This chapter adopts a state-centered approach to compliance by examining how the Turkish and UK governments responded to ECtHR rulings on trade union rights. While both states enacted structural reforms to align with ECtHR judgments, the chapter shows that, upon closer inspection, these measures often prove partial and superficial. In Turkey, persistent strike bans, a collective bargaining system that privileges a government-aligned union, and violent repression of union activity indicate deep structural resistance to labor rights. In the UK, compliance took the form of narrow legal adjustments that reflect an instrumental approach rather than an absence of legal capacity. When evaluated solely by formal state responses, ECtHR rulings offer limited leverage for meaningful reform, confirming the pessimism of realist and critical scholars. Yet the chapter also shows that some of the most effective changes occurred before the Court issued its final ruling, suggesting that international law gains traction when combined with grassroots mobilization. In highlighting the limitations of a compliance-oriented perspective, the chapter sets the stage for the next two chapters, which explore how labor activists engage international human rights law not merely as a legal tool, but as part of broader campaigns for justice, recognition, and institutional change.