COSTS 

FOR PRODUCTION WORKERS IN MANUFACTURING, 2002

Average hourly compensation costs in U.S. dollars for production workers in manufacturing 

in 29 foreign economies remained at 66 percent of the U.S. level in 2002, according to the 

Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor. Although overall compensation costs 

relative to the United States remained the same in 2002 as in 2001, costs in Europe rose from 90 

to 95 percent of the U.S. level, while relative costs declined in Canada and Japan. (See table 1.) 

 In the United States, hourly compensation costs for production workers in manufacturing 

increased 3.5 percent in 2002, to $21.33. Average costs in the United States were higher than 

those in the economies covered outside Europe, but seven of the European countries had higher 

hourly compensation costs than did the United States. Trade-weighted average costs increased 

2.9 percent in the combined 29 foreign economies in 2002, when measured in national currency 

terms. With the trade-weighted value of the foreign currencies in 2002 remaining nearly at 2001 

levels, hourly compensation costs measured in U.S. dollars rose 2.8 percent in the foreign 

economies during 2002. A strong euro in 2002 drove European costs measured in U.S. dollars 

up 9.1 percent, but slow compensation cost growth and weak currencies in Canada and Japan 

offset the European increases. (See chart 1 and table A.) 

0

3

6

9

12

15

18

21

24

1975 1985 1995

Chart 1. Hourly compensation costs in U.S. dollars for

production workers in manufacturing, 1975-2002

Europe

Canada

28 Foreign Economies 

(trade-weighted average)

U.S.

Mexico

Asian NIEs

Hourly costs

$

1975 1980 1990 2002 1985 1995

Japan
- 2 - 

Compensation costs expressed in U.S. dollars

Compensation costs in U.S. dollars rose strongly in 2002 in most of the foreign economies, 

with increases of more than 7 percent in 18 of the 26 economies for which data were available. 

However, costs in the three largest U.S. trading partners -- Canada, Japan, and Mexico -- did not 

rise as quickly as costs in the United States. In addition, three of the four Asian NIEs had 

decreases in compensation costs in 2002. (NIEs are the newly industrializing economies of Hong 

Kong SAR, Korea, Singapore, and Taiwan.) As a result, the rate of compensation increase in a 

trade-weighted average of the foreign economies was only 2.8 percent, less than the 3.5 percent 

increase recorded in the United States. (See table A.) 

 Changes over time in compensation costs in U.S. dollars are affected by the underlying 

national wage and benefit trends measured in national currencies, as well as frequent and 

sometimes sharp changes in currency exchange rates. A country’s compensation costs expressed 

in U.S. dollars are calculated by dividing compensation costs in national currency by the 

exchange rate (expressed as national currency units per U.S. dollar). 

A note on the measures 

 The hourly compensation measures in this news release are based on statistics available to BLS as of 

July 2003. The 2002 compensation statistics are preliminary measures; for some of the foreign economies, 

they are based on less than full-year data. These measures are prepared specifically for international 

comparisons of employer labor costs in manufacturing. The methods used, as well as the results, differ 

somewhat from those of other BLS series on U.S. compensation costs. 

 Total compensation costs include pay for time worked, other direct pay (including holiday and 

vacation pay, bonuses, other direct payments, and the cost of pay in kind), employer expenditures for 

legally required insurance programs and contractual and private benefit plans, and, for some countries, 

other labor taxes. 

Labor cost measures. The compensation measures are computed in national currency units and are 

converted into U.S. dollars at prevailing commercial market currency exchange rates. They are appropriate 

measures for comparing levels of employer labor costs, but they do not indicate relative living standards of 

workers or the purchasing power of their incomes. Prices of goods and services vary greatly among 

countries, and commercial market exchange rates do not reliably indicate relative differences in prices. 

Data limitations. Hourly compensation is partly estimated, and data are subject to revision in the next 

update. The comparative level figures are averages for all manufacturing industries and are not necessarily 

representative of all component industries. 

See the Technical Notes for further information regarding definitions, sources, and computation 

methods and a description of the trade-weighted measures for economic groups.
- 3 - 

Table A. Hourly compensation costs, in national currency and in 

U.S. dollars, for production workers in manufacturing 

and exchange rates (U.S. dollars per national currency unit) 

Percent change, 2001-2002 

Country 

Hourly 

compensation, Exchange 

Hourly 

compensation, 

or area national rates U.S. 

currency dollars 

Americas 

United States 3.5 - 3.5 

Brazil 7.5 -19.4 -13.4 

Canada 2.8 -1.3 1.4 

Mexico 5.7 -3.4 2.1 

Asia and Oceania 

Australia 10.8 5.2 16.6 

Hong Kong SAR 1 -2.2 .0 -2.2 

Israel 1.1 -11.2 -10.2 

Japan -1.1 -2.9 -4.0 

Korea 13.4 3.4 17.3 

New Zealand 3.9 10.5 14.9 

Singapore -3.9 .1 -3.8 

Sri Lanka - - - 

Taiwan -3.1 -2.1 -5.1 

Europe 

Austria 3.0 5.6 8.7 

Belgium 2.5 5.6 8.3 

Denmark 4.3 5.7 10.2 

Finland 2.8 5.6 8.6 

France 3.7 5.6 9.5 

Germany, former West 2.3 5.6 8.0 

Germany 2.2 5.6 7.9 

Greece - - - 

Ireland 7.6 5.6 13.6 

Italy 2.6 5.6 8.4 

Luxembourg 3.1 5.6 8.9 

Netherlands 4.2 5.6 10.1 

Norway 5.1 12.7 18.4 

Portugal - - - 

Spain 4.8 5.6 10.7 

Sweden 3.4 6.4 10.0 

Switzerland 1.8 8.5 10.4 

United Kingdom 3.7 4.3 8.2 

 

Trade-weighted measures 2,3 

All 29 foreign economies 2.9 -.1 2.8 

OECD 4 3.4 .6 4.0 

less Mexico, Korea 5 2.3 1.2 3.7 

Europe 3.4 5.6 9.1 

Asian NIEs 2.2 .4 2.8 

1

 Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of China. 

2

 Because data for Germany are not available before 1993, data for only the former West 

 Germany are included in the trade-weighted measures. 

3

 The 2001-2002 percent changes for the trade-weighted measures are based upon the 

 changes for the countries or areas for which 2002 data are available. 

4

 OECD refers to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. 

5

 Mexico joined the OECD in 1994, and Korea joined in 1996. 
- 4 - 

 Although European compensation costs on a national currency basis increased at about the 

same rate as those in the United States, the strength of the European currencies in 2002 drove costs 

in U.S. dollars up more than 9 percent. It was the first time that European costs rose at a faster rate 

than costs in the United States since 1995; in that year, European costs peaked at 27 percent higher 

than those in the United States. Since then, European costs have fallen below those in the United 

States, and in 2002 they were 95 percent of the U.S. level. (See chart 2.) 

Compensation trends in Asia in 2002 were very different than those in Europe. Costs in U.S. 

dollars in Japan and each of the Asian NIE countries except Korea declined more than 2 percent. 

Japanese compensation costs, which were 13 percent higher than costs in the United States just two 

years before, decreased to only 88 percent of the U.S. level in 2002, the lowest relative level of 

Japanese costs since 1990. Even though costs declined in three of the four NIEs, the level of 

compensation costs in those economies nevertheless remained at 33 percent of the U.S. level 

because costs in Korea increased by 17.3 percent. 

Moderate growth in costs in Mexico and Canada, which together comprise one-third of the 

trade-weighted compensation cost average, offset much of the high growth in compensation costs 

seen in Europe. Following three consecutive years of double-digit growth, Mexican compensation 

costs rose only 2.1 percent in 2002. Canadian costs continued to grow more slowly than those in the 

United States, increasing just 1.4 percent. Since 1993, when costs in Canada and the United States 

were approximately the same, costs in Canada have grown at a slower rate than the United States in 

all but one year, with the result that Canadian costs are now only 75 percent of U.S. costs. 

 With the fast growth in hourly compensation costs in Europe, the average for the 17 European 

countries in 2002 rose above the $20 level for the first time in three years. Seven countries had 

higher compensation costs than the United States, with the highest costs in Norway and Germany, 

more than $25 per hour. Belgium, Denmark, Finland, the Netherlands, and Switzerland were the 

other countries where costs were higher than in the United States. (See table 2.) 

 
- 5 - 

(1) For 2002, U.S. hourly compensation costs were $21.33. 

(2) Hong Kong became a Special Administrative Region (SAR) of China in July 1997. 

(3) Because data for Germany are not available before 1993, data for the former West Germany only are included in the tradeweighted measures. The trade-weighted measures include Greece, Portugal, and Sri Lanka, which are not shown on this chart 

because 2002 data were not available. OECD refers to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. Mexico 

joined the OECD in 1994, and Korea joined in 1996. 

0 50 100 150 200

United States (1)

Brazil

Canada

Mexico

Australia

Hong Kong SAR (2)

Israel

Japan

Korea

New Zealand

Singapore

Taiwan

Austria

Belgium

Denmark

Finland

France

former West Germany

Germany

Ireland

Italy

Luxembourg

Netherlands

Norway

Spain

Sweden

Switzerland

United Kingdom

Trade-weighted measures (3)

All 29 foreign economies

OECD

OECD less Mexico, Korea

Europe

Asian NIEs

Chart 2. Indexes of hourly compensation costs in U.S. dollars

for production workers in manufacturing, 2002

(U.S. = 100)
- 6 - 

Compensation costs expressed in national currencies

 For U.S. competitors, compensation costs in national currency in 2002 grew at the lowest rate 

since this series began in 1975.1

 The increase of 2.9 percent was a drop of more than 1 percentage 

point from 2001, when the trade-weighted average cost increased 4.1 percent for the foreign 

economies. The lower rate of growth was due primarily to declining costs in many of the Asian 

countries and a slowing of cost growth in Mexico. (See table A and table 4.) 

 Compared to the previous year, the growth rate of compensation costs in national currency in 

2002 slowed in all of the Asian economies except Korea; costs in Hong Kong, Japan, Singapore, 

and Taiwan actually declined from their 2001 levels, with drops of more than 3 percent in Singapore 

and Taiwan. Cost growth in the Asian NIEs as a whole remained positive because of the 13.4 

percent increase in Korea, the highest increase of any of the foreign economies. Nevertheless, the 

2.2 percent increase in NIEs costs in 2002 was much lower than the 6.2 percent increase the 

previous year, and was the lowest rate of growth in the NIEs since this series began in 1975. 

Compensation cost trends in the North American competitors, Canada and Mexico, also 

contributed to the slowing growth rate for the 29 foreign economies. Sluggish cost growth 

continued in Canada, with a 2.8 percent increase in 2002. Compensation costs in that country have 

not grown at a rate of 3 percent or more since 1992. The rate of growth in Mexico fell by nearly 

half in 2002, to 5.7 percent. It was the first time since this series began in 1975 that the Mexican 

compensation cost growth rate was in the single digits. 

Compensation costs in Europe grew at the same rate, 3.4 percent, in 2002 as in 2001. The rate 

of growth was moderate (between about 2 and 5 percent) in most of the countries. The exception 

was Ireland, where costs grew 7.6 percent, the fourth consecutive year in which Ireland had the 

highest rate of growth among the European countries. 

 

1

 Data prior to 1996 relate to 28 foreign economies not including Brazil. 
- 7 - 

Exchange rates

 The trade-weighted value of the currencies of the 29 foreign economies against the U.S. dollar 

changed very little between 2001 and 2002. Although the trade-weighted average did not change 

much, there were several important movements in exchange rates that impacted hourly 

compensation trends in U.S. dollars. (See table 5.) 

 In 2002, for the first time in seven years, the European currencies appreciated against the U.S. 

dollar, by 5.6 percent. The euro, which accounts for about 70 percent of the European tradeweighted average, also rose by 5.6 percent. The currency with the largest appreciation was the 

Norwegian krone (12.7 percent), while the British pound showed the smallest appreciation (4.3 

percent). 

 In contrast to the currency appreciation in Europe, currencies in each of the countries with the 

largest trade weights (Canada, Japan, and Mexico) fell in value against the U.S. dollar in 2002. The 

depreciation of the Canadian dollar (down 1.3 percent), the Japanese yen (down 2.9 percent), and 

A note on European exchange rates 

 On January 1, 1999, several European countries joined the European Monetary Union (EMU): 

Austria, Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal, and 

Spain. Greece joined on January 1, 2001. Currencies of EMU members were established at fixed 

conversion rates to the euro, the official currency of the EMU. Exchange rates between the national 

currencies of EMU countries and the U.S. dollar are no longer reported; only the exchange rate between the 

euro and the U.S. dollar is available. 

In this news release, data on hourly compensation costs in national currency and exchange rates for the 

EMU countries relate to euros for 1999-2002; for the years 1975-1998 these data are published in the old 

national currencies used in each country before the euro was adopted. Data for all years can be accessed in 

the supplementary tables to this news release available at http://www.bls.gov/fls or upon request. Caution 

should be exercised when using these data. The national currency compensation data and exchange rates in 

the tables for 1975-1998 are not comparable to the same data for 1999-2002 for the EMU countries. 

 In order to include data on trends in national currency compensation costs and exchange rates for the 

entire 1975-2002 period, BLS converts national currency for 1975-1998 to a “euro” basis for calculation. 

The conversions for all years 1975-1998 are made using the official fixed conversion rates for 1999 below: 

1 euro = 13.7603 Austrian Schillings 

 = 40.3399 Belgian Francs 

 = 5.94573 Finnish Markkas 

 = 6.55957 French Francs 

 = 1.95583 German Marks 

 = .787564 Irish Pounds 

 = 1936.27 Italian Lire 

 = 40.3399 Luxembourg Francs 

 = 2.20371 Netherlands Guilders 

 = 200.482 Portuguese Escudos 

 = 166.386 Spanish Pesetas 
- 8 - 

the Mexican peso (down 3.4 percent) negated the effect of the strong European currencies on the 

trade-weighted average for all countries. 

 Although several currencies appreciated against the dollar in 2002, most are well below their 

values of the mid-1990s, when many currencies peaked. Over the period 1995-2002, no foreign 

currency appreciated against the U.S. dollar, and the rate of depreciation was fairly steep in virtually 

all economies. In all but three countries (Canada, Hong Kong, and the United Kingdom), currency 

values declined at a rate of more than 3 percent per year during that time period. The depreciation 

of the foreign currencies over this time period had a significant influence on hourly compensation 

costs measured in U.S. dollars. Since 1995, hourly compensation costs on a national currency basis 

in 28 foreign economies (not including Brazil) rose at a rate of 4.2 percent per year, more than a 

percentage point higher than in the United States. When adjusted for a 3.6 percent per year 

depreciation of the foreign currencies against the U.S. dollar, however, those costs only increased at 

a rate of 0.3 percent per year, nearly 3 percentage points less than in the United States. 

Additional data available

 In addition to the compensation cost measures covered in this news release, data are available 

for comparative levels of hourly compensation costs, hourly direct pay, pay for time worked, and the 

structure of compensation in manufacturing for all years from 1975 through 2002. Data are also 

available for national currency hourly compensation and exchange rates 1975-2002 in the 

supplementary tables as well. 

 BLS also computes comparative measures for 39 component manufacturing industries. Data 

through 2001 are available upon request and via the Internet (http://www.bls.gov/fls). Data for the 

component industries are not included in this release; in general, the data limitations for the 

component industries are greater than for total manufacturing. 

 For further information, contact the Office of Productivity and Technology by phone at 202-

691-5654, by e-mail at flshelp@bls.gov, or by mail at Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2 Massachusetts 

Avenue, NE, Room 2150, Washington, DC 20212. 

 Information in this release will be made available to sensory impaired individuals upon request. 

Voice phone: 202-691-5200; TDD message referral phone: 1-800-877-8339. 

 This material is in the public domain and, with appropriate credit, may be reproduced without 

permission. It may be translated into foreign languages without permission, with a separate credit 

for the translation. 
- 9 - 

Revised Measures 

The hourly compensation measures are subject to revision in future updates. In this update, 

revisions of particular note were made for the following countries: 

For Canada, data beginning in 1999 were revised to include new data on supplementary labor 

income. 

For Japan, data beginning in 1991 were revised to include new production worker estimates 

based on data from the wage structure survey. In addition, data beginning in 1999 were revised with 

the incorporation of data from the 2002 labor cost survey. 

For Singapore, data beginning in 1997 were revised to incorporate new data on benefits of 

employees. 

For Germany, data beginning in 1991 were revised to incorporate new data on pay for time not 

worked. 
- 10 -

TECHNICAL NOTES

The tables in this news release present international

comparisons of hourly compensation costs for production workers 

in manufacturing in selected countries or areas. The total

compensation measures are prepared by the Bureau of Labor 

Statistics in order to assess international differences in employer 

labor costs. Comparisons based on the more readily available 

average earnings statistics published by many countries can be very 

misleading. National definitions of average earnings differ

considerably; average earnings do not include all items of labor 

compensation; and the omitted items of compensation frequently 

represent a large proportion of total compensation.

The compensation measures are computed in national currency 

units and are converted into U.S. dollars at prevailing commercial 

market currency exchange rates. The foreign currency exchange 

rates used in the calculations are the average daily exchange rates 

for the reference period. They are appropriate measures for 

comparing levels of employer labor costs. They do not indicate 

relative living standards of workers or the purchasing power of 

their income. Prices of goods and services vary greatly among 

countries, and commercial market exchange rates are not reliable 

indicators of relative differences in prices.

Definitions

Hourly compensation costs include (1) hourly direct pay and 

(2) employer social insurance expenditures and other labor taxes. 

Hourly direct pay includes all payments made directly to the 

worker, before payroll deductions of any kind, consisting of (a) pay 

for time worked (basic time and piece rates plus overtime

premiums, shift differentials, other premiums and bonuses paid 

regularly each pay period, and cost-of-living adjustments) and (b) 

other direct pay (pay for time not worked (vacations, holidays, and 

other leave, except sick leave), seasonal or irregular bonuses and 

other special payments, selected social allowances, and the cost of 

payments in kind). Social insurance expenditures and other labor 

taxes include (c) employer expenditures for legally required

insurance programs and contractual and private benefit plans

(retirement and disability pensions, health insurance, income

guarantee insurance and sick leave, life and accident insurance, 

occupational injury and illness compensation, unemployment

insurance, and family allowances) and, for some countries, (d) other 

labor taxes (other taxes on payrolls or employment (or reductions 

to reflect subsidies), even if they do not finance programs that 

directly benefit workers, because such taxes are regarded as labor 

costs). For consistency, compensation is measured on an hoursworked basis for every country.

The BLS definition of hourly compensation costs is not the 

same as the International Labour Office (ILO) definition of total 

labor costs. Hourly compensation costs do not include all items of 

labor costs. The costs of recruitment, employee training, and plant 

facilities and services−such as cafeterias and medical clinics−are not 

included because data are not available for most countries. The 

labor costs not included account for no more than 4 percent of total 

labor costs in any country for which the data are available.

Production workers generally include those employees who are 

engaged in fabricating, assembly, and related activities; material 

handling, warehousing, and shipping; maintenance and repair;

janitorial and guard services; auxiliary production (for example, 

powerplants); and other services closely related to the above

activities. Working supervisors are generally included; apprentices 

and other trainees are generally excluded.

Methods

Total compensation is computed by adjusting each country's 

average earnings series for items of direct pay not included in 

earnings and for employer expenditures for legally required

insurance, contractual and private benefit plans, and other labor 

taxes. For the United States and other countries that measure 

earnings on an hours-paid basis, the figures are also adjusted in 

order to approximate compensation per hour worked.

Earnings statistics are obtained from surveys of employment, 

hours, and earnings or from surveys or censuses of manufactures.

Adjustment factors are obtained from periodic labor cost 

surveys and interpolated or projected to nonsurvey years on the 

basis of other information for most countries. The information 

used includes tabulations of employer social security contribution 

rates provided by the International Social Security Association,

information on contractual and legislated fringe benefit changes 

from ILO and national labor bulletins, and statistical series on 

indirect labor costs. For other countries, adjustment factors are 

obtained from surveys or censuses of manufactures or from reports 

on fringe-benefit systems and social security. For the

United States, the adjustment factors are special calculations for 

international comparisons based on data from several surveys.

The statistics are also adjusted, where necessary, to account for 

major differences in worker coverage; differences in industrial

classification systems; and changes over time in survey coverage, 

sample benchmarks, or frequency of surveys. Nevertheless, some 

differences in industrial coverage remain and, with the exception of 

the United States, Canada, and several other countries, the data 

exclude very small establishments (less than 5 employees in Japan 

and less than 10 employees in most European and some other 

countries). For the United States, the methods used, as well as the 

results, differ somewhat from those for other BLS series on

U.S. compensation costs.

Hourly compensation costs are converted to U.S. dollars using 

the average daily exchange rate for the reference period. The 

exchange rates used are prevailing commercial market exchange rates 

as published by either the U.S. Federal Reserve Board or the 

International Monetary Fund.

For further details on survey sources and on special estimation 

procedures for some countries because of incomplete data, see 

International Comparisons of Hourly Compensation Costs for

Production Workers in Manufacturing, 1995 (Report 909, Bureau 

of Labor Statistics, September 1996).
- 11 -

Country notes

The following are exceptions to the standard coverage and 

definitions explained above:

Australia. Compensation relates to production workers and 

nonproduction workers other than those in managerial, executive, 

professional, and higher supervisory positions.

Hong Kong SAR. Average of selected manufacturing industries. 

The industries covered accounted for about 70 percent of all 

persons employed in manufacturing in 1988. Compensation

excludes overtime pay. Hong Kong became a Special

Administrative Region (SAR) of China in July 1997.

Austria. Excludes workers in establishments considered

handicraft manufacturers. (All printing and publishing and miscellaneous manufacturing establishments are classified in handi-crafts.) 

In 1986, handicraft employment was about 35 percent of all 

manufacturing employment. Average compensation per employee

was about 10 percent lower in manufacturing including handicrafts 

than in manufacturing excluding handicrafts.

Finland. Includes workers in mining and electrical power

plants. For comparability with other countries, compensation 

excludes some obligatory training and plant facilities costs; these 

costs would add 1.6 percent to average hourly compensation costs 

in 1994.

Germany. Excludes workers in establishments considered

handicraft manufacturers. In 1990, handicraft employment in the 

former West Germany was about 25 percent of all manufacturing 

employment. Average hourly earnings of production workers were 

about 3percent lower in manufacturing including handicrafts than 

in manufacturing excluding handicrafts.

Ireland. Data refer to September for 1975.

Norway. For comparability with other countries, compensation excludes some obligatory training and plant facilities costs; 

these costs would add 2.2 percent to average hourly compensation 

costs in 1994. 

Trade-weighted measures

The trade weights used to compute the average compensation 

cost measures for selected economic groups are relative

importances derived from the sum of U.S. imports of manufactured 

products for consumption (customs value) and U.S. exports of 

domestic manufactured products (free along side {f.a.s.} value) in 

1999 for each country or area and each economic group. See table 

below.

Share of total U.S. imports and exports 

of manufactured products in 1999

(in percent)

 Country or area 1999 Country or area 1999

 and trade and trade

 economic group share economic group share

Canada ........... 21.5 Greece ............. .1

Brazil .............. 1.5 Ireland .............. 1.1

Mexico ............ 11.8 Italy ................... 2.0

Luxembourg ..... .1

Australia ......... 1.0 Netherlands ...... 1.6

Hong Kong SAR11.5 Norway ............ .2

Israel .............. 1.1

Japan ............. 11.8 Portugal ............ .2

Korea ............. 3.4 Spain ................ .7

New Zealand . .2 Sweden ........... .8

Singapore ....... 2.2 Switzerland ...... 1.1

Sri Lanka ........ .1 United Kingdom 4.6

Taiwan ........... 3.4

Economic groups 

Austria ........... .4 29 foreign 

Belgium ........... 1.3 economies ..... 82.2

Denmark ......... .3 OECD3 .............. 72.5

Finland ............ .3 Europe .............. 22.6

France ............ 2.7 European Union 21.4

Germany2....... 5.2 Asian NIEs ........ 10.5

1 Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of China.

2 Former West Germany.

3 Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

The trade data used to compute the weights are U.S. Bureau of 

the Census statistics of U.S. imports and exports converted to an 

industrial classification basis from data initially collected under the 

Harmonized Tariff Schedule commodity classification system.

The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development 

(OECD) includes Canada, Mexico, Australia, Japan, Korea, New 

Zealand, and all European countries. Europe consists of Austria, 

Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, 

Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain,

Sweden, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom. The group labeled 

"Asian NIEs" consists of the four newly industrializing economies 

of Hong Kong SAR, Korea, Singapore, and Taiwan.

The trade weighted measures relate to all the countries or areas 

covered in the series. Data for Germany relate to the former West 

Germany. Estimates are computed for missing country data using 

the average trend in other economies to estimate the missing data. 

Trade weighted average percent changes for the 29 foreign

economies are computed both including and excluding Brazil, 

Mexico and Israel because their rapid rates of inflation and

currency changes in several years distort the trade-weighted 

averages.

The trade-weighted average rates of change are computed as the 

trade-weighted arithmetic average of the rates of change for the 

individual countries or areas; the trade-weighted average hourly 

compensation costs are computed as the trade-weighted arithmetic 

average of cost levels for the individual countries or areas. Rates of 

change derived from the trade-weighted average hourly

compensation cost levels need not be the same as the tradeweighted average rates of change.

Data limitations

Because compensation is partly estimated, the statistics should 

not be considered as precise measures of comparative compensation costs. In addition, the figures are subject to revision as the 
- 12 -

results of new labor cost surveys or other data used to estimate 

compensation costs become available.

The comparative level figures in this report are averages for all 

manufacturing industries and are not necessarily representative of 

all component industries. In the United States and some other 

countries, such as Japan, differentials in hourly compensation cost 

levels by industry are quite wide. In contrast, other countries, such 

as Sweden, have narrow differentials.

Labor costs versus labor income

The hourly compensation figures in U.S. dollars shown in the 

tables provide comparative measures of employer labor costs; 

they do not provide intercountry comparisons of the purchasing 

power of worker incomes. Prices of goods and services vary 

greatly among countries, and the commercial market exchange rates 

used to compare employer labor costs do not reliably indicate 

relative differences in prices. Purchasing power parities−that is, 

the number of foreign currency units required to buy goods and 

services equivalent to what can be purchased with one unit of 

U.S. or other base-country currency−must be used for meaningful 

international comparisons of the relative purchasing power of

worker incomes.

Total compensation converted to U.S. dollars at purchasing 

power parities would provide one measure for comparing relative 

real levels of labor income. It should be noted, however, that total 

compensation includes employer payments to funds for the benefit 

of workers in addition to payments made directly to workers. (For 

a few countries, the compensation measures also include taxes or 

subsidies on payrolls or employment even if they do not finance 

programs which directly benefit workers.) Payments into these 

funds provide either deferred income (for example, payments to 

retirement funds), a type of insurance (for example, payments to 

unemployment or health benefit funds), or current social benefits 

(for example, family allowances), and the relationship between 

employer payments and current or future worker benefits is

indirect. On the other hand, excluding these payments would 

understate the total value of income derived from work because 

they substitute for worker savings or self-insurance to cover 

retirement, medical costs, etc.

Total compensation, because it takes account of employer 

payments into funds for the benefit of workers, is a broader income 

concept than either total direct earnings or direct spendable

earnings. An even broader concept would take account of all social 

benefits available to workers, including those financed out of

general revenues as well as those financed through employment or 

payroll taxes.
- 13 -

Table 1. Indexes of hourly compensation costs in U.S. dollars for production workers

in manufacturing, 30 countries or areas and selected economic groups, selected years, 1975-2002

Country or area 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 1999 2000 2001 2002

Americas

United States ........................ 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

Brazil 1

 ................................... - - - - - 18 18 14 12

Canada ................................. 94 88 84 107 94 82 81 77 75

Mexico .................................. 23 22 12 11 10 10 11 11 11

Asia and Oceania

Australia ............................... 88 86 63 89 90 84 73 65 73

Hong Kong SAR 2

 ................. 12 15 13 22 29 29 28 29 27

Israel .................................... 35 38 31 57 61 62 65 66 57

Japan ................................... 47 56 49 85 138 109 113 95 88

Korea ................................... 5 10 9 25 42 38 41 38 43

New Zealand ........................ 49 53 34 55 58 48 41 38 42

Singapore ............................ 13 15 19 25 43 38 39 37 34

Sri Lanka ............................. 42223222 -

Taiwan ................................. 6 10 11 26 34 29 30 28 25

Europe

Austria ................................. 71 90 58 119 147 114 98 94 99

Belgium ............................... 101 133 69 129 161 125 109 102 107

Denmark .............................. 99 110 62 121 145 126 109 107 114

Finland ................................. 73 84 63 142 141 113 98 96 101

France ................................ 71 91 58 104 113 90 79 77 82

Germany, former West...... 99 124 73 146 184 141 124 118 123

Germany ............................... - - - - 176 135 118 113 118

Greece ............................... 27 38 28 45 53 ----

Ireland ................................ 48 61 46 79 80 71 63 64 71

Italy ...................................... 73 83 59 117 94 83 71 67 70

Luxembourg ......................... 98 117 58 108 136 104 90 84 89

Netherlands ......................... 103 122 67 121 140 112 98 96 102

Norway ................................ 106 117 80 144 142 128 114 112 128

Portugal ................................ 25 21 12 25 31 28 24 - -

Spain .................................... 40 60 36 76 74 63 55 53 56

Sweden ................................ 113 127 74 140 125 113 102 89 95

Switzerland .......................... 96 112 74 140 170 123 108 106 113

United Kingdom .................... 53 77 48 85 80 89 83 78 82

Trade-weighted measures 3,4 

All 29 foreign economies ...... - - - - - 74 72 66 66

 less Brazil 

...................... 60 66 51 80 89 75 73 67 67

OECD 5

 ................................. 66 72 55 86 95 80 77 71 71

 less Mexico, Korea 6 .......... 78 86 67 105 116 97 93 85 85

Europe .................................. 79 99 61 115 127 106 94 90 95

Asian NIEs 7

 .......................... 8 12 13 25 38 34 35 33 33

Dash means data not available.

1

 Data for Brazil are not available before 1996. 4 For description of trade-weighted measures and economic groups,

2

 Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of China. see the Technical Notes preceding these tables.

3

 Because data for Germany are not available before 5 Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

 1993, data for the former West Germany only are 6

 Mexico joined the OECD in 1994, and Korea joined in 1996.

 included in the trade-weighted measures. 7

 The Asian NIEs are Hong Kong, Korea, Singapore and Taiwan.

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, September 2003.
- 14 -

Table 2. Hourly compensation costs in U.S. dollars for production workers in manufacturing, 

30 countries or areas and selected economic groups, selected years, 1975-2002

Country or area 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 1999 2000 2001 2002

Americas

United States ........................ $6.36 $9.87 $13.01 $14.91 $17.19 $19.10 $19.76 $20.60 $21.33

Brazil 1

 ................................... ----- $3.43 $3.56 $2.97 $2.57

Canada ................................. 5.96 8.67 10.95 15.95 16.10 $15.58 $16.04 $15.80 $16.02

Mexico .................................. 1.47 2.21 1.59 1.58 1.65 $1.83 $2.08 $2.33 $2.38

Asia and Oceania

Australia ............................... 5.62 8.47 8.21 13.24 15.56 15.99 14.47 13.34 15.55

Hong Kong SAR 2

 ................. .76 1.51 1.73 3.23 4.91 5.54 5.63 5.96 5.83

Israel .................................... 2.25 3.79 4.06 8.55 10.54 11.91 12.86 13.53 12.14

Japan ................................... 3.00 5.52 6.34 12.70 23.73 20.83 22.27 19.61 18.83

Korea ................................... .32 .96 1.23 3.71 7.29 7.35 8.19 7.82 9.16

New Zealand ........................ 3.15 5.22 4.38 8.17 9.91 9.14 8.13 7.74 8.89

Singapore ............................ .84 1.49 2.47 3.78 7.33 7.28 7.63 7.56 7.27

Sri Lanka ............................. .28 .22 .28 .35 .48 .46 .48 .42 -

Taiwan ................................. .38 1.02 1.49 3.90 5.85 5.51 5.85 5.70 5.41

Europe

Austria ................................. 4.51 8.88 7.58 17.75 25.32 21.85 19.46 19.38 21.07

Belgium ............................... 6.41 13.11 8.97 19.17 27.62 23.92 21.59 21.04 22.79

Denmark .............................. 6.28 10.83 8.13 18.04 24.98 24.11 21.49 21.98 24.23

Finland ................................. 4.66 8.33 8.25 21.25 24.32 21.55 19.45 19.86 21.56

France ................................. 4.52 8.94 7.52 15.49 19.38 17.24 15.70 15.91 17.42

Germany, former West...... 6.29 12.21 9.50 21.81 31.57 26.87 24.42 24.23 26.18

Germany ............................... ---- 30.26 25.73 23.38 23.23 25.08

Greece ............................... 1.69 3.73 3.66 6.76 9.06 ----

Ireland ................................ 3.05 6.03 5.99 11.81 13.78 13.61 12.50 13.28 15.09

Italy ...................................... 4.67 8.15 7.63 17.45 16.22 15.88 14.01 13.78 14.93

Luxembourg ......................... 6.26 11.54 7.49 16.04 23.45 19.79 17.70 17.37 18.91

Netherlands ......................... 6.58 12.06 8.75 18.06 24.12 21.45 19.44 19.75 21.74

Norway ................................ 6.77 11.59 10.37 21.47 24.38 24.45 22.44 23.13 27.40

Portugal ................................ 1.58 2.06 1.53 3.77 5.37 5.35 4.75 - -

Spain .................................... 2.53 5.89 4.66 11.38 12.80 12.03 10.78 10.88 12.04

Sweden ................................ 7.18 12.51 9.66 20.93 21.44 21.61 20.14 18.35 20.18

Switzerland .......................... 6.09 11.09 9.66 20.86 29.30 23.56 21.24 21.84 24.11

United Kingdom .................... 3.37 7.56 6.27 12.70 13.78 17.04 16.45 16.15 17.47

Trade-weighted measures 3,4 

All 29 foreign economies ...... ----- 14.20 14.15 13.68 14.13

 less Brazil 

...................... 3.83 6.51 6.69 11.96 15.34 14.40 14.34 13.88 14.35

OECD 5

 ................................. 4.18 7.08 7.21 12.83 16.34 15.27 15.17 14.64 15.21

 less Mexico, Korea 6 .......... 4.96 8.45 8.72 15.69 19.91 18.52 18.28 17.59 18.21

Europe .................................. 5.03 9.80 7.92 17.19 21.83 20.30 18.60 18.51 20.18

Asian NIEs 7

 .......................... .51 1.17 1.65 3.72 6.50 6.48 6.95 6.81 7.08

Dash means data not available.

1

 Data for Brazil are not available before 1996. 4 For description of trade-weighted measures and economic groups,

2

 Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of China. see the Technical Notes preceding these tables. 3

 Because data for Germany are not available before 5

 Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

 1993, data for the former West Germany only are 6

 Mexico joined the OECD in 1994, and Korea joined in 1996.

 included in the trade-weighted measures. 7

 The Asian NIEs are Hong Kong, Korea, Singapore and Taiwan.

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, September 2003.
- 15 -

Table 3. Annual percent change in hourly compensation costs in U.S. dollars for production workers 

in manufacturing, 30 countries or areas and selected economic groups, selected periods, 1975-2002 

Country or area 1975- 1975- 1980- 1985- 1990- 1995- 2000 2001 2002

2002 1980 1985 1990 1995 2002

Americas

United States ......................... 4.6 9.2 5.7 2.8 2.9 3.1 3.5 4.3 3.5

Brazil 1

 ..................................... - - - - - - 3.9 -16.6 -13.4

Canada .................................. 3.7 7.8 4.8 7.8 .2 -.1 2.9 -1.5 1.4

Mexico ................................... 1.8 8.5 -6.3 -.2 .8 5.4 14.0 11.9 2.1

Asia and Oceania

Australia ................................ 3.8 8.6 -.6 10.0 3.3 .0 -9.5 -7.8 16.6

Hong Kong SAR 2

 ................. 7.9 14.8 2.8 13.3 8.8 2.5 1.6 6.0 -2.2

Israel ..................................... 6.4 11.0 1.4 16.1 4.3 2.0 7.9 5.2 -10.2

Japan .................................... 7.0 13.0 2.8 14.9 13.3 -3.3 6.9 -11.9 -4.0

Korea .................................... 13.2 24.3 5.1 24.6 14.5 3.3 11.5 -4.6 17.3

New Zealand ........................ 3.9 10.7 -3.5 13.3 3.9 -1.5 -11.0 -4.9 14.9

Singapore ............................. 8.3 12.1 10.6 8.9 14.2 -.1 4.8 -.9 -3.8

Sri Lanka .............................. 2.2 3 -5.0 5.2 4.7 6.4 - 3.5 -12.2 -

Taiwan .................................. 10.4 21.9 8.0 21.2 8.5 -1.1 6.1 -2.5 -5.1

Europe

Austria .................................. 5.9 14.5 -3.1 18.5 7.4 -2.6 -11.0 -.4 8.7

Belgium ................................. 4.8 15.4 -7.3 16.4 7.6 -2.7 -9.7 -2.5 8.3

Denmark ............................... 5.1 11.5 -5.6 17.3 6.7 -.4 -10.9 2.3 10.2

Finland .................................. 5.8 12.3 -.2 20.8 2.7 -1.7 -9.7 2.1 8.6

France ................................. 5.1 14.6 -3.4 15.6 4.6 -1.5 -8.9 1.4 9.5

Germany, former West ...... 5.4 14.2 -4.9 18.1 7.7 -2.6 -9.1 -.8 8.0

Germany ............................... - ---- -2.6 -9.1 -.6 7.9

Greece ................................. 7.4 3 17.2 -.4 13.0 6.0 ----

Ireland .................................. 6.1 14.6 -.1 14.6 3.1 1.3 -8.1 6.2 13.6

Italy ....................................... 4.4 11.8 -1.3 18.0 -1.4 -1.2 -11.8 -1.6 8.4

Luxembourg .......................... 4.2 13.0 -8.3 16.4 7.9 -3.0 -10.5 -1.9 8.9

Netherlands .......................... 4.5 12.9 -6.2 15.6 6.0 -1.5 -9.4 1.6 10.1

Norway ................................. 5.3 11.4 -2.2 15.7 2.6 1.7 -8.2 3.1 18.4

Portugal ................................ 4.5 3 5.5 -5.8 19.8 7.3 - -11.2 - -

Spain .................................... 6.0 18.4 -4.6 19.6 2.4 -.9 -10.4 .9 10.7

Sweden ................................ 3.9 11.8 -5.0 16.7 .5 -.9 -6.8 -8.9 10.0

Switzerland .......................... 5.2 12.7 -2.7 16.6 7.0 -2.7 -9.8 2.8 10.4

United Kingdom .................... 6.3 17.5 -3.7 15.2 1.6 3.4 -3.5 -1.8 8.2

Trade-weighted measures 4,5 

All 29 foreign economies ....... - - - - - - 2.4 -1.0 2.8

 less Brazil 

...................... 5.3 12.1 .6 11.7 5.0 .3 2.4 -.8 3.1

 less Brazil, Mexico, Israel ...... 5.9 12.8 1.7 13.7 5.7 -.6 .3 -3.1 3.5

OECD 6 ................................. 4.9 11.7 -.2 11.3 4.5 .3 2.1 -.9 4.0

 less Mexico, Korea 7 ........... 5.1 11.6 .8 12.8 4.6 -1.0 -.9 -3.3 3.7

Europe .................................. 5.4 14.5 -3.9 16.6 4.3 -.7 -8.3 -.3 9.1

Asian NIEs 8 ............................ 10.5 19.6 6.9 18.6 11.7 1.0 6.9 -1.7 2.8

Rates of change based on compound rate method.

Dash means data not available. 5 Trade-weighted percent changes computed as the trade-weighted 

1

 Data for Brazil are not available before 1996. average of the rates of change for the individual countries or areas. 2

 Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of China. For description of trade-weighted measures and economic groups, 3

 1975-2001 for Sri Lanka; 1975-2000 for Portugal; 1975-98 for Greece. see the Technical Notes preceding these tables. 4

 Because data for Germany are not available before 6 Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

 1993, data for the former West Germany only are 7

 Mexico joined the OECD in 1994, and Korea joined in 1996.

 included in the trade-weighted measures. 8

 The Asian NIEs are Hong Kong, Korea, Singapore and Taiwan.

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, September 2003.
- 16 -

Table 4. Annual percent change in hourly compensation costs in national currency for 

production workers in manufacturing, 30 countries or areas and selected economic 

groups, selected periods, 1975-2002

Country or area 1975- 1975- 1980- 1985- 1990- 1995- 2000 2001 2002

2002 1980 1985 1990 1995 2002

Americas

United States ......................... 4.6 9.2 5.7 2.8 2.9 3.1 3.5 4.3 3.5

Brazil 1

 ................................... - - - - - - 4.4 7.2 7.5

Canada .................................. 5.4 10.8 8.1 4.5 3.5 1.9 2.9 2.7 2.8

Mexico ................................... 30.2 22.5 51.8 61.1 18.9 11.8 12.9 10.5 5.7

Asia and Oceania

Australia ................................ 7.3 11.6 9.6 7.6 4.4 4.5 .5 3.7 10.8

Hong Kong SAR 2

 ................. 9.7 15.0 12.4 13.3 8.6 2.6 2.0 6.1 -2.2

Israel ..................................... 48.1 68.3 200.9 29.2 13.0 8.9 6.3 8.5 1.1

Japan .................................... 3.7 7.0 4.0 4.0 3.9 .8 1.4 -.7 -1.1

Korea .................................... 17.2 30.1 13.0 19.5 16.5 10.7 5.9 9.0 13.4

New Zealand ........................ 7.7 15.6 10.4 9.3 2.0 3.4 3.1 3.4 3.9

Singapore ............................. 7.2 9.8 11.2 4.7 8.7 3.3 6.6 3.0 -3.9

Sri Lanka .............................. 12.4 3 12.7 16.2 13.1 11.7 - 12.8 9.0 -

Taiwan .................................. 10.0 20.6 10.2 12.1 8.1 2.7 2.6 5.5 -3.1

Europe

Austria .................................. 5.2 7.9 6.4 5.1 4.9 2.7 2.8 2.7 3.0

Belgium ................................. 5.4 10.2 6.8 3.8 4.9 2.6 4.2 .5 2.5

Denmark ............................... 6.4 11.1 7.2 5.3 4.6 4.6 3.2 5.3 4.3

Finland .................................. 8.0 12.6 10.5 9.7 5.5 3.5 4.1 5.3 2.8

France ................................. 7.0 14.3 12.3 4.6 2.7 3.2 5.1 4.5 3.7

Germany, former West ...... 4.8 7.5 4.7 4.8 5.1 2.6 4.9 2.3 2.3

Germany ............................... - - - - - 2.6 4.9 2.5 2.2

Greece ................................. 18.3 3 23.9 26.0 16.2 14.4 ----

Ireland .................................. 8.5 16.4 13.9 4.9 3.8 5.6 6.0 9.5 7.6

Italy ....................................... 8.9 18.0 15.9 7.5 4.8 2.1 1.8 1.5 2.6

Luxembourg ......................... 4.8 8.0 5.7 3.8 5.2 2.2 3.2 1.2 3.1

Netherlands .......................... 4.2 7.6 3.9 2.5 3.3 3.9 4.5 4.8 4.2

Norway ................................. 7.0 10.1 9.3 8.5 2.8 5.1 3.6 5.2 5.1

Portugal ................................ 13.9 3 20.7 20.6 15.4 8.4 - 2.5 - -

Spain .................................... 10.4 23.8 13.4 7.9 6.6 4.1 3.4 4.1 4.8

Sweden ................................ 7.2 12.2 9.5 8.3 4.3 3.6 3.4 2.7 3.4

Switzerland ........................... 3.3 3.4 5.0 4.1 3.6 1.2 1.3 2.7 1.8

United Kingdom .................... 7.8 16.5 8.3 8.0 4.2 4.2 3.0 3.4 3.7

Trade-weighted measures 4,5 

All 29 foreign economies ....... - - - - - - 4.6 4.1 2.9

 less Brazil 

...................... 10.6 14.5 17.2 14.6 7.2 4.2 4.6 4.1 2.8

 less Brazil, Mexico, Israel ... 6.5 12.2 8.2 6.3 5.0 2.8 3.2 2.9 2.3

OECD 6 ................................. 10.1 13.5 15.0 14.8 7.0 4.2 4.7 3.9 3.4

 less Mexico, Korea 7 ........... 5.6 10.7 7.5 5.0 3.9 2.3 2.9 2.3 2.3

Europe .................................. 6.6 12.4 8.7 5.8 4.4 3.3 3.8 3.4 3.4

Asian NIEs 8

 .......................... 11.7 20.6 11.6 13.1 11.0 5.4 4.4 6.2 2.2

Rates of change based on compound rate method. 5

 Trade-weighted percent changes computed as the trade-weighted 

Dash means data not available. average of the rates of change for the individual countries or areas.

1

 Data for Brazil are not available before 1996. For description of trade-weighted measures and economic groups, 2

 Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of China. see the Technical Notes preceding these tables. 3

 1975-2001 for Sri Lanka; 1975-2000 for Portugal; 1975-98 for Greece. 6 Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

4

 Because data for Germany are not available before 7 Mexico joined the OECD in 1994, and Korea joined in 1996.

 1993, data for the former West Germany only are 8

 The Asian NIEs are Hong Kong, Korea, Singapore and Taiwan.

 included in the trade-weighted measures.

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, September 2003.
- 17 -

Table 5. Annual percent change in exchange rates (U.S. dollars per national currency unit),

30 countries or areas and selected economic groups, selected years, 1975-2002

Country or area 1975- 1975- 1980- 1985- 1990- 1995- 2000 2001 2002

2002 1980 1985 1990 1995 2002

Americas

United States ......................... ---- -----

Brazil 1

 ................................... - - - - - - -.5 -22.2 -19.4

Canada .................................. -1.6 -2.7 -3.1 3.2 -3.2 -1.9 .0 -4.1 -1.3

Mexico ................................... -21.8 -11.5 -38.3 -38.0 -15.2 -5.7 1.0 1.3 -3.4

Asia and Oceania

Australia ................................ -3.2 -2.7 -9.3 2.2 -1.0 -4.3 -9.9 -11.1 5.2

Hong Kong SAR 2

 ................. -1.7 -.1 -8.6 .0 .1 -.1 -.4 -.1 .0

Israel ..................................... -28.1 -34.1 -66.3 -10.2 -7.7 -6.3 1.5 -3.1 -11.2

Japan .................................... 3.2 5.6 -1.1 10.5 9.1 -4.0 5.5 -11.3 -2.9

Korea .................................... -3.5 -4.4 -6.9 4.2 -1.7 -6.7 5.2 -12.5 3.4

New Zealand ........................ -3.5 -4.3 -12.6 3.7 1.9 -4.8 -13.7 -8.0 10.5

Singapore ............................. 1.0 2.1 -.5 3.9 5.1 -3.3 -1.7 -3.8 .1

Sri Lanka .............................. -9.1 3 -15.7 -9.5 -7.5 -4.8 - -8.3 -19.5 -

Taiwan .................................. .4 1.1 -2.0 8.2 .3 -3.7 3.4 -7.6 -2.1

Europe

Austria .................................. .7 6.1 -9.0 12.8 2.4 -5.1 -13.3 -3.0 5.6

Belgium ................................. -.6 4.7 -13.2 12.2 2.5 -5.2 -13.3 -3.0 5.6

Denmark ............................... -1.2 .4 -11.9 11.4 2.0 -4.8 -13.7 -2.8 5.7

Finland .................................. -2.0 -.3 -9.7 10.1 -2.6 -5.0 -13.3 -3.0 5.6

France ................................. -1.8 .3 -14.0 10.5 1.8 -4.6 -13.3 -3.0 5.6

Germany, former West ...... .6 6.2 -9.2 12.7 2.5 -5.1 -13.4 -3.0 5.6

Germany ............................. ----- -5.1 -13.4 -3.0 5.6

Greece ................................. -9.2 3 -5.4 -21.0 -2.7 -7.3 ----

Ireland .................................. -2.3 -1.5 -12.3 9.2 -.7 -4.1 -13.3 -3.0 5.6

Italy ....................................... -4.1 -5.3 -14.8 9.8 -6.0 -3.2 -13.3 -3.1 5.6

Luxembourg .......................... -.5 4.7 -13.2 12.2 2.5 -5.1 -13.3 -3.0 5.6

Netherlands .......................... .3 4.9 -9.8 12.7 2.6 -5.2 -13.3 -3.0 5.6

Norway ................................. -1.6 1.1 -10.5 6.6 -.3 -3.2 -11.4 -2.0 12.7

Portugal ................................ -8.2 3 -12.7 -21.9 3.8 -1.0 - -13.4 - -

Spain .................................... -4.1 -4.3 -15.9 10.8 -3.9 -4.8 -13.3 -3.1 5.6

Sweden ................................. -3.1 -.4 -13.2 7.8 -3.7 -4.3 -9.8 -11.3 6.4

Switzerland ........................... 1.9 9.0 -7.4 12.0 3.3 -3.9 -10.9 .1 8.5

United Kingdom .................... -1.4 .9 -11.0 6.6 -2.4 -.7 -6.3 -5.0 4.3

Trade-weighted measures 4,5 

All 29 foreign economies ....... - - - - -- -2.1 -5.0 -.1

 less Brazil 

...................... -4.0 -1.6 -11.4 .2 -1.8 -3.6 -2.2 -4.7 .3

 less Brazil, Mexico, Israel ...... -.5 .6 -5.9 7.0 .6 -3.2 -2.8 -5.8 1.1

OECD 6 ................................. -4.0 -1.4 -11.4 -.1 -2.0 -3.7 -2.5 -4.7 .6

 less Mexico, Korea 7 ........... -.4 .9 -6.2 7.5 .6 -3.1 -3.7 -5.5 1.2

Europe .................................. -.9 2.1 -11.5 10.2 .0 -3.7 -11.6 -3.6 5.6

Asian NIEs 8 ........................... -1.0 -.7 -4.2 4.9 .6 -4.1 2.4 -7.3 .4

Rates of change based on compound rate method. 5

 Trade-weighted percent changes computed as the trade-weighted 

1

 Data for Brazil are not available before 1996. average of the rates of change for the individual countries or areas. 2

 Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of China. For description of trade-weighted measures and economic groups, 3

 1975-2001 for Sri Lanka; 1975-2000 for Portugal; 1975-98 for Greece. see the Technical Notes preceding these tables. 4

 Because data for Germany are not available before 6 Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

 1993, data for the former West Germany only are 7

 Mexico joined the OECD in 1994, and Korea joined in 1996.

 included in the trade-weighted measures. 8

 The Asian NIEs are Hong Kong, Korea, Singapore and Taiwan.

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, September 2003.
- 18 -

Table 6. Hourly compensation costs in national currency units and exchange rates,

30 countries or areas and selected economic groups, 2002

Country or area

Americas

United States ......................... 21.33 1.000

Brazil ................................... 7.51 2.921

Canada .................................. 25.16 1.570

Mexico ................................... 23.00 9.663

Asia and Oceania

Australia ................................ 28.60 1.839

Hong Kong SAR 1 ................. 45.50 7.800

Israel ..................................... 57.54 4.738

Japan .................................... 2357 125.2

Korea .................................... 11454 1250

New Zealand ........................ 19.13 2.153

Singapore ............................. 13.03 1.791

Sri Lanka .............................. - -

Taiwan .................................. 186.87 34.54

Europe

Austria .................................. 22.30 .1.058

Belgium ................................. 24.11 .1.058

Denmark ............................... 191.07 7.886

Finland .................................. 22.81 .1.058

France ................................. 18.42 .1.058

Germany, former West ...... 27.70 .1.058

Germany ............................. 26.53 .1.058

Greece ................................. - -

Ireland .................................. 15.96 .1.058

Italy ....................................... 15.79 .1.058

Luxembourg .......................... 20.01 .1.058

Netherlands .......................... 22.99 .1.058

Norway ................................. 218.74 7.984

Portugal ................................ - -

Spain .................................... 12.74 .1.058

Sweden ................................. 196.20 9.720

Switzerland ........................... 37.54 1.557

United Kingdom .................... 11.64 .6660

Dash means data not available for 2002.

1

 Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of China.

Austria, euro; Belgium, euro; Denmark, krone; Finland, euro;

National currency units are: United States, dollar; Canada, dollar; France, euro; Germany, euro; Greece, euro; Ireland, euro;

Brazil, real; Mexico, peso; Australia, dollar; Hong Kong, dollar; Italy, euro; Luxembourg, euro; Netherlands, euro; Norway, krone; 

Israel, new shekel; Japan, yen; Korea, won; New Zealand, dollar Portugal, euro; Spain, euro; Sweden, krona; 

Singapore, dollar; Sri Lanka, rupee; Taiwan, dollar; Switzerland, franc; United Kingdom, pound.

Note: For data for all years 1975-2002, see the supplementary tables to this news release at http://www.bls.gov/fls.

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, September 2003.

Compensation costs Exchange rates