{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.016692546583850932, 'fraction_numerical': 0.002717391304347826, 'mean_word_length': 4.778026905829597, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Book Review: International and Comparative Labor Relations: International Labor Relations Management in the Automotive Industry: A Comparative Study of Chrysler, Ford and General Motors

of the ILO would be very much in order right now. It should start with an evaluation of the conventions and recommendations promulgated by the ILO. Contrary to the impression one sometimes gets in Geneva, mere ratification by member countries is not the main purpose of the exercise. A great many conventions are ratified, filed, and forgotten. Others give rise to legislation that is not implemented. Indeed, conventions may be counter-productive in the sense that they give the impression of positive achievement when this is not at all true. As an example I would cite Convention and Recommendation No. 122 (1964) in which nations are urged to adopt a set of platitudes in the apparent belief that this will somehow help solve the critical problems of unemployment facing the less developed countries at the present time. A good history would also have to take a long, hard look at what the ILO has accomplished through technical assistance. The question to be answered is whether, on balance, the donor countries have received their money's worth in terms of advancing the economic development of the recipient nations. An inquiry of this sort would be particularly useful now that bilateral aid is being questioned, and the developed nations are being urged to switch to multilateralism. The ILO has spent a good deal of money on projects ranging from the training of automobile mechanics to grandiose schemes for raising the social and economic status of the indigenous population of the Andes and for transforming a sizable chunk of rural Nigeria. It cannot be assumed a priori that all of this activity has been profitable; for example, it was at least inconsistent for the ILO to be promoting national centers for raising labor productivity when the lack of jobs had already become a burning issue. The real history of the ILO is yet to be written, and would include not just such matters as accounts of the unseemly jurisdictional squabbles with UNIDO, UNESCO, and other sister agencies of the U.N. family, which loom so large in Alcock's book. To be useful and interesting, it must go far beyond what happens at Geneva and look to the real effect of the ILO on institutions and events. The ILO would probably come out fairly well in such a history, but that remains to be seen. Walter Galenson Professor New York State School of Industrial and Labor Relations Cornell University