🇦🇺 Australia vs 🇨🇷 Costa Rica

Australia (Asia-Pacific) and Costa Rica (Americas) are compared here using the three authoritative datasets on PlainEmploy: ILO EPLex, World Bank B-READY 2025, and OECD EPL. Australia has data from 2 sources and Costa Rica from 3, producing 2 metrics where both countries can be scored on the same scale. OECD membership status: Australia is a member, Costa Rica is a member, which affects the length and depth of OECD EPL history available.

On the ILO EPLex composite (0-1 scale, higher = stronger termination protection), Australia scores 0.404 versus Costa Rica's 0.179 — a gap of 0.226 points in favor of Australia. The OECD EPL overall strictness index (0-6) shows Australia at 1.70 and Costa Rica at 0.85, meaning Australia has the stricter statutory regime by 0.85 points on OECD's composite scale.

Treat these scores as scaled summaries, not verdicts — they compress dozens of statutory rules into single numbers and can mask important detail. The largest normalized gap in this comparison is on EPLex Composite (ILO EPLex), where Australia leads Costa Rica. To understand why the scores differ, open the full Australia and Costa Rica profiles to see tenure-scaled notice periods, severance and redundancy schedules, trial-period caps, third-party approval requirements, and dispute-resolution timelines. The underlying sources — ILO, World Bank, and OECD — are cited directly next to each table, and this comparison page reflects the most recent data release for each indicator at the time of build.

When you compare two countries side by side, the most common mistake is to assume that a higher score automatically means better protection for workers. Each index measures something slightly different, so the comparison only holds when both countries are read on the same scale. The ILO EPLex composite captures what the law says about termination, notice, and severance, while the World Bank Business Ready labor score weights how efficiently those rules play out for employers and the OECD index tracks long term statutory strictness for member economies. Two countries can sit close together on one measure and far apart on another, which usually points to a gap between the letter of the law and how it is enforced day to day. Differences also shrink or widen depending on the reference year, because reforms land in different countries at different times. Use the year labels next to each figure to confirm you are comparing comparable releases, and treat any single number as one input into a fuller picture rather than a verdict on its own.