The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that businesses employed 39,000 more people in August than they did in July (on a seasonally adjusted basis). The BLS also reports that its survey of households produces an estimate of 429,000 more Americans at work in August than in July.
Which is more reliable? I have always trusted the business employment survey rather than the household survey as a more reliable business cycle indicator. This month, it is the one that is more pessimistic about the state of the economy.
Technical information:
Household data: (202) 691-6378 USDL 02-509
http://www.bls.gov/cps/
Establishment data: 691-6555 Transmission of material in this release is
http://www.bls.gov/ces/ embargoed until 8:30 A.M. (EDT),
Media contact: 691-5902 Friday, September 6, 2002.
THE EMPLOYMENT SITUATION: AUGUST 2002
Both payroll employment and the unemployment rate were little changed in
August, the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of Labor
reported today. Job gains in services, government, and construction were
largely offset by losses in manufacturing and retail trade.
Unemployment (Household Survey Data)
Both the unemployment rate, 5.7 percent, and the number of unemployed
persons, 8.1 million, were little changed over the month. The jobless
rates for the major worker groups--adult men (5.2 percent), adult women
(4.9 percent), teenagers (17.2 percent), whites (5.1 percent), blacks
(9.6 percent), and Hispanics (7.5 percent)--showed little or no change.
(See tables A-1 and A-2.)
The number of persons unemployed 15 weeks or more was 2.8 million in
August, down from the recent high of 3.1 million in June. (See table A-6.)
Total Employment and the Labor Force (Household Survey Data)
Total employment rose by 429,000 to 134.5 million in August, after seasonal
adjustment. The employment-population ratio was up by 0.2 percentage point to
62.8 percent. The civilian labor force (142.6 million) and the labor force
participation rate (66.6 percent) were essentially unchanged over the month.
(See table A-1.)
About 6.8 million persons (not seasonally adjusted) held more than one
job in August. These multiple jobholders represented 5.0 percent of the
total employed. (See table A-10.)
Persons Not in the Labor Force (Household Survey Data)
About 1.4 million persons (not seasonally adjusted) were marginally
attached to the labor force in August, essentially the same as a year
earlier. These individuals reported that they wanted and were available
for work and had looked for a job sometime in the prior 12 months. They
were not counted as unemployed, however, because they had not actively
searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey. The number of
discouraged workers was 372,000 in August. Discouraged workers, a subset
of the marginally attached, were not currently looking for work
specifically because they believed no jobs were available for them.
(See table A-10.)
- 2 -
Table A. Major indicators of labor market activity, seasonally adjusted
(Numbers in thousands)
___________________________________________________________________________
| Quarterly | |
| averages | Monthly data |
|_________________|__________________________| July-
Category | 2002 | 2002 | Aug.
|_________________|__________________________|change
| I | II | June | July | Aug. |
______________________|________|________|________|________|________|_______
HOUSEHOLD DATA | Labor force status
|____________________________________________________
Civilian labor force..| 141,868| 142,605| 142,476| 142,390| 142,616| 226
Employment..........| 133,894| 134,149| 134,053| 134,045| 134,474| 429
Unemployment........| 7,975| 8,456| 8,424| 8,345| 8,142| -203
Not in labor force....| 71,342| 71,059| 71,366| 71,633| 71,609| -24
|________|________|________|________|________|_______
| Unemployment rates
|____________________________________________________
All workers...........| 5.6| 5.9| 5.9| 5.9| 5.7| -0.2
Adult men...........| 5.1| 5.3| 5.4| 5.2| 5.2| .0
Adult women.........| 4.9| 5.2| 5.1| 5.2| 4.9| -.3
Teenagers...........| 16.0| 17.1| 17.6| 17.7| 17.2| -.5
White...............| 5.0| 5.2| 5.2| 5.3| 5.1| -.2
Black...............| 10.1| 10.7| 10.7| 9.9| 9.6| -.3
Hispanic origin.....| 7.5| 7.4| 7.4| 7.6| 7.5| -.1
|________|________|________|________|________|_______
ESTABLISHMENT DATA | Employment
|____________________________________________________
Nonfarm employment....| 130,759| 130,706| 130,736|p130,803|p130,842| p39
Goods-producing 1/..| 24,049| 23,879| 23,861| p23,820| p23,787| p-33
Construction......| 6,602| 6,544| 6,549| p6,519| p6,553| p34
Manufacturing.....| 16,883| 16,776| 16,757| p16,750| p16,682| p-68
Service-producing 1/| 106,711| 106,827| 106,875|p106,983|p107,055| p72
Retail trade......| 23,353| 23,327| 23,308| p23,341| p23,286| p-55
Services..........| 40,924| 41,090| 41,152| p41,212| p41,312| p100
Government........| 21,165| 21,201| 21,211| p21,231| p21,272| p41
|________|________|________|________|________|_______
| Hours of work 2/
|____________________________________________________
Total private.........| 34.2| 34.2| 34.3| p34.0| p34.1| p0.1
Manufacturing.......| 40.8| 41.0| 41.1| p40.7| p40.8| p.1
Overtime..........| 4.0| 4.2| 4.3| p4.0| p4.2| p.2
|________|________|________|________|________|_______
| Indexes of aggregate weekly hours (1982=100) 2/
|____________________________________________________
Total private.........| 148.2| 148.3| 148.6| p147.5| p147.9| p0.4
|________|________|________|________|________|_______
| Earnings 2/
|____________________________________________________
Avg. hourly earnings, | | | | | |
total private.......| $14.62| $14.71| $14.75| p$14.78| p$14.82| p$0.04
Avg. weekly earnings, | | | | | |
total private.......| 499.52| 503.58| 505.93| p502.52| p505.36| p2.84
______________________|________|________|________|________|________|_______
1/ Includes other industries, not shown separately.
2/ Data relate to private production or nonsupervisory workers.
p=preliminary.
- 3 -
Industry Payroll Employment (Establishment Survey Data)
Total nonfarm payroll employment was little changed (+39,000) in August
at 130.8 million. Since its recent low in April, payroll employment has
edged up by 162,000. (See table B-1.)
The services industry added 100,000 jobs in August. Employment in this
industry has risen by 411,000 since February. Employment in health services
rose by 26,000 in August, in line with the average monthly increase over the
prior 12 months. The help supply industry, which provides workers to other
businesses, added 51,000 jobs over the month, following a decline of 30,000
in July. Since its recent low point in February of this year, employment in
help supply services has risen by 165,000.
Government employment rose by 41,000 over the month. The federal
government added 20,000 jobs, mostly reflecting an increase in the number
of federal security personnel at airports. Employment in local government
grew by 34,000 in August, due largely to a gain in local education. State
education employment fell by 20,000, after increasing by the same amount in
July.
Employment in construction increased by 34,000 in August. Despite this
one-month increase, the level of construction employment in August was
essentially the same as in April.
Manufacturing employment declined by 68,000 in August; this compares
with losses in the prior 4 months that averaged 18,000. In August, job
losses were widespread, including substantial declines in electronic and
other electrical equipment (-18,000) and industrial machinery and equipment
(-13,000). After remaining fairly steady from January through July,
employment in fabricated metal products decreased by 10,000 in August.
Rubber and plastics manufacturing lost 7,000 jobs, offsetting the previous
month’s increase.
Retail trade, which had shown little change on balance since February,
lost 55,000 jobs in August. A decline in department store employment
(-41,000) accounted for most of the drop.
- 4 -
Weekly Hours (Establishment Survey Data)
The average workweek for production or nonsupervisory workers on private
nonfarm payrolls edged up by 0.1 hour in August to 34.1 hours, seasonally
adjusted. This follows a decline of 0.3 hour in July. The manufacturing
workweek also was up by 0.1 hour over the month to 40.8 hours.
Manufacturing overtime rose by 0.2 hour to 4.2 hours. Both measures had
declined in July. (See table B-2.)
The index of aggregate weekly hours of production or nonsupervisory
workers on private nonfarm payrolls rose by 0.3 percent in August to 147.9
(1982=100). The manufacturing index was down by 0.2 percent over the
month. (See table B-5.)
Hourly and Weekly Earnings (Establishment Survey Data)
Average hourly earnings of production or nonsupervisory workers on
private nonfarm payrolls increased by 4 cents in August to $14.82,
seasonally adjusted. Average weekly earnings increased by 0.6 percent
over the month to $505.36. Over the year, both average hourly earnings
and average weekly earnings grew by 3.1 percent. (See table B-3.)
______________________________
The Employment Situation for September 2002 is scheduled to be released
on Friday, October 4, at 8:30 A.M. (EDT).
- 5 -
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
| Upcoming Changes to National Nonfarm Payroll |
| Series in June 2003 |
| |
| NAICS conversion. The nonfarm payroll series, produced from the |
| Current Employment Statistics (CES) program, will be converted from |
| the 1987 Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) basis to the 2002 |
| North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) basis with the |
| June 6, 2003, release of May 2003 estimates. The NAICS conversion |
| involves major definitional changes to many of the currently pub- |
| lished SIC-based series. After the conversion to NAICS, SIC-based |
| series will no longer be produced or published. Historical time |
| series will be reconstructed as part of the NAICS conversion process. |
| All published series will have a NAICS-based history extending back |
| to at least January 1990. For total nonfarm and other high-level |
| aggregates, NAICS history will begin in January 1939, the current |
| starting date for these series. For more detailed series, the |
| starting date will vary depending on the scope of the definitional |
| changes between SIC and NAICS. The NAICS-based reconstruction |
| effort will cover all CES published data types: all employees, |
| women workers, production workers, average weekly hours, average |
| hourly earnings, and derivative series (for example, indexes of |
| aggregate weekly hours). |
| |
| Completion of the CES sample redesign. June 6, 2003, also will |
| mark the completion of the CES sample redesign phase-in. The |
| redesign converts the CES from a quota-based sample to a probabi- |
| lity based sample. In June 2003, the services industries will be |
| converted to the new sample design; all other private sector indus- |
| tries have already been converted. The final stage of sample |
| redesign phase-in may result in level shifts for average weekly |
| hours, average hourly earnings, production worker, and women worker |
| series. New levels for these series are being recomputed from the |
| NAICS-based probability sample. | |
| |
| Concurrent seasonal adjustment. Also beginning in June 2003, the |
| CES program will convert to concurrent seasonal adjustment, which |
| uses all available monthly estimates, including those for the |
| current month, in developing seasonal factors. Currently, the CES |
| program projects seasonal factors twice a year. With the introduc- |
| tion of concurrent seasonal adjustment, BLS will no longer publish |
| seasonal factors for CES national estimates. |
| |
| Change to federal government series. Beginning in June 2003, the |
| CES series for federal government employment will be revised slightly |
| in scope and definition due to a change in source data and estimation |
| methods. The current national series is an end-of-month federal |
| employee count produced by the Office of Personnel Management, and it |
| excludes some workers, mostly employees who work in Department of |
| Defense-owned establishments such as military base commissaries. The |
| CES national series will include these workers. Also, federal govern-|
| ment employment will be estimated from a sample of federal establish- |
| ments, will be benchmarked annually to counts from unemployment |
| insurance tax records, and will reflect employee counts as of the pay |
| period including the 12th of the month, consistent with other CES |
| industry series. The historical time series for federal government |
| employment will be revised to reflect these changes. |
| |
| Further information on upcoming changes to CES data series is |
| available through the BLS public database on the Internet, via the |
| CES homepage at http://www.bls.gov/ces/, or by calling 202-691-6555. |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
- 6 -
Explanatory Note
This news release presents statistics from two major surveys, the Current
Population Survey (household survey) and the Current Employment Statistics
survey (establishment survey). The household survey provides the
information on the labor force, employment, and unemployment that appears
in the A tables, marked HOUSEHOLD DATA. It is a sample survey of about
60,000 households conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau for the Bureau of
Labor Statistics (BLS).
The establishment survey provides the information on the employment,
hours, and earnings of workers on nonfarm payrolls that appears in the B
tables, marked ESTABLISHMENT DATA. This information is collected from
payroll records by BLS in cooperation with State agencies. In June 2002,
the sample included about 300,000 establishments employing about 37 million
people.
For both surveys, the data for a given month relate to a particular week
or pay period. In the household survey, the reference week is generally
the calendar week that contains the 12th day of the month. In the
establishment survey, the reference period is the pay period including the
12th, which may or may not correspond directly to the calendar week.
Coverage, definitions, and differences between surveys
Household survey. The sample is selected to reflect the entire
civilian noninstitutional population. Based on responses to a series of
questions on work and job search activities, each person 16 years and over
in a sample household is classified as employed, unemployed, or not in the
labor force.
People are classified as employed if they did any work at all as paid
employees during the reference week; worked in their own business,
profession, or on their own farm; or worked without pay at least 15 hours
in a family business or farm. People are also counted as employed if they
were temporarily absent from their jobs because of illness, bad weather,
vacation, labor-management disputes, or personal reasons.
People are classified as unemployed if they meet all of the following
criteria: They had no employment during the reference week; they were
available for work at that time; and they made specific efforts to find
employment sometime during the 4-week period ending with the reference
week. Persons laid off from a job and expecting recall need not be
looking for work to be counted as unemployed. The unemployment data
derived from the household survey in no way depend upon the eligibility for
or receipt of unemployment insurance benefits.
The civilian labor force is the sum of employed and unemployed
persons. Those not classified as employed or unemployed are not in the
labor force. The unemployment rate is the number unemployed as a percent
of the labor force. The labor force participation rate is the labor force
as a percent of the population, and the employment-population ratio is the
employed as a percent of the population.
Establishment survey. The sample establishments are drawn from private
nonfarm businesses such as factories, offices, and stores, as well as
Federal, State, and local government entities. Employees on nonfarm
payrolls are those who received pay for any part of the reference pay
period, including persons on paid leave. Persons are counted in each job
they hold. Hours and earnings data are for private businesses and relate
only to production workers in the goods-producing sector and nonsupervisory
workers in the service-producing sector.
- 7 -
Differences in employment estimates. The numerous conceptual and
methodological differences between the household and establishment surveys
result in important distinctions in the employment estimates derived from
the surveys. Among these are:
--The household survey includes agricultural workers, the self-employed,
unpaid family workers, and private household workers among the employed.
These groups are excluded from the establishment survey.
--The household survey includes people on unpaid leave among the
employed. The establishment survey does not.
--The household survey is limited to workers 16 years of age and older.
The establishment survey is not limited by age.
--The household survey has no duplication of individuals, because
individuals are counted only once, even if they hold more than one job. In
the establishment survey, employees working at more than one job and thus
appearing on more than one payroll would be counted separately for each
appearance.
Other differences between the two surveys are described in "Comparing
Employment Estimates from Household and Payroll Surveys," which may be
obtained from BLS upon request.
Seasonal adjustment
Over the course of a year, the size of the nation's labor force and the
levels of employment and unemployment undergo sharp fluctuations due to
such seasonal events as changes in weather, reduced or expanded production,
harvests, major holidays, and the opening and closing of schools. The
effect of such seasonal variation can be very large; seasonal
fluctuations may account for as much as 95 percent of the month-to-month
changes in unemployment.
Because these seasonal events follow a more or less regular pattern each
year, their influence on statistical trends can be eliminated by adjusting
the statistics from month to month. These adjustments make nonseasonal
developments, such as declines in economic activity or increases in the
participation of women in the labor force, easier to spot. For example,
the large number of youth entering the labor force each June is likely to
obscure any other changes that have taken place relative to May, making it
difficult to determine if the level of economic activity has risen or
declined. However, because the effect of students finishing school in
previous years is known, the statistics for the current year can be
adjusted to allow for a comparable change. Insofar as the seasonal
adjustment is made correctly, the adjusted figure provides a more useful
tool with which to analyze changes in economic activity.
In both the household and establishment surveys, most seasonally adjusted
series are independently adjusted. However, the adjusted series for many
major estimates, such as total payroll employment, employment in most major
industry divisions, total employment, and unemployment are computed by
aggregating independently adjusted component series. For example, total
unemployment is derived by summing the adjusted series for four major age-
sex components; this differs from the unemployment estimate that would be
obtained by directly adjusting the total or by combining the duration,
reasons, or more detailed age categories.
The numerical factors used to make the seasonal adjustments are
recalculated twice a year. For the household survey, the factors are
calculated for the January-June period and again for the July-December
- 8 -
period. For the establishment survey, updated factors for seasonal
adjustment are calculated for the May-October period and introduced along
with new benchmarks, and again for the November-April period. In both
surveys, revisions to historical data are made once a year.
Reliability of the estimates
Statistics based on the household and establishment surveys are subject
to both sampling and nonsampling error. When a sample rather than the
entire population is surveyed, there is a chance that the sample estimates
may differ from the "true" population values they represent. The exact
difference, or sampling error, varies depending on the particular sample
selected, and this variability is measured by the standard error of the
estimate. There is about a 90-percent chance, or level of confidence, that
an estimate based on a sample will differ by no more than 1.6 standard
errors from the "true" population value because of sampling error. BLS
analyses are generally conducted at the 90-percent level of confidence.
For example, the confidence interval for the monthly change in total
employment from the household survey is on the order of plus or minus
292,000. Suppose the estimate of total employment increases by 100,000
from one month to the next. The 90-percent confidence interval on the
monthly change would range from -192,000 to 392,000 (100,000 +/- 292,000).
These figures do not mean that the sample results are off by these
magnitudes, but rather that there is about a 90-percent chance that the
"true" over-the-month change lies within this interval. Since this range
includes values of less than zero, we could not say with confidence that
employment had, in fact, increased. If, however, the reported employment
rise was half a million, then all of the values within the 90-percent
confidence interval would be greater than zero. In this case, it is likely
(at least a 90-percent chance) that an employment rise had, in fact,
occurred. The 90-percent confidence interval for the monthly change in
unemployment is +/- 273,000, and for the monthly change in the unemployment
rate it is +/- .19 percentage point.
In general, estimates involving many individuals or establishments have
lower standard errors (relative to the size of the estimate) than estimates
which are based on a small number of observations. The precision of
estimates is also improved when the data are cumulated over time such as
for quarterly and annual averages. The seasonal adjustment process can
also improve the stability of the monthly estimates.
The household and establishment surveys are also affected by nonsampling
error. Nonsampling errors can occur for many reasons, including the
failure to sample a segment of the population, inability to obtain
information for all respondents in the sample, inability or unwillingness
of respondents to provide correct information on a timely basis, mistakes
made by respondents, and errors made in the collection or processing of the
data.
For example, in the establishment survey, estimates for the most recent 2
months are based on substantially incomplete returns; for this reason,
these estimates are labeled preliminary in the tables. It is only after
two successive revisions to a monthly estimate, when nearly all sample
reports have been received, that the estimate is considered final.
Another major source of nonsampling error in the establishment survey is
the inability to capture, on a timely basis, employment generated by new
firms. To correct for this systematic underestimation of employment growth
(and other sources of error), a process known as bias adjustment is
included in the survey's estimating procedures, whereby a specified number
of jobs is added to the monthly sample-based change. The size of the
- 9 -
monthly bias adjustment is based largely on past relationships between the
sample-based estimates of employment and the total counts of employment
described below.
The sample-based estimates from the establishment survey are adjusted
once a year (on a lagged basis) to universe counts of payroll employment
obtained from administrative records of the unemployment insurance program.
The difference between the March sample-based employment estimates and the
March universe counts is known as a benchmark revision, and serves as a
rough proxy for total survey error. The new benchmarks also incorporate
changes in the classification of industries. Over the past decade, the
benchmark revision for total nonfarm employment has averaged 0.3 percent,
ranging from zero to 0.7 percent.
Additional statistics and other information
More comprehensive statistics are contained in Employment and Earnings,
published each month by BLS. It is available for $26.00 per issue or
$50.00 per year from the U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC
20402. All orders must be prepaid by sending a check or money order
payable to the Superintendent of Documents, or by charging to Mastercard or
Visa.
Employment and Earnings also provides measures of sampling error for the
household survey data published in this release. For unemployment and
other labor force categories, these measures appear in tables 1-B through
1-D of its "Explanatory Notes." Measures of the reliability of the data
drawn from the establishment survey and the actual amounts of revision due
to benchmark adjustments are provided in tables 2-B through 2-H of that
publication.
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.
HOUSEHOLD DATA HOUSEHOLD DATA
Table A-1. Employment status of the civilian population by sex and age
(Numbers in thousands)
Not seasonally adjusted Seasonally adjusted(1)
Employment status, sex, and age
Aug. July Aug. Aug. Apr. May June July Aug.
2001 2002 2002 2001 2002 2002 2002 2002 2002
TOTAL
Civilian noninstitutional population.............. 212,135 214,023 214,225 212,135 213,492 213,658 213,842 214,023 214,225
Civilian labor force............................ 141,862 143,885 143,176 141,380 142,570 142,769 142,476 142,390 142,616
Participation rate........................ 66.9 67.2 66.8 66.6 66.8 66.8 66.6 66.5 66.6
Employed...................................... 134,905 135,289 135,028 134,408 133,976 134,417 134,053 134,045 134,474
Employment-population ratio............... 63.6 63.2 63.0 63.4 62.8 62.9 62.7 62.6 62.8
Agriculture................................. 3,419 3,671 3,479 3,126 3,154 3,097 3,110 3,282 3,188
Nonagricultural industries.................. 131,487 131,618 131,549 131,282 130,823 131,320 130,942 130,763 131,286
Unemployed.................................... 6,956 8,595 8,148 6,972 8,594 8,351 8,424 8,345 8,142
Unemployment rate......................... 4.9 6.0 5.7 4.9 6.0 5.8 5.9 5.9 5.7
Not in labor force.............................. 70,274 70,139 71,049 70,755 70,922 70,889 71,366 71,633 71,609
Persons who currently want a job.............. 5,062 4,856 4,751 4,788 4,468 4,779 4,689 4,895 4,503
Men, 16 years and over
Civilian noninstitutional population.............. 101,995 102,945 103,046 101,995 102,682 102,765 102,856 102,945 103,046
Civilian labor force............................ 76,102 77,274 76,669 75,538 76,009 76,415 76,189 76,041 76,088
Participation rate........................ 74.6 75.1 74.4 74.1 74.0 74.4 74.1 73.9 73.8
Employed...................................... 72,554 72,831 72,456 71,705 71,397 71,894 71,524 71,509 71,552
Employment-population ratio............... 71.1 70.7 70.3 70.3 69.5 70.0 69.5 69.5 69.4
Unemployed.................................... 3,548 4,443 4,213 3,833 4,611 4,521 4,665 4,532 4,536
Unemployment rate......................... 4.7 5.7 5.5 5.1 6.1 5.9 6.1 6.0 6.0
Men, 20 years and over
Civilian noninstitutional population.............. 93,810 94,694 94,756 93,810 94,414 94,479 94,622 94,694 94,756
Civilian labor force............................ 71,713 72,437 72,418 71,523 72,098 72,428 72,288 72,172 72,203
Participation rate........................ 76.4 76.5 76.4 76.2 76.4 76.7 76.4 76.2 76.2
Employed...................................... 68,828 68,877 68,958 68,388 68,193 68,647 68,390 68,405 68,447
Employment-population ratio............... 73.4 72.7 72.8 72.9 72.2 72.7 72.3 72.2 72.2
Agriculture................................. 2,301 2,463 2,400 2,129 2,213 2,125 2,138 2,256 2,221
Nonagricultural industries.................. 66,527 66,413 66,557 66,259 65,980 66,522 66,251 66,149 66,226
Unemployed.................................... 2,885 3,560 3,460 3,135 3,905 3,781 3,899 3,767 3,757
Unemployment rate......................... 4.0 4.9 4.8 4.4 5.4 5.2 5.4 5.2 5.2
Women, 16 years and over
Civilian noninstitutional population.............. 110,140 111,078 111,179 110,140 110,809 110,893 110,985 111,078 111,179
Civilian labor force............................ 65,759 66,610 66,507 65,842 66,561 66,354 66,287 66,349 66,527
Participation rate........................ 59.7 60.0 59.8 59.8 60.1 59.8 59.7 59.7 59.8
Employed...................................... 62,352 62,458 62,572 62,703 62,579 62,524 62,528 62,536 62,922
Employment-population ratio............... 56.6 56.2 56.3 56.9 56.5 56.4 56.3 56.3 56.6
Unemployed.................................... 3,408 4,152 3,934 3,139 3,982 3,830 3,759 3,813 3,605
Unemployment rate......................... 5.2 6.2 5.9 4.8 6.0 5.8 5.7 5.7 5.4
Women, 20 years and over
Civilian noninstitutional population.............. 102,165 103,127 103,256 102,165 102,847 102,936 103,038 103,127 103,256
Civilian labor force............................ 61,743 62,098 62,448 62,142 62,724 62,597 62,481 62,590 62,783
Participation rate........................ 60.4 60.2 60.5 60.8 61.0 60.8 60.6 60.7 60.8
Employed...................................... 58,851 58,656 59,037 59,526 59,333 59,337 59,316 59,364 59,710
Employment-population ratio............... 57.6 56.9 57.2 58.3 57.7 57.6 57.6 57.6 57.8
Agriculture................................. 820 867 806 781 732 760 749 814 772
Nonagricultural industries.................. 58,032 57,789 58,231 58,745 58,602 58,577 58,567 58,550 58,938
Unemployed.................................... 2,892 3,442 3,411 2,616 3,391 3,260 3,165 3,226 3,073
Unemployment rate......................... 4.7 5.5 5.5 4.2 5.4 5.2 5.1 5.2 4.9
Both sexes, 16 to 19 years
Civilian noninstitutional population............. 16,161 16,202 16,212 16,161 16,231 16,243 16,182 16,202 16,212
Civilian labor force............................ 8,406 9,349 8,310 7,715 7,748 7,744 7,707 7,629 7,630
Participation rate........................ 52.0 57.7 51.3 47.7 47.7 47.7 47.6 47.1 47.1
Employed...................................... 7,226 7,756 7,033 6,494 6,450 6,434 6,347 6,276 6,318
Employment-population ratio...............
Posted by DeLong at September 06, 2002 01:33 PM
| Trackback
It may not be exactly related to your question but here is what the FT writes:
The US labour department said the jobless rate fell to 5.7 per cent last month from 5.9 per cent in July. The pool of workers available for jobs shrank by 4.5 per cent to 12.7m in spite of paltry job growth. Payrolls grew by only 39,000 last month, well below the 150,000 figure economists say is required to keep unemployment at bay. A jump in the number of government hires, many related to airport security, bolstered the figures. Private-sector job creation was the weakest since February.
Remember, we're less than 2 months away from the Congressional elections, aren't we... Gotta have some good figures to show the voters...
Posted by: Jean-Philippe Stijns on September 6, 2002 03:34 PMP.S. I think I have a temptative answer to your question: the difference is made up by secret government employees in charge of posting themselves in liberal stronghold, dressed and acting like drunk bums, and with as mission to report any suspicious use of civil liberty :-D
P.P.S. I am just kidding, of course...
Sadly, it makes no sense that 429,000 more Americans could have been at work in August than in July. Why such a large divergence: 39,000 or 429,000?
Posted by: on September 7, 2002 10:31 AMLet me try to guess. Somebody changed the definition of work and, say, decreased the minimum number of hours that classify someone as a worker. Or if what you report is the answer to a survey question, there are always ways to rephrase questions that would lead to a bias one way or an other. In Europe, I would add in the possibility of a rise in mano negra but never got the impression this was a major thing in the US except in agriculture and perhaps construction. Short answer: good question! :)
Posted by: Jean-Philippe Stijns on September 7, 2002 07:59 PM>>Sadly, it makes no sense that 429,000 more Americans could have been at work in August than in July. Why such a large divergence: 39,000 or 429,000?<<
It's the statistical discrepancy. At least one of the two surveys has gotten it massively wrong last month (probably the household survey)...
Posted by: Brad DeLong on September 8, 2002 06:39 AM