Bob Marshall’s BLS Analysis; 11/2/12
October BLS Preface
Special BLS note concerning last month’s analysis:
For those of you who read all of my BLS Analyses, you know that last month’s numbers just didn’t make sense to me. Well, I think I have finally figured out why. It has been reported from many reliable sources that California with 12.4% of the population and an August U-3 of 10.7% was not counted in the September BLS report. If you mix in the California numbers for August, the U-3 would have been 8.2%, or what it has been for most of the summer. Now that makes sense!
TBMG News
To potential students: If you want to increase your income as a recruiter, all the details of my three coaching plans are available to you on my website: www.TheMarshallPlan.org or you can reach me at 770-898-5550 or bob@themarshallplan.org.
Preface
Over the past months, some of you have corresponded with me about these monthly BLS analyses and asked if it is OK to use them in your presentations. The answer is, of course, yes! That is why I spend the time to write down this information. I would encourage any of you who have that desire to weave any of the information I have printed below into your presentations. I write these analyses for the benefit of our recruitment industry in general and for the members of my distribution list in particular. So use this info as you deem appropriate.
I also write these monthly BLS analyses to not only counterbalance the negative/incorrect press reporting of our general economic state but, more than that, to remind all of my recruitment readers that, at the level we work, there is no unemployment and so we must recruit to find the candidates our client companies so desperately need!
So to my recruiter colleagues, get out there and do what your name implies…RECRUIT. When your client companies have unique and difficult positions to fill, they need you. When they are being picky, they need you. When they are longing for more production from fewer employees, they need you. Go fill those needs. These should be the halcyon days in the recruitment arena!
Finally, always remember that we are not in an HR business, but in a ‘circumventing the time factor in the hiring sequence’ business—and adding value to our client companies
Healthcare costs top U.S. executives’ concerns: Adecco survey
Nick Zieminski, New York, October 22, 2012
NEW YORK (Reuters) – U.S. corporate executives are more worried about providing healthcare benefits to their employees than about issues like wages, taxes or attracting qualified workers, according to a survey by the world’s No. 1 staffing company, Adecco SA.
In Adecco’s poll of senior executives, 55 percent named healthcare benefits as their biggest current business challenge, and about a third say they are holding back hiring because of healthcare reforms introduced by U.S. President Barack Obama.
Obama’s 2010 healthcare law, upheld this year by the U.S. Supreme Court, is expected to raise insurance costs for employers because it calls for wider coverage of more people, including those with pre-existing medical conditions.
“A lot of firms just don’t know how the (law) is going to impact them financially,” said Senior Vice President Janette Marx. “If it does increase costs, it causes executives to question whether they can hire more.”
Obama is not doing enough to help businesses grow, executives say, and they favor Republican challenger Mitt Romney in the November 6 Presidential election by nearly 3-to-1.
Fewer than half of those polled expect their businesses to grow profits in the next year. Those who run small businesses are more optimistic than those running large ones.
More respondents also reported lower profits over the past year than said their companies grew earnings. They cited government regulation, consumer confidence and commodity prices as the biggest headwinds to growth.
Healthcare’s prominence as an issue has risen since the 2008-2009 recession, Adecco found: in 2007, only 35 percent called healthcare their top worry.
U.S. hiring could pick up after the election, regardless of who wins, because employers will have one less area of uncertainty to keep them on the sidelines. Adecco is seeing pent-up demand for workers among clients in manufacturing, retail, e-commerce and in the car industry.
“Companies have been waiting until after the election to make hires they need to make,” Marx said.
Adecco is the world’s largest staffing company measured by revenues and is the third-largest employer in the United States, behind Wal-Mart Stores Inc and the postal service. Its poll was conducted in early October and included responses from 501 CEOs, owners, managing directors and other senior executives.
Korn/Ferry Survey
LOS ANGELES – October 5, 2012 – Prior to the 114,000 September job increase reported by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, executives surveyed showed 58% intend to increase hiring at all levels across their organizations within the next 12 months; yet 69% are waiting for resolution on the fiscal cliff or the European financial crisis. The survey was fielded from Sept. 28 to Oct. 3 by Korn/Ferry International, a premier global provider of talent management solutions.
Despite future hiring intentions, results revealed broad-based hiring is stagnant. While 26% responded that they are currently hiring people, 25% said they are either thinking about laying people off or in the process of laying people off. 49% said they were holding the line – remaining status quo and delaying a decision either way.
The two top outside factors creating a pause in hiring: the United States fiscal cliff cited by 39% of respondents; and EU economic instability, with a 30% response. 19% of executives said that the U.S. lowering its corporate tax rate would make them prone to increase hiring.
Detailed results follow:
1. Are you planning on increasing hiring in the next 12 months?
No – will not increase hiring anytime in the next 6 months 32%
No – laying off in the next 12 months 11% (43%)
Yes – within 6 months 42%
Yes – within the 12 months 16% (58%)
2. What “outside factor” would make you most prone to increase U.S. hiring?
End of fiscal cliff 39%
EU economic stability 30%
U.S. lowering its corporate tax rate 19%
QE3 (3rd round of Quantitative Easing) 9%
Ending possible trade war with China 4%
3. Right now, what is your company doing about hiring?
Aggressively hiring more people 7%
Hiring more people 19% (26%)
Delaying — wanting to hire more people now but delaying it 23%
Not hiring and remaining status quo 26% (49%)
Thinking about laying people off, but holding off 7%
Laying people off 18% (25%)
4. Compared to last year, are you hiring more/less/the same?
Hiring more than a year ago 19%
Hiring at the same level as a year ago 14% (31%)
Keeping staffing levels the same as a year ago 38% (38%)
Laying people off at the same pace as we did a year ago 10%
Laying many more people off than we did a year ago 19% (29%)
Job Searching Is Routine for 69%
October 10 2012
As reported in the Daily News, 69% of full-time workers reported that regularly searching for new jobs is part of their routine and 30% conduct job searches on a weekly basis, according to a new study by CareerBuilder and Inavero.
“Digital behavior has blurred the distinction between an active and a passive job candidate,” said Brent Rasmussen, president of CareerBuilder North America. “The majority of workers are regularly exposed to new job opportunities and are willing to consider them. They may not leave their jobs right away, but they’re keeping aware of possibilities and planning for their next career move.”
Millennials (those born late `70s/early `80s to early 2000s) are more fickle; 79% actively search for or are open to new jobs and they typically stay in a job for three years, while 67% of baby boomers job hunt and they stay in a position for 11 years on average.
Most workers find new employment through online searching (74%), traditional networking (68%) and job boards (67%).
The survey included 1,078 full-time workers across industries and company sizes in the United States and Canada.
ADP Teams with Moody’s on the monthly National Employment Report
On October 24, 2012, it was reported that payroll giant ADP is partnering with Moody’s Analytics and Moody’s influential chief economist Mark Zandi on producing its monthly ADP National Employment Report.
ADP had previously partnered with Macroeconomic Advisers and its chairman Joel Prakken on producing the monthly reports. They have become a barometer for the jobs market in the private sector and are generally released a few days ahead of the federal government’s official job numbers from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, providing an early insight into employment trends across the country.
According to an ADP spokesman, the company and Macroeconomic Advisers have “amicably ended their collaboration on the report.”
The partnership with Moody’s promises to expand the number of companies sampled from ADP’s payroll clients from 344,000 U.S. companies to 406,000, and from 21 million employees to 23 million, which accounts for more than 20 percent of all U.S. private sector employees.
Instead of only providing snapshots of employment activity at small companies with 1 to 49 employees, midsize companies with 50 to 499 employees, and large companies with 500 employees or more, the new report will offer data on five company sizes, from 1 to 19 employees, 20 to 49 employees, 50 to 499 employees, 500 to 999 employees, and 1,000 or more employees.
The enhanced report will also provide an expanded snapshot of the monthly change in nonfarm private sector employment by moving from reporting on three industries (construction, manufacturing and finance) to five industries (construction; financial activities; manufacturing; professional and business services; and trade, transportation and utilities). The five industries constitute more than 50 percent of all U.S. private sector employment.
The new ADP/Moody’s Report released November 1, 2012:
Private sector employment increased by 158,000 jobs from September to October, according to the October ADP National Employment Report®, which is produced by Automatic Data Processing, Inc. (ADP®), a leading provider of human capital management solutions, in collaboration with Moody’s Analytics. The report, which is derived from ADP’s actual payroll data, measures the change in total nonfarm private employment each month on a seasonally-adjusted basis.
By Company Size
Small businesses: 50,000
1-19 employees 18,000
20-49 employees 32,000
Medium businesses: 27,000
50-499 employees 27,000
Large businesses: 81,000
500-999 employees 12,000
1,000+ employees 69,000
By Sector
Goods producing 14,000
Service providing 144,000
Industry Snapshot
Construction 23,000
Manufacturing -8,000
Trade/transportation/utilities 24,000
Financial activities 9,000
Professional/business services 35,000
Goods-producing employment rose by 14,000 jobs in October after declining in the two prior months. Gains in construction jobs of 23,000 more than offset the 8,000 decline in manufacturing employment.
Service-providing jobs increased by 144,000. Among the service industries reported by the ADP National Employment Report, professional/business services had the largest gain with 35,000 jobs added over the month. Trade/transportation/utilities added 24,000 jobs
Carlos A. Rodriguez, president and chief executive officer of ADP, said, “Today marks the first ADP National Employment Report with Moody’s Analytics as our partner. Our new format leverages ADP’s unique client data in a more robust way to provide greater insights on employment in the United States.”
Mark Zandi, chief economist of Moody’s Analytics, said, “Businesses are adding consistently to their payrolls. October’s job gains were in line with the average monthly gains of the past two years, with sturdy albeit less than stellar growth across most industries and company sizes. Businesses have turned more cautious in recent months, but that has yet to impact their hiring and firing decisions.”
Bottom-line: To my audience of recruiters, always remember this: Our ‘bread and butter’, especially on the contingency side of the house, has historically been, and continues to be, small and medium-sized client companies. Along with the large companies, these companies need to be in included in your niche!
Job Openings and Structural Unemployment
On October 10th, the BLS reported that there were 3,600,000 job openings on the last business day of August—a decrease from the 3,700,000 job openings announced for the last business day of July. (The next BLS Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey results for September 2012 are scheduled to be released on November 6th). The 3,600,000 reflects published openings comprised of jobs that are advertised either online or in print format.
As we recruiters know, that 3,600,000 number only represents 20% of the jobs currently available in the marketplace. The other 80% of job openings are unpublished and are filled through networking or word of mouth or by using a RECRUITER. So, those 3,600,000 published job openings now become a total of 18,000,000 published and hidden job orders.
In October there were 12,258,000 unemployed workers. What was the main reason why those job openings were open? Two Words: Structural Unemployment. If we can’t figure out how to educate and/or reeducate those 12,258,000 unemployed, then they will keep reappearing each month as a BLS unemployment statistic—as they have. In the meantime, our recruitment marketplace flourishes!
Online advertised job ads fell by 77,800 in October to approximately 4.74 million, according to The Conference Board help wanted online data series released on October 31, 2012. The average monthly increase for 2012 is 41,000 per month, with over half of the gain in the first quarter.
“The average labor demand for the last five months (since May 2012) is neither up nor down but basically flat,” said June Shelp, vice president at The Conference Board. Nationally, the gains and losses over the last five months netted out to a very weak average of about 4,000 per month.
The October BLS Analysis
The unemployment rate is published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, a division of the US Department of Labor. The rate is found by dividing the number of unemployed by the total civilian labor force. On November 2nd, 2012, the BLS published the most recent unemployment rate for October, 2012 of 7.9% (actually it is 7.876 up .080 from 7.796, in September, 2012).
The unemployment rate was determined by dividing the unemployed of 12,258,000 (up from the month before by 170,000—since October, 2011 (one year ago), this number has decreased by 1,501,000) by the total civilian labor force of 155,641,000 (up by 578,000 from September, 2012). Since October 2011, our total civilian labor force has increased by 1,584,000 people.
(The continuing ‘Strange BLS Math’ saga): The BLS continues to increase the total Civilian Working Population—this time up to 243,983,000; up from September by 211,000, up from August by 206,000; up from July by 212,000; up from June by 199,000; up from May by 189,000; up from April by 182,000; up from March by 180,000; up from February by 169,000; up from January by 335,000; and up from December by 2,020,000. And this month they have again slightly increased the Civilian Labor Force to 155,641,000 (up from September by 578,000).
Subtract the second number from the first number and you get 88,342,000 ‘Not in Labor Force’. That is an increase of 1,645,000 ‘Not in Labor Force’ since December 2011—10 months ago. In one year’s time, since October 2011, 2,128,000 US workers have vanished! Where did those 2,128,000 potential workers disappear to? That’s approximately 6.8% of the entire US population of 314,696,175. I am assuming they still have to eat and pay their rent. They still need money, don’t they?
Because of these new numbers, our Employment Participation Rate—the population 16 years and older working or seeking work—has risen slightly to 63.8% (3/10th higher than August’s historic low level).
Final take on these numbers: Fewer people looking for work will always bring down the unemployment rate).
Anyway, back to the point I am trying to make. On the surface, these new unemployment rates are scary, but let’s look a little deeper and consider some other numbers.
The unemployment rate includes all types of workers—construction workers, government workers, etc. We recruiters, on the other hand, mainly place management, professional and related types of workers. That unemployment rate in October fell to 3.8% (this rate is down from last month’s 3.9% and the previous month’s 4.5%). Or, you can look at it another way. We usually place people who have college degrees. That unemployment rate in October fell to 3.8% (this rate is down from 4.1% for the last four months).
Now stay with me a little longer. This gets better. It’s important to understand (and none of the pundits mention this) that the unemployment rate, for many reasons, will never be 0%, no matter how good the economy is. Without boring you any more than I have already, let me add here that Milton Friedman (the renowned Nobel Prize-winning economist), is famous for the theory of the “natural rate of unemployment” (or the term he preferred, NAIRU, which is the acronym for Non-Accelerating Inflation Rate of Unemployment). Basically, this theory states that full employment presupposes an ‘unavoidable and acceptable’ unemployment rate of somewhere between 4-6% with it. Economists often settle on 5%, although the “New Normal Unemployment Rate” has been suggested to fall at 6.7%.
Nevertheless (if you will allow me to apply a ‘macro’ concept to a ‘micro’ issue), if this rate is applied to our main category of Management, Professional and Related types of potential recruits, and/or our other main category of College-Degreed potential recruits, we find no unemployment! None! Zilch!
THE IMPORTANCE OF GDP
“The economic goal of any nation, as of any individual, is to get the greatest results with the least effort. The whole economic progress of mankind has consisted in getting more production with the same labor…Translated into national terms, this first principle means that our real objective is to maximize production. In doing this, full employment—that is, the absence of involuntary idleness—becomes a necessary by-product. But production is the end, employment merely the means. We cannot continuously have the fullest production without full employment. But we can very easily have full employment without full production.”
—Economics in One Lesson, by Henry Hazlitt, Chapter X, “The Fetish of Full Employment”
On October 26th, the Bureau of Economic Analysis announced that the “first” estimate of our real gross domestic product (GDP) – the output of goods and services produced by labor and property located in the United States – increased at an annual rate of 2.0% in the third quarter of 2012 (that is from the second quarter to the third quarter), according to the “advance” estimate. In the second quarter, real GDP increased 1.3%. And in the first quarter, real GDP increased 2.0%. The economy needs to expand at about 3% just to keep the unemployment rate from rising.
IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR UNEMPLOYMENT EVER TO BE ZERO
‘Unemployment’ is an emotional ‘trigger’ word. It conjures up negative thoughts. But it is important to realize that, while we want everyone who wants a job to have the opportunity to work, unemployment can never be zero and, in fact, can be disruptive to an economy if it gets too close to zero. Very low unemployment can actually hurt the economy by creating an upward pressure on wages which invariably leads to higher production costs and prices. This can lead to inflation. The lowest the unemployment rate has been in the US was 2.5%. That was in May and June 1953 when the economy overheated due to the Korean War. When this bubble burst, it kicked off the Recession of 1953. A healthy economy will always include some percentage of unemployment.
There are five main sources of unemployment:
1. Cyclical (or demand-deficient) unemployment – This type of unemployment fluctuates with the business cycle. It rises during a recession and falls during the subsequent recovery. Workers who are most affected by this type of unemployment are laid off during a recession when production volumes fall and companies use lay-offs as the easiest way to reduce costs. These workers are usually rehired, some months later, when the economy improves.
2. Frictional unemployment – This comes from the normal turnover in the labor force. This is where new workers are entering the workforce and older workers are retiring and leaving vacancies to be filled by the new workers or those re-entering the workforce. This category includes workers who are between jobs.
3. Structural unemployment – This happens when the skills possessed by the unemployed worker don’t match the requirements of the opening—whether those be in characteristics and skills or in location. This can come from new technology or foreign competition (e.g., foreign outsourcing). This type of unemployment usually lasts longer than frictional unemployment because retraining, and sometimes relocation, is involved. Occasionally jobs in this category can just disappear overseas.
4. Seasonal unemployment – This happens when the workforce is affected by the climate or time of year. Construction workers and agricultural workers aren’t needed as much during the winter season because of the inclement weather. On the other hand, retail workers experience an increase in hiring shortly before, and during, the holiday season, but can be laid off shortly thereafter.
5. Surplus unemployment – This is caused by minimum wage laws and unions. When wages are set at a higher level, unemployment can often result. Why? To keep within the same payroll budget, the company must let go of some workers to pay the remaining workers a higher salary.
Other factors influencing the unemployment rate:
1. Length of unemployment – Some studies indicate that an important factor influencing a workers decision to accept a new job is directly related to the length of the unemployment benefit they are receiving. In early 2009, eligibility for unemployment benefits was extended from 26 weeks to as much as 99 weeks. Studies suggest that this reduces the incentive of the unemployed to seek and accept less desirable jobs.
2. Changes in GDP – Since hiring workers takes time, the improvement in the unemployment rate usually lags behind the improvement in the GDP.
WHERE RECRUITERS PLACE
Now back to the issue at hand, namely the recruiting, and placing, of professionals and those with college degrees.
If you take a look at the past few years of unemployment in the October “management, professional and related” types of worker category, you will find the following rates:
October 2011 4.4%
October 2010 4.5%
October 2009 4.7%
October 2008 3.0%
October 2007 2.0%
October 2006 1.9%
October 2005 2.2%
October 2004 2.4%
October 2003 2.9%
October 2002 2.8%
Here are the rates, during those same time periods, for “college-degreed” workers:
October 2011 4.4%
October 2010 4.7%
October 2009 4.7%
October 2008 3.1%
October 2007 2.1%
October 2006 1.9%
October 2005 2.3%
October 2004 2.5%
October 2003 3.1%
October 2002 3.0%
So, while October’s 2012 rates for these two categories, at 3.8% and 3.8% respectively, are trending positively, when looking at the big picture, it’s not anything to be very happy about either—especially when we see how well we had it during the 2002-2008 time frame. But regardless, these unemployment numbers usually include a good number of job hoppers, job shoppers and rejects. We, on the other hand, are engaged by our client companies to find those candidates who are happy, well-appreciated, making good money and currently working and we entice them to move for even better opportunities—especially where new technologies are expanding. This will never change. And that is why, no matter the unemployment rate, we still need to market to find the best job orders and we still need to recruit to find the best candidates.
Below are the numbers for the over 25 year olds:
Less that H.S. diploma – Unemployment Rate
|
12/08 |
|
10.9% |
|
1/09 |
2/09 |
3/09 |
4/09 |
5/09 |
6/09 |
7/09 |
8/09 |
9/09 |
10/09 |
11/09 |
12/09 |
|
12.0% |
12.6% |
13.3% |
14.8% |
15.5% |
15.5% |
15.4% |
15.6% |
15.0% |
15.5% |
15.0% |
15.3% |
|
1/10 |
2/10 |
3/10 |
4/10 |
5/10 |
6/10 |
7/10 |
8/10 |
9/10 |
10/10 |
11/10 |
12/10 |
|
15.2% |
15.6% |
14.5% |
14.7% |
15.0% |
14.1% |
13.8% |
14.0% |
15.4% |
15.3% |
15.7% |
15.3% |
|
1/11 |
2/11 |
3/11 |
4/11 |
5/11 |
6/11 |
7/11 |
8/11 |
9/11 |
10/11 |
11/11 |
12/11 |
|
14.2% |
13.9% |
13.7% |
14.6% |
14.7% |
14.3% |
15.0% |
14.3% |
14.0% |
13.8% |
13.2% |
13.8% |
|
1/12 |
2/12 |
3/12 |
4/12 |
5/12 |
6/12 |
7/12 |
8/12 |
9/12 |
10/12 |
|
13.1% |
12.9% |
12.6% |
12.5% |
13.0% |
12.6% |
12.7% |
12.0% |
11.3% |
12.2% |
H.S. Grad; no college – Unemployment Rate
|
12/08 |
|
7.7% |
|
1/09 |
2/09 |
3/09 |
4/09 |
5/09 |
6/09 |
7/09 |
8/09 |
9/09 |
10/09 |
11/09 |
12/09 |
|
8.1% |
8.3% |
9.0% |
9.3% |
10.0% |
9.8% |
9.4% |
9.7% |
10.8% |
11.2% |
10.4% |
10.5% |
|
1/10 |
2/10 |
3/10 |
4/10 |
5/10 |
6/10 |
7/10 |
8/10 |
9/10 |
10/10 |
11/10 |
12/10 |
|
10.1% |
10.5% |
10.8% |
10.6% |
10.9% |
10.8% |
10.1% |
10.3% |
10.0% |
10.1% |
10.0% |
9.8% |
|
1/11 |
2/11 |
3/11 |
4/11 |
5/11 |
6/11 |
7/11 |
8/11 |
9/11 |
10/11 |
11/11 |
12/11 |
|
9.4% |
9.5% |
9.5% |
9.7% |
9.5% |
10.0% |
9.3% |
9.6% |
9.7% |
9.6% |
8.8% |
8.7% |
|
1/12 |
2/12 |
3/12 |
4/12 |
5/12 |
6/12 |
7/12 |
8/12 |
9/12 |
10/12 |
|
8.4% |
8.3% |
8.0% |
7.9% |
8.1% |
8.4% |
8.7% |
8.8% |
8.7% |
8.4% |
Some College; or AA/AS – Unemployment Rate
|
12/08 |
|
5.6% |
|
1/09 |
2/09 |
3/09 |
4/09 |
5/09 |
6/09 |
7/09 |
8/09 |
9/09 |
10/09 |
11/09 |
12/09 |
|
6.2% |
7.0% |
7.2% |
7.4% |
7.7% |
8.0% |
7.9% |
8.2% |
8.5% |
9.0% |
9.0% |
9.0% |
|
1/10 |
2/10 |
3/10 |
4/10 |
5/10 |
6/10 |
7/10 |
8/10 |
9/10 |
10/10 |
11/10 |
12/10 |
|
8.5% |
8.0% |
8.2% |
8.3% |
8.3% |
8.2% |
8.3% |
8.7% |
9.1% |
8.5% |
8.7% |
8.1% |
|
1/11 |
2/11 |
3/11 |
4/11 |
5/11 |
6/11 |
7/11 |
8/11 |
9/11 |
10/11 |
11/11 |
12/11 |
|
8.0% |
7.8% |
7.4% |
7.5% |
8.0% |
8.4% |
8.3% |
8.2% |
8.4% |
8.3% |
7.6% |
7.7% |
|
1/12 |
2/12 |
3/12 |
4/12 |
5/12 |
6/12 |
7/12 |
8/12 |
9/12 |
10/12 |
|
7.2% |
7.3% |
7.5% |
7.6% |
7.9% |
7.5% |
7.1% |
6.6% |
6.5% |
6.9% |
BS/BS + – Unemployment Rate
|
12/08 |
|
3.7% |
|
1/09 |
2/09 |
3/09 |
4/09 |
5/09 |
6/09 |
7/09 |
8/09 |
9/09 |
10/09 |
11/09 |
12/09 |
|
3.8% |
4.1% |
4.3% |
4.4% |
4.8% |
4.7% |
4.7% |
4.7% |
4.9% |
4.7% |
4.9% |
5.0% |
|
1/10 |
2/10 |
3/10 |
4/10 |
5/10 |
6/10 |
7/10 |
8/10 |
9/10 |
10/10 |
11/10 |
12/10 |
|
4.9% |
5.0% |
4.9% |
4.9% |
4.7% |
4.4% |
4.5% |
4.6% |
4.4% |
4.7% |
5.1% |
4.8% |
|
1/11 |
2/11 |
3/11 |
4/11 |
5/11 |
6/11 |
7/11 |
8/11 |
9/11 |
10/11 |
11/11 |
12/11 |
|
4.2% |
4.3% |
4.4% |
4.5% |
4.5% |
4.4% |
4.3% |
4.3% |
4.2% |
4.4% |
4.4% |
4.1% |
|
1/12 |
2/12 |
3/12 |
4/12 |
5/12 |
6/12 |
7/12 |
8/12 |
9/12 |
10/12 |
|
4.2% |
4.2% |
4.2% |
4.0% |
3.9% |
4.1% |
4.1% |
4.1% |
4.1% |
3.8% |
Management, Professional & Related – Unemployment Rate
|
12/08 |
|
3.3% |
|
1/09 |
2/09 |
3/09 |
4/09 |
5/09 |
6/09 |
7/09 |
8/09 |
9/09 |
10/09 |
11/09 |
12/09 |
|
4.1% |
3.9% |
4.2% |
4.0% |
4.6% |
5.0% |
5.5% |
5.4% |
5.2% |
4.7% |
4.6% |
4.6% |
|
1/10 |
2/10 |
3/10 |
4/10 |
5/10 |
6/10 |
7/10 |
8/10 |
9/10 |
10/10 |
11/10 |
12/10 |
|
5.0% |
4.8% |
4.7% |
4.5% |
4.5% |
4.9% |
5.0% |
5.1% |
4.4% |
4.5% |
4.7% |
4.6% |
|
1/11 |
2/11 |
3/11 |
4/11 |
5/11 |
6/11 |
7/11 |
8/11 |
9/11 |
10/11 |
11/11 |
12/11 |
|
4.7% |
4.4% |
4.3% |
4.0% |
4.4% |
4.7% |
5.0% |
4.9% |
4.4% |
4.4% |
4.2% |
4.2% |
|
1/12 |
2/12 |
3/12 |
4/12 |
5/12 |
6/12 |
7/12 |
8/12 |
9/12 |
10/12 |
|
4.3% |
4.2% |
4.2% |
3.7% |
4.0% |
4.4% |
4.8% |
4.5% |
3.9% |
3.8% |
Or employed…(,000)
|
12/08 |
|
52,548 |
|
1/09 |
2/09 |
3/09 |
4/09 |
5/09 |
6/09 |
7/09 |
8/09 |
9/09 |
10/09 |
11/09 |
12/09 |
|
52,358 |
52,196 |
52,345 |
52,597 |
52,256 |
51,776 |
51,810 |
51,724 |
52,186 |
52,981 |
52,263 |
52,131 |
|
1/10 |
2/10 |
3/10 |
4/10 |
5/10 |
6/10 |
7/10 |
8/10 |
9/10 |
10/10 |
11/10 |
12/10 |
|
52,159 |
52,324 |
52,163 |
52,355 |
51,839 |
51,414 |
50,974 |
50,879 |
51,757 |
51,818 |
52,263 |
51,704 |
|
1/11 |
2/11 |
3/11 |
4/11 |
5/11 |
6/11 |
7/11 |
8/11 |
9/11 |
10/11 |
11/11 |
12/11 |
|
51,866 |
52,557 |
53,243 |
53,216 |
52,778 |
52,120 |
51,662 |
51,997 |
52,665 |
52,864 |
52,787 |
52,808 |
|
1/12 |
2/12 |
3/12 |
4/12 |
5/12 |
6/12 |
7/12 |
8/12 |
9/12 |
10/12 |
|
53,152 |
53,208 |
53,771 |
54,055 |
54,156 |
53,846 |
53,165 |
53,696 |
54,655 |
55,223 |
And unemployed…(,000)
|
12/08 |
|
1,802 |
|
1/09 |
2/09 |
3/09 |
4/09 |
5/09 |
6/09 |
7/09 |
8/09 |
9/09 |
10/09 |
11/09 |
12/09 |
|
2,238 |
2,137 |
2,292 |
2,164 |
2,373 |
2,720 |
3,034 |
2,925 |
2,859 |
2,593 |
2,530 |
2,509 |
|
1/10 |
2/10 |
3/10 |
4/10 |
5/10 |
6/10 |
7/10 |
8/10 |
9/10 |
10/10 |
11/10 |
12/10 |
|
2,762 |
2,637 |
2,600 |
2,464 |
2,450 |
2,644 |
2,687 |
2,762 |
2,381 |
2,417 |
2,525 |
2,468 |
|
1/11 |
2/11 |
3/11 |
4/11 |
5/11 |
6/11 |
7/11 |
8/11 |
9/11 |
10/11 |
11/11 |
12/11 |
|
2,557 |
2,435 |
2,381 |
2,196 |
2,419 |
2,598 |
2,742 |
2,671 |
2,450 |
2,410 |
2,336 |
2,303 |
|
1/12 |
2/12 |
3/12 |
4/12 |
5/12 |
6/12 |
7/12 |
8/12 |
9/12 |
10/12 |
|
2,410 |
2,336 |
2,330 |
2,062 |
2,275 |
2,472 |
2,666 |
2,556 |
2,245 |
2,170 |
For a total Management, Professional & Related workforce of…(,000)
|
12/08 |
|
54,350 |
|
1/09 |
2/09 |
3/09 |
4/09 |
5/09 |
6/09 |
7/09 |
8/09 |
9/09 |
10/09 |
11/09 |
12/09 |
|
54,596 |
54,333 |
54,637 |
54,761 |
54,629 |
54,496 |
54,844 |
54,649 |
55,045 |
55,574 |
54,793 |
54,640 |
|
1/10 |
2/10 |
3/10 |
4/10 |
5/10 |
6/10 |
7/10 |
8/10 |
9/10 |
10/10 |
11/10 |
12/10 |
|
54,921 |
54,961 |
54,763 |
54,819 |
54,289 |
54,058 |
53,661 |
53,641 |
54,138 |
54,235 |
54,788 |
54,172 |
|
1/11 |
2/11 |
3/11 |
4/11 |
5/11 |
6/11 |
7/11 |
8/11 |
9/11 |
10/11 |
11/11 |
12/11 |
|
54,423 |
54,992 |
55,624 |
55,412 |
55,197 |
54,718 |
54,404 |
54,668 |
55,115 |
55,274 |
55,123 |
55,111 |
|
1/12 |
2/12 |
3/12 |
4/12 |
5/12 |
6/12 |
7/12 |
8/12 |
9/12 |
10/12 |
|
55,562 |
55,544 |
56,101 |
56,117 |
56,431 |
56,318 |
55,831 |
56,252 |
56,900 |
57,393 |
Management, Business and Financial Operations – Unemployment Rate
|
12/08 |
|
3.9% |
|
1/09 |
2/09 |
3/09 |
4/09 |
5/09 |
6/09 |
7/09 |
8/09 |
9/09 |
10/09 |
11/09 |
12/09 |
|
4.6% |
4.5% |
4.5% |
4.4% |
4.6% |
4.8% |
4.9% |
5.0% |
5.2% |
5.4% |
5.4% |
5.2% |
|
1/10 |
2/10 |
3/10 |
4/10 |
5/10 |
6/10 |
7/10 |
8/10 |
9/10 |
10/10 |
11/10 |
12/10 |
|
5.2% |
5.1% |
5.4% |
5.1% |
4.9% |
4.8% |
4.7% |
4.9% |
4.3% |
5.0% |
5.5% |
5.7% |
|
1/11 |
2/11 |
3/11 |
4/11 |
5/11 |
6/11 |
7/11 |
8/11 |
9/11 |
10/11 |
11/11 |
12/11 |
|
5.3% |
4.9% |
4.8% |
4.6% |
4.9% |
4.6% |
4.6% |
4.6% |
4.6% |
4.7% |
4.6% |
4.4% |
|
1/12 |
2/12 |
3/12 |
4/12 |
5/12 |
6/12 |
7/12 |
8/12 |
9/12 |
10/12 |
|
4.5% |
4.4% |
4.4% |
4.0% |
4.1% |
3.8% |
3.8% |
3.7% |
3.5% |
3.6% |
Professional & Related – Unemployment Rate
|
12/08 |
|
2.9% |
|
1/09 |
2/09 |
3/09 |
4/09 |
5/09 |
6/09 |
7/09 |
8/09 |
9/09 |
10/09 |
11/09 |
12/09 |
|
3.7% |
3.5% |
3.9% |
3.6% |
4.2% |
5.1% |
6.0% |
5.6% |
5.2% |
4.2% |
4.1% |
4.2% |
|
1/10 |
2/10 |
3/10 |
4/10 |
5/10 |
6/10 |
7/10 |
8/10 |
9/10 |
10/10 |
11/10 |
12/10 |
|
4.9% |
4.6% |
4.3% |
4.1% |
4.3% |
5.0% |
5.2% |
5.3% |
4.4% |
4.1% |
4.1% |
3.8% |
|
1/11 |
2/11 |
3/11 |
4/11 |
5/11 |
6/11 |
7/11 |
8/11 |
9/11 |
10/11 |
11/11 |
12/11 |
|
4.3% |
4.1% |
3.9% |
3.5% |
4.0% |
4.9% |
5.3% |
5.1% |
4.4% |
4.1% |
4.0% |
4.0% |
|
1/12 |
2/12 |
3/12 |
4/12 |
5/12 |
6/12 |
7/12 |
8/12 |
9/12 |
10/12 |
|
4.2% |
4.1% |
4.0% |
3.5% |
4.0% |
4.8% |
5.5% |
5.2% |
4.3% |
3.9% |
Sales & Related – Unemployment Rate
|
12/08 |
|
7.0% |
|
1/09 |
2/09 |
3/09 |
4/09 |
5/09 |
6/09 |
7/09 |
8/09 |
9/09 |
10/09 |
11/09 |
12/09 |
|
7.7% |
8.4% |
8.9% |
8.6% |
8.9% |
9.1% |
8.3% |
8.7% |
8.9% |
9.5% |
9.1% |
8.9% |
|
1/10 |
2/10 |
3/10 |
4/10 |
5/10 |
6/10 |
7/10 |
8/10 |
9/10 |
10/10 |
11/10 |
12/10 |
|
10.1% |
10.2% |
9.7% |
9.2% |
9.6% |
9.4% |
10.1% |
9.0% |
9.4% |
9.1% |
8.8% |
8.3% |
|
1/11 |
2/11 |
3/11 |
4/11 |
5/11 |
6/11 |
7/11 |
8/11 |
9/11 |
10/11 |
11/11 |
12/11 |
|
9.3% |
9.0% |
8.5% |
8.5% |
9.4% |
9.7% |
9.4% |
8.6% |
9.4% |
8.2% |
7.8% |
7.7% |
|
1/12 |
2/12 |
3/12 |
4/12 |
5/12 |
6/12 |
7/12 |
8/12 |
9/12 |
10/12 |
|
8.2% |
7.9% |
8.1% |
7.6% |
7.9% |
8.4% |
8.3% |
8.6% |
7.9% |
7.0% |