March payroll employment edges up (+88,000); unemployment rate changes little (7.6%)

[mahatmakanejeeves]

Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics

THE EMPLOYMENT SITUATION -- MARCH 2013


Nonfarm payroll employment edged up in March (+88,000), and the unemployment rate was
little changed at 7.6 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today.
Employment grew in professional and business services and in health care but declined
in retail trade.

Household Survey Data

Both the number of unemployed persons, at 11.7 million, and the unemployment rate, at
7.6 percent, were little changed in March. (See table A-1.)

Among the major worker groups, the unemployment rates for adult men (6.9 percent),
adult women (7.0 percent), teenagers (24.2 percent), whites (6.7 percent), blacks
(13.3 percent), and Hispanics (9.2 percent) showed little or no change in March. The
jobless rate for Asians was 5.0 percent (not seasonally adjusted), little changed from
a year earlier. (See tables A-1, A-2, and A-3.)

In March, the number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks or more) was
little changed at 4.6 million. These individuals accounted for 39.6 percent of the
unemployed. (See table A-12.)

Read more: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm

---

Good morning, Freepers and DUers alike. I especially welcome viewers from across the aisle. You're paying for this information too, so you ought to see this as much as anyone. Please, everyone, put aside your differences long enough to digest the information. After that, you can engage in your usual donnybrook.

If you don't have the time to study the report thoroughly, here is the news in a nutshell:

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/jec.nr0.htm
Commissioner's Statement on The Employment Situation

A gain of 88,000 is an extremely disappointing number. ADP, two days ago, came in at a gain of 158,000, and that was lower than expected. The estimates of a gain in employment that had been making the rounds earlier in the week were on the order of 200,000.

For August 2012, there was an increase of 96,000 jobs, according to the BLS. At the time, a commenter at DU said the number was "disappointing." March 2013's is lower than that. This is not good.

What is important about these statistics is not so much this month’s number, but the trend. So let’s look at some earlier numbers.

ADP, for employment in March 2013:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014442827
U.S. Economy Added 158,000 Private-Sector Jobs in March, According to ADP National Employment Report

BLS, for employment in February 2013:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014419050
February payroll employment rises (+236,000); unemployment rate edges down (7.7%)

ADP, for employment in February 2013:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/111631869
U.S. Economy Added 198,000 Private-Sector Jobs in February, According to ADP Employment Report

BLS, for employment in January 2013:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014387295
January payroll employment rises (+157,000); jobless rate essentially unchanged (7.9%)

ADP, for employment in January 2013:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014384927
U.S. Economy Added 192,000 Private-Sector Jobs in January, According to ADP National Employment Repo

BLS, for employment in December 2012:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014356331
December payroll employment rises (+155,000); unemployment rate unchanged (7.8%)

From The Wall Street Journal. of January 4, 2013:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324374004578221291910741394.html
Economy Adds 155,000 Jobs



ADP, for employment in December 2012:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014354896
U.S. Economy Added 215,000 Private-Sector Jobs in December, According to ADP National Employment Report

BLS, for employment in November 2012:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014328849
November payroll employment rises (+146,000); unemployment rate edges down (7.7%)

ADP, for employment in November 2012:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014326586
U.S. Economy Added 118,000 Private-Sector Jobs in November, According to ADP National Employment Rep

ADP, for employment in October 2012:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014286714
U.S. Economy Added 158,000 Private-Sector Jobs in October, According to ADP National Employment Report

BLS, for employment in September 2012:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=256565
U.S. Economy Added 114,000 Jobs In September, Unemployment Falls To 7.8%

and

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=256816
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics - The Employment Situation - September 2012

The charge was made that September’s BLS numbers were cooked. A fellow who used to head the BLS says this is not possible.

Impossible to Manipulate Labor Survey Data — Former BLS Head
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2012/10/05/impossible-to-manipulate-labor-survey-data-former-bls-head/

ADP, for employment in September 2012:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014254238
U.S. Private-Sector Employment Increased by 162,000 Jobs in September, According to ADP

BLS, for employment in August 2012:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014221739
August payroll employment rises (+96,000); unemployment rate edges down (8.1%)

The increase of 96,000 was really lackluster. It's not just lackluster, but, as the first response said, "disappointing." It's half the ADP estimate. Here is a quote from yesterday's ADP news release:

ADP, for employment in August 2012:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014220380
The ADP National Employment Report August 2012

BLS, for employment in July 2012:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014184289
July payroll employment rises (+163,000); jobless rate essentially unchanged (8.3%)

ADP, for employment in July. I heard an estimate earlier this morning that the growth in employment would be on the order of 100,000.

The ADP National Employment Report July 2012

BLS, for employment in June 2012:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014160067
Payroll employment continues to edge up in June (+80,000); jobless rate unchanged (8.2%)

Of particular importance for the BLS estimate for June was this article from that day’s Wall Street Journal.

Unemployment Line Longer Than It Looks‎

When May 2012’s figures were released, Judson Phillips of Tea Party Nation was on Tom Hartmann that Friday night. He kept referring to the "U-6 Number." That can be found in Table A15. It is "Total unemployed, plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force, plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force." It appears in two forms, seasonally adjusted and non-seasonally adjusted. Either way, it is the least optimistic of all the estimates.

Thanks to DUer alp227, you can watch Judson Phillips’s appearance on Tom Hartmannn here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014184289#post12

ADP, for employment in June 2012:

ADP jobs up 176,000 (for June)

BLS, for employment in May 2012:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014133487
May payroll employment changes little (+69,000); jobless rate essentially unchanged (8.2%)

ADP, for employment in May 2012:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014132307
May change in employment +133,000

BLS, for employment in April 2012:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014113023
Payroll employment rises 115,000 in April; unemployment rate changes little (8.1%)

So how many jobs must be created every month to have an effect on the unemployment rate? There's an app for that.

http://www.frbatlanta.org/chcs/calculator/index.cfm
Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta Jobs Calculator™

Well, enough of that. On with the show.

Monthly Employment Reports

The large print giveth, and the fine print taketh away.

A DU'er pointed out several months ago that, if I'm going to post the link to the press release, I should include the link to all the tables that provide additional ways of examining the data. Specifically, I should post a link to "Table A-15. Alternative measures of labor underutilization." Table A-15 includes those who are not considered unemployed, on the grounds that they have become discouraged about the prospects of finding a job and have given up looking. Here are those links.

Employment Situation

Table A-15. Alternative measures of labor underutilization

From the February 10, 2011, "DOL Newsletter":

Take Three

Secretary Solis answers three questions about how the Bureau of Labor Statistics calculates unemployment rates.

How does BLS determine the unemployment rate and the number of jobs that were added each month?

BLS uses two different surveys to get these numbers. The "household survey," or Current Population Survey (CPS), involves asking people, from about 60,000 households, a series of questions to assess each person in the household's activities including work and searching for work. Their responses give us the unemployment rate. The "establishment survey," or Current Employment Statistics (CES), surveys 140,000 employers about how many people they have on their payrolls. These results determine the number of jobs being added or lost.

[Joel thakkar]

1. Not good news

The civilian labor force declined by 496,000 over the month, and the labor force
participation rate decreased by 0.2 percentage point to 63.3 percent

Thus, decrease in unemployment rate is of no use

Although a little good sign was the following :

"The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for January was revised from +119,000 to
+148,000, and the change for February was revised from +236,000 to +268,000.
"

[Dawgs]

2. Ouch.

That's not good at all.

[bigdarryl]

3. Can you say SEQUESTER!!!! people are loosing there jobs because of the cuts

The rethugs kept saying the President was hyping the sequester being worst than it was.Well here it is proof the President was right on target

[Dawgs]

4. Sorry, but the President agreed to the sequester.

He doesn't get away without blame on this one.

[bigdarryl]

5. Agree he's trying to make another deal by putting the big three on the table

NO FUCKING WAY!!!!!! Mr. President

[Dawgs]

6. Yep.

[Daniel537]

7. Yikes, not good.

Here in Miami i've seen a lot of "Now Hiring" signs lately, but its all basically low-wage retail jobs.

[Turborama]

8. U.S. construction employment hits three-year high, but worries remain

Apr 5, 2013, 1:36pm MDT

The number of construction jobs in the U.S. rose for the 10th straight month as companies added about 18,000 employees in March, surpassing the 5.8 million mark for the first time since late 2009.

Damon Scott
Reporter-
Albuquerque Business First

The number of construction jobs in the U.S. rose for the 10th straight month as companies added about 18,000 employees in March, surpassing the 5.8 million mark for the first time since late 2009. The unemployment rate for the industry now sits at 14.7 percent, its lowest since 2008.

Part of the decline in the unemployment rate was due to more than 1.5 million in the industry leaving to take other jobs, retiring or stepping out of the workforce, Associated General Contractors of America Chief Economist Ken Simonson noted.
Most categories of construction employment experienced a jolt, while infrastructure hiring lagged, according to the AGC’s latest analysis of government data. Officials cautioned that layoffs could occur unless policymakers in Washington, D.C., boost infrastructure investment and allow importation of needed workers as part of immigration reform.

“That makes shortages of skilled workers increasingly likely in high-demand crafts such as pipe fitting, welding and some residential activities,” he said.

The numbers showed:

• an increase of 162,000 construction workers, or 2.9 percent, compared to March 2012

• residential building and specialty trade contractors added 14,800 workers in March and 77,800 over 12 months

• nonresidential building and specialty trade contractors, along with heavy and civil engineering construction firms, grew employment by 3,000 in March and 84,400 since March 2012

More: http://www.bizjournals.com/albuquerque/news/2013/04/05/construction-employment-three-year-high.html

[Beacool]

9. There are 90M people who are not in the labor force?????????

This was the biggest monthly increase in people dropping out of the labor force since January 2012, when the BLS did its census recast of the labor numbers. And even worse, the labor force participation rate plunged from an already abysmal 63.5% to 63.3% - the lowest since 1979!

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-04-05/people-not-labor-force-soar-663000-90-million-labor-force-participation-rate-1979-le

[alcibiades_mystery]

10. Comparing the rate of labor force participation between 2013 and 1979 is a bit silly

In 1979, the biggest population group in the nation's history (baby boomers) was at the prime of their working lives. In 2013, that population group is retired or retiring in record numbers.

Now, certainly, the number of people who want jobs but can't find them (about 6.4 million according to the numbers you're relying on for the 90 million figure) is outrageous, and requires more jobs action in Congress, but it is almost 600,000 less than it was in August 2012 (at 7.03 million) and 750,000 less than in July of 2012 (7.15 million).

[Beacool]

11. Thanks for the clarification.

[alcibiades_mystery]

12. No problemo

A lot of people who don't really understand the issue jumped on that weird and misleading Zero Hedge post. It was all the rage on the anti-Obama boards. One person even claimed here that "Persons not in the Workforce" didn't include retirees! (http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=445435). That's a fairly brutal level of ignorance.

[former9thward]

13. As usual you are trying to put the decline in the labor force rate on retirees.

You hope people won't actually look at the figures. Almost half of the March drop outs were people under 25. Were they retiring? Labor force participation for those under 25 went down below 55%. It was at 60% when the recession began. For those 25 to 54 the rate was 81.1% in March which is the lowest since 1984. These are the so-called prime age workers. Their number counted as "unemployed" has fallen by 732,000 in the last year but only 166,000 found jobs. The rest gave up and stopped looking. I guess they "retired".

[alcibiades_mystery]

14. Not true at all

My claim is that comparing 1979 to 2013 without discussing the retirement of baby boomers is ridiculous. I made none of the claims you attribute to me here.