Tag: BLS

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data May Not Correctly Tell the Story

horvath Leave a comment

It is questionable whether the wage and salary data produced by the Bureau of Labor Statistics reflects what is happening on the streets of Colorado. With that in mind, the following paragraphs tell the story of the Colorado economy based on the headlines.

The Headlines

Comments made by Mark Snead

The former director of the Denver Branch of the Kansas City Fed has said that the Tier I energy states are on the verge of recession. To date, the economies in Tier II states have been much stronger and job gains in other industries have more than offset job losses in the energy sector.

On a different note, Snead posted in a blog post saying that” the current expansion is getting to be a bit long in the tooth.” It is 74 months and running.

Government

Governments are optimistic given the following actions:
• Boulder has approved their 2016 budget which includes the addition of 48 employees.
• Governor Hickenlooper has promised $100 million to make Colorado the “best state for biking.”
• The U.S. Treasury CDFI fund has given a $2 million grant to The Colorado Enterprise Fund to support local small businesses.
• The state approved $12.8 million in tax credits for two companies that might result in 1,600 jobs. These companies are in the health care and energy solutions industries.
• Loveland city council will discuss a proposal to provide high-tech manufacturing consulting and training organization EWI with $2 million in funding to open a facility at the Rocky Mountain Center for Innovation and Technology.
• In an uncharacteristic move, the state rejected a proposal for tax credits for a Colorado company that would increase health care employment by 1,418 jobs. The justification was the state did not have the workers to fill the jobs and would have to import them.

Aerospace
Aerospace is one of Colorado’s targeted high tech industries, yet it is in a state of flux with increased involvement from the private sector. The impact of some of the changes remains to be seen.
• Lockheed Martin could lay off 500 IT workers (nationally).
• Aeroject Rocketdyne made an unsolicited bid of $2 billion for United Launch Alliance.
• Jeff Bezos announces Cape Canaveral as the base for his commercial aerospace program.

Retail
The budgets for many cities rely heavily on taxes generated from retail trade sales. Nationally some retail chains are struggling. At the moment that appears to be an issue with the companies, not the industry.
• Best Buy in Broomfield has announced it is closing on October 31.
• A January restructuring caused Macy’s to shutter 14 stores and it recently announced it will close an additional 35 to 40 stores in early 2016. The company runs 770 Macy’s stores and has closed 52 locations over the last five years while opening 12. It is not known if Colorado stores will be closed.

Technology
Colorado has always prided itself for its technology clusters.
• Hewlett-Packard has announced worldwide cuts of 25,000 to 30,000. There is uncertainty whether this will negatively impact Colorado or benefit it if consolidation brings workers to the state.
• Level 3 has announced a round of layoffs associated with the company’s merger with TW Telecomm that took place last fall. The location and number of these workers has not been announced.
• Seagate will layoff 70 workers in Longmont
• Astra Zeneca bought the Boulder Amgen facility and may add 400 jobs.

Construction
Some construction leaders are clamoring that the growth of the industry and the economy may not reach its potential in part because of the lack of trained workers. The lack of a trained workforce has occurred despite solid growth in wages. At the same time, non-seasonally adjusted construction spending is at its highest level since May 2008.

Energy
Synergy Resources paid $78 million to K.P. Kaufman for assets in the Wattenberg Field. After record oil production in May, June production dropped off slightly.

Time will tell whether the Bureau of Labor Statistics or the headlines are correct.

U.S. Job Growth Remains Strong

horvath Leave a comment

On August 7th, the Bureau of Labor Statistics released its monthly update for U.S. nonfarm payroll employment. The number of jobs increased by 215,000 in July and U.S. job growth falls in the solid-to-strong category.

The areas with the largest increases were retail trade, health care, professional and technical services, and financial activities.

Average U.S. employment for the first seven months of 2015 is 3.1 million greater than the same period in 2014. That is about 256,000 net new jobs per month.

If job gains continue at the current pace, average annual wage and salary employment for 2015 will be about 142 million. As a point of reference, the 2015 population will be about 322 million.

Throughout 2015, U.S. employment has continued to post steady gains (month-over-month prior year) although there has been a slight downward trend since the change in employment peaked in February.

This downward trend is thought to be normal volatility and not a cause for concern. Even with the decrease, the number of jobs added this year will be well above the 2014 total.

All eyes are on the Fed and how they will interpret the latest news from BLS. They would like to see strong job and wage growth before they start raising interest rates; however it is most essential for them to see sustained, solid U.S. job growth. Unfortunately, for workers wage growth is less critical.

The consensus among most economists is that gradual rate hikes will begin in September.

The bottom line – the Fed will raise interest rates and U.S. employment will increase by 3.1 million this year. At this point, both are positive signs for the U.S. economy.

U.S. Job Growth

 

Tepid Job Growth Continues

horvath Leave a comment

When the Bureau of Labor Statistics announced (June 7th) that 175,000 jobs were added in May the stock market rose by 200+ points.  While the number of jobs added in May exceeded expectations, a significant downward revision in April offset those gains.

Said differently, the number of jobs added in May was comparable to the monthly average for 2011.  It is difficult to explain how that level of job growth could drive the market up.

The good news is that jobs are being added at a steady, albeit tepid pace.

On average, the U.S. has added 189,200 jobs per month in 2013. This compares to +185,000 workers in 2012 and +175,000 workers in 2011.  In other words, job growth continues to be lackluster, but well above the average for 2010 (+85,000) and 2009 (-421,000).

At this rate, U.S. employment will return to the 2008 peak some time in 2014.

©Copyright 2011 by CBER.

Lack of Primary Job Creation May Slow Future Employment Growth

horvath Leave a comment

The Bureau of Labor Statistics recently released data showing that, on average, Colorado added almost 62,000 jobs for the first four months of the year compared to the same period last year.

As has been the case in the past, the tourism and healthcare industries led the continued expansion.  The top five sectors for growth were:

  • Accommodations and Food Services
  • Healthcare
  • B-to-B (excluding Employment Services)
  • Retail
  • Construction

About 64% of the jobs added can be attributed to these sectors.

While it is good news that jobs are being added in most sectors, the expansion may be slowed by the lack of primary/high-tech jobs – jobs that create other jobs or bring in investment from the outside. The following sectors serve as a proxy for “primary job creation.”

  • Professional, Scientific, and Technical
  • Corporate Headquarters (MCE)
  • Manufacturing
  • Information

So far this year, these sectors are responsible for adding about 10% of the jobs.

All jobs are important and interrelated, but not all jobs are equal in terms of their ability to create other jobs.

A review of the Colorado economy after four months can be found by clicking here.

©Copyright 2011 by CBER.

Stagnancy in the Size of the Colorado Labor Force – The Lost Decade and Beyond

horvath Leave a comment

In a previous post, the topic of discussion was the stagnancy of the labor force during the 1980s (click here). In that case the size of the labor force was flat for about five years because of a regional recession, weak wage and salary job growth, and negative net migration. This post will look at the size of the labor force during the Great Recession and beyond.

Local Area Unemployment Statistics (LAUS) are available for Colorado beginning in 1976. Since then, the month-over-prior month labor force increased about 87% of the time (383 of 442 months). In a vibrant economy, periodic ups and downs are expected, but increases in the size of the labor force are generally the rule of the thumb.

Between April 2000 and October 2012 there were 30 months with decreases in the month-over-prior month size of the labor force. In January 2008 there were 2,722,015 workers. By April 2009 the number had risen to 2,758,468 workers.

During the past 42 months, there were 19 month-over-prior month declines. There were 2,725,803 workers in the October 2012 labor force. This was 32,665 fewer than the level in April 2009 and essentially the same as January 2008.

Next, we will look at three data sets for the period: Wage and Salary job growth, Net migration, and the Unemployment Rate.

For the years, 2009-2012, wage and salary job growth was devastating, with back-to-back net job losses in 2009 and 2010. The net change in wage and salary jobs follows:
• 2008 19,000
• 2009 -104,700
• 2010 -23,300
• 2011  33,000
• 2012 est  45,000

Unlike the 1980s, when the state experienced negative net migration, there has been solid positive net migration, i.e. more people moved into the state than out of it. The net migration follows:
• 2008 45,000
• 2009 36,300
• 2010 37,000
• 2011 34,900
• 2012 est 36,800

For this period the unemployment rate varied from 4.8% to 8.0%. While the monthly rate has dropped from a high of 9.0% in 2010, the 2012 annual rate remains the same as it was in 2009.
• 2008 4.8%
• 2009 8.1%
• 2010 8.9%
• 2011 8.3%
• 2012 8.0%

For all intensive purposes, the size of the labor force will be about the same as it was at the end of 2009 and the number of employed and unemployed workers will be similar.

• The 33,000 wage and salary jobs added in 2011 lowered the unemployment rate by 0.6% points, yet growth of 45,000 jobs in 2012 will lower it by 0.3% points.
• For the period 2008 to 2012, total net migration was 190,000; approximately 125,000 of these individuals are 16-65 years old.

This raises a series of questions:
• How many people have become contract or 1099 workers? How many have become sole proprietors and owned family businesses? How many people are working temporary jobs? Will they still work in this capacity when the economy recovers or will they take wage and salary jobs?
• How many workers have stopped working who don’t show up in the data?
• What are the in migrants doing? Did they take jobs that Colorado residents might have taken? Are they working in other capacities?
• How many families with dual incomes now only have one income?
• Have the published unemployment numbers been manipulated to meet political agendas?

There seem to be more questions than answers and the numbers do not seem to reconcile. As grave as the employment situation has been, it appears that the unemployment rate may be inaccurate and may have understated the magnitude of the problem.


©Copyright 2011 by CBER.

Stagnancy in the Size of the Colorado Labor Force – 1980s

horvath Leave a comment

The unemployment rate is one of the most popular, but overrated statistics for measuring the performance of the economy. It is such a crude measurement of economic performance that the state’s labor economist was recently quoted in the media as saying that it shouldn’t be taken at face value.

The calculation of the unemployment rate is simple. The number of unemployed workers is added to the number of employed workers (wage and salary, sole proprietors, and others) and that equals the size of the labor force. The unemployment rate is simply the number of unemployed workers divided by the size of the labor force.

In other words, the size of the labor force is a key component in determining the accuracy of the unemployment rate. This brings us to the topic of this post – the size of the labor force.

Local Area Unemployment Statistics (LAUS) are available for Colorado beginning in 1976. Since then, month-over-prior month labor force increased about 87% of the time (383 of 442 months). In a vibrant economy, periodic ups and downs are expected, but increases in the size of the labor force are generally the rule of the thumb.

There are two periods when the size of the labor force did not increase, during the 1980s and the late 2000s. The following analysis looks a period during the 1980s.

Between September 1984 through April 1989 the size of the labor force declined in 29 of 53 months.

In August 1984 the size of the labor force, as measured by LAUS data,  was 1,719,239. It declined sharply in 1985, bounced back for most of 1986, and fell sharply in 1987. It remained flat for much of 1988 and into the first part of 1989. In June of 1989, the labor force was reported at 1,719,824. From that point, it continued to grow.

Next, we will look at three data sets for the period: Wage and Salary job growth, Net migration, and the unemployment rate.

During this period, Wage and Salary (CES)  job growth was weak, with net job losses in 1987. The net change in wage and salary jobs follows:
• 1984   75,100
• 1985   16,400
• 1986  -10,400
• 1987       4,300
• 1988    23,500
• 1989    46,200
• 1990    38,600

The CES and LAUS series are different measures of employment, but they should tell a similar story about changes in employment.

During this period the state experienced negative net migration, i.e. more people moved out of the state than into the state. The net migration follows:
• 1984      2,782
• 1985      5,172
• 1986     -5,270
• 1987   -13,997
• 1988   -24,280
• 1989   -18,752
• 1990   -12,964

For this period the unemployment rate varied from 5.4% to 7.5%. It remained at a higher than normal level because unemployed workers were able to move outside the region and find work. The annual unemployment rates for this period were:
• 1984   5.4%
• 1985   6.0%
• 1986   7.5%
• 1987   7.5%
• 1988   6.4%
• 1989   5.6%
• 1990   5.1%

The labor force was stagnant for about five years for the following reasons:
• There was a regional recession
• Weak wage and salary job growth
• Negative net migration.

A similar stagnancy in the size of the labor force occurred during the 2000s. It is more difficult to understand and will be discussed in a later post (click here).


©Copyright 2011 by CBER.

Most Recent Labor Report Not What Incumbents Want to Hear

horvath Leave a comment

The October 5th Bureau of Labor Statistics press release was disappointing, particularly for incumbents in the upcoming elections. The report indicated that the U.S. added only 114,000 nonfarm jobs in September. It stated, “Employment increased in health care and in transportation and warehousing but changed little in most other major industries.” While job creation is important, the expansion of these industries does little to create jobs in other sectors.

The recent update also indicated that there are 12 million Americans out of work. Four years ago that number was 9.5 million and 6 years ago it was 6.8 million. The fact that the unemployment rate edged downward to 7.8% seems somewhat irrelevant given this data.

The data can be looked at from a slightly different perspective. That view indicates that the nation has regained about half the jobs lost as a result of the Great Recession. Ugh!

The private sector added 104,000 jobs for the month, while government employment added 10,000 workers. This is the second month in a row for increased government employment. While some have an unfavorable view of job gains in the public sector, in this case, it may be a positive indicator that state and local revenue streams have improved.

The BLS announcement was preceded by the ADP employment report which stated that private nonfarm employment had risen by 162,000 in September, 189,000 in August, and 156,000 in July. At this point, ADP is clearly more optimistic about the recovery than the BLS.

On average, Colorado nonfarm employment comprises about 1.72% of the U.S. total. If Colorado grows at the same pace as the U.S., the state data will gain about 2,000 jobs in September. We’ll see what BLS says in their monthly update on October 19th.

©Copyright 2011 by CBER.

Colorado Unemployment Rate Up for Fourth Month in a Row

horvath Leave a comment

The Colorado unemployment rate rose for the fourth consecutive month and reached 8.3%. While the BLS indicated that this increase was not statistically significant, it is certainly significant to incumbents seeking re-election in November.

The unemployment rate is a metric that the public pays attention to. They view it as a sign that the economy is not improving – as promised. Specifically, more than 225,000 people are unemployed in Colorado.  The never-ending talk about the fiscal cliff, additional easing by the Federal Reserve, and other doom and gloom projections add to the concerns of the electorate and the woes of incumbents.
The increase to 8.3% is significant for another reason. This is the second consecutive month that the state unemployment rate has matched the U.S. Over the past decade, the Colorado rate has often been a half to a full point lower than the U.S. rate. Seldom has Colorado’s rate been equal to or higher than the nation.

The basic reason for the rise in the rate is that the size of the labor pool increased. In other words, a greater number of people began looking for jobs. Even though the public and private sector have been adding jobs for the past two years, they aren’t being added fast enough to absorb all of the interested workers.

On a positive note, initial job claims are declining. That means there are fewer layoffs.

Continuing claims are also trending downwards – ever so slowly. That means people are either finding work or their benefits have expired. The former is a positive sign, while the latter is not.

The most recent data release shows that after seven months, an average of 40,000 jobs have been added, or about 3,300 jobs per month. Two factors could cause 2012 employment to be less than 2011 (Last year the state added 33,000 jobs).

BLS periodically and systematically revises the unemployment and employment data. Revisions to the data could push the 2012 total downward (an upward revision is unlikely).

As well, there could be a downturn in employment. If employment drops to a monthly average of 23,000 for the last five months then the annual total would be 33,000, or the same as 2011.

The good news is that gross job losses appear have declined, there has been a slight increase in gross job gains, and more people are looking for work. While this scenario is not ideal, it is much better than having a rise in the unemployment rate caused by a drop off in gross job gains and an uptick in gross job losses.

 

©Copyright 2011 by CBER.

BLS reports 33,000 Colorado jobs added in 2011

horvath Leave a comment

The Bureau of Labor Statistics recently released its benchmark revisions for 2011 that show Colorado added 33,000 jobs in 2011. The updated total is nearly double the projected job growth of the monthly data presented throughout the year.

After peaking in 2008, approximately 150,000 jobs were shed in 2009 and 2010. Employment declines were so severe that total employment dropped below the 2001 peak. Finally, in 2011, Colorado employment again surpassed the high point in 2001.

If Colorado employment increases by about 1.7% in 2012 and 1.9% – 2.2% for the 2 years after that, it will reach the 2008 peak in 2014. In other words, it will take six years to return to the 2008 peak.
By comparison, it took 4½ years for employment to return to the 2001 peak after jobs losses associated with the 2001 recession. (Some economists are saying the full recovery will return to peak just in time for the next cyclical downturn).

Here’s to quicker recoveries from future recessions.
©Copyright 2011 by CBER.

U.S. Employment Situation – The Good, The Bad, The Ugly

horvath Leave a comment

The recent labor report from the BLS brings back memories of the Clint Eastwood classic, “The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly.”

The Good – In February, March, and April an average of 220,000 jobs were added each month.
The Bad – In May the original estimate was that 54,000 jobs had been added. It was hoped that the downward trend would simply be a bump in the road.
The Ugly – The number of jobs created for May was revised downward to 25,000 with an addition of 18,000 in June.

These are not the kind of job gains that economic recoveries are built on. It is estimated that 100,000 to 125,000 jobs must be added each month to prevent unemployment from rising. If you account for the number of older workers who have remained in the workforce, that number might be bumped to 150,000 to 175,000. It is necessary to add between 200,000 and 225,000 jobs each month, on a sustained basis, to lower the unemployment rate.

The private sector posted gains of 57,000, while budget strapped governments reduced their payrolls by 39,000. The net is +18,000 employees.

The financial sector declined by 15,000 followed by construction at 9,000 workers. In addition, the temporary help services sector shed 12,000 workers. The sector, which is often considered a harbinger of broader hiring, declined for the third consecutive month.

On the positive side of the ledger the most significant sector gains were as follows:
• Leisure and hospitality 34,000 employees
• Health care and social assistance 17,400 employees
• Professional and business services 12,000 employees
• Wholesale trade   7,100 employees
• Manufacturing   6,000 employees
• Retail trade   5,200 employees
• Other services   5,000 employees
• Transportation and warehousing   3,600 employees.
Note: Not all sectors are included in the above overview.

While there is optimism for improved economic activity in the second half of the year, the reports cast doubts about job expectations. Employment growth appears to be nothing more than a necessary evil in the new economy that is driven by technology, globalization, a housing bust, and struggling financial markets.

Clint Eastwood, where are you when the country need you the most?

©Copyright 2011 by CBER.