Full text of 2000 : Text File, USDL: 01-311
The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
Internet address: http://www.bls.gov/flshome.htm USDL: 01-311
Technical information: (202) 691-5654 For Release: 10:00 A.M. EDT
Media contact: (202) 691-5902 Tuesday, September 25, 2001
INTERNATIONAL COMPARISONS OF HOURLY COMPENSATION COSTS
FOR PRODUCTION WORKERS IN MANUFACTURING, 2000
Average hourly compensation costs in U.S. dollars for production workers
in manufacturing in 28 foreign economies declined to 76 percent of the U.S.
level in 2000 from 80 percent in 1999, according to the Bureau of Labor
Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor. Compensation costs relative to the United
States continued to decline in Canada and throughout Europe in 2000, while
relative costs rose in Japan, Korea, Mexico, and Taiwan.
The recent decline of relative compensation costs in 17 European economies
studied resulted in higher compensation costs in the United States than in
Europe for the first time since 1989. In 2000, average costs in the United
States were 7 percent higher than for Europe, after being 7 percent lower in
1999. Costs in Canada continued to decline relative to the United States, down
to 81 percent in 2000 from 90 percent in 1997, while costs in Japan increased to
111 percent of those in the United States. Average costs in the Asian newly
industrialized economies (NIEs) of Hong Kong, Korea, Singapore, and Taiwan
remained at approximately one-third of the U.S level. (See table 1.)
Chart 1. Hourly compensation costs in U.S. dollars for
production workers in manufacturing, 1975-2000
PRINTED COPY CONTAINS CHART AT THIS POINT.
Compensation costs expressed in U.S. dollars
In the United States, hourly compensation costs for production workers
were $19.86 in 2000, a 3.9 percent increase from the 1999 level. Hourly
compensation costs increased 1.9 percent in the combined 28 foreign economies
during 2000, following a 4.9 percent increase in 1999. In Europe, costs
declined 8.8 percent in 2000, whereas they increased 7.7 percent in the Asian
NIEs during the same time period.
Changes over time in compensation costs in U.S. dollars are affected by
the underlying national wage and benefit trends measured in national currencies,
as well as frequent and sometimes sharp changes in currency exchange rates. A
country's compensation costs expressed in U.S. dollars are calculated by
dividing compensation costs in national currency by the exchange rate (expressed
as national currency units per U.S. dollar).
BOX: A NOTE ON THE MEASURES
The hourly compensation measures in this news release are based on statistics
available to BLS as of June 2001. The 2000 compensation statistics are
preliminary measures; for some of the foreign countries, they are based on less
than full-year data. These measures are prepared specifically for international
comparisons of employer labor costs in manufacturing. The methods used, as well
as the results, differ somewhat from those of other BLS series on U.S.
compensation costs.
Total compensation costs include pay for time worked, other direct pay
(including holiday and vacation pay, bonuses, other direct payments, and the
cost of pay in kind), employer expenditures for legally required insurance
programs and contractual and private benefit plans, and, for some countries,
other labor taxes.
Labor cost measures. The compensation measures are computed in national
currency units and are converted into U.S. dollars at prevailing commercial
market currency exchange rates. They are appropriate measures for comparing
levels of employer labor costs, but they do not indicate relative living
standards of workers or the purchasing power of their incomes. Prices of goods
and services vary greatly among countries, and commercial market exchange rates
do not reliably indicate relative differences in prices.
Data limitations. Hourly compensation is partly estimated, and data are
subject to revision in the next update. The comparative level figures are
averages for all manufacturing industries and are not necessarily representative
of all component industries.
See the Technical Notes for further information regarding definitions,
sources, and computation methods and a description of the trade-weighted
measures for economic groups.
END OF BOX (A NOTE ON THE MEASURES)
Table A. Hourly compensation costs, in national currency and in U.S. dollars,
for production workers in manufacturing
and exchange rates (U.S. dollars per national currency unit)
Percent change, 1999-2000
Hourly Hourly
Country compensation compensation
or area national Exchange U.S.
currency Rates dollars
North America
United States 3.9 - 3.9
Canada 3.3 .0 3.3
Mexico 16.6 1.0 17.7
Asia and Oceania
Australia .4 -9.9 -9.6
Hong Kong SAR 1 2.0 -.4 1.7
Israel 6.4 1.5 8.1
Japan -.2 5.5 5.3
Korea 9.6 5.2 15.3
New Zealand 3.1 -13.7 -11.1
Singapore 6.0 -1.7 4.1
Sri Lanka - - -
Taiwan 2.8 3.4 6.4
Europe
Austria 2.8 -13.3 -10.9
Belgium 1.9 -13.3 -11.7
Denmark 3.1 -13.7 -11.0
Finland 5.5 -13.3 -8.6
France 5.1 -13.3 -8.9
Germany, former West 3.5 -13.4 -10.3
Germany 2 3.5 -13.4 -10.3
Greece - - -
Ireland 6.1 -13.3 -8.2
Italy 1.8 -13.3 -11.7
Luxembourg 3.3 -13.3 -10.5
Netherlands 3.3 -13.3 -10.4
Norway 4.1 -11.4 -7.8
Portugal 2.5 -13.4 -11.2
Spain 3.4 -13.3 -10.4
Sweden 3.4 -9.8 -6.8
Switzerland 1.3 -10.9 -9.8
United Kingdom 2.8 -6.3 -3.6
Trade-weighted measures 3,4
All 28 foreign economies 4.1 -2.1 1.9
OECD 5 4.2 -2.6 1.5
less Mexico, Korea 6 2.3 -3.4 -1.3
Europe 3.3 -11.7 -8.8
Asian NIEs 5.2 2.3 7.7
1 Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of China.
2 Referred to as unified Germany in prior news releases.
3 Because data for Germany (referred to as unified Germany in prior news
releases) are not available before 1993, data for the former West Germany
only are included in the trade-weighted measures.
4 The 1999-2000 percent changes for the trade weighted measures are based
upon the changes for the countries or areas for which 2000 data are
available.
5 OECD refers to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
6 Mexico joined the OECD in 1994 and Korea joined in 1996.
In Mexico, compensation costs in U.S. dollars increased by 17.7 percent,
the largest percent increase among the 28 foreign economies studied. As in
1999, the Mexican peso remained stable relative to the U.S. dollar, and a sharp
upward trend in Mexican compensation costs in pesos led to the large increase.
Despite increases in the past two years, Mexican compensation costs were only 12
percent of the U.S. level in 2000. (See table A and chart 2.)
Continued weakening of the euro was primarily responsible for the lowest
compensation costs in Europe since 1993. Average costs in Europe were $18.50 in
2000, dropping from $20.36 in 1999. Compensation costs in all the European
countries fell in 2000, with the largest declines in Belgium and Italy (11.7
percent each), while costs in the United Kingdom, the European country with the
strongest currency relative to the U.S. dollar in 2000, dropped only 3.6
percent.
The former West Germany continued to have the highest compensation costs
of the 28 foreign economies at $24.01, 21 percent higher than those in the
United States. However, that gap has been narrowing dramatically in recent
years; the compensation costs in the former West Germany were 84 percent higher
than in the United States in 1995. In 1999, there were nine European countries
whose hourly compensation costs were more than 10 percent higher than the United
States; following steep declines in Europe in 2000, only Germany, the former
West Germany and Norway had costs 10 percent or more above the U.S. level. (See
chart 2.)
In contrast to Europe, compensation costs in the Asian NIEs rose strongly
in 2000 for the second consecutive year, increasing 7.7 percent. Compensation
costs in Korea in 2000 rose faster than in any other foreign economy studied
except Mexico, increasing 15.3 percent, following a 24.3 percent increase in
1999. Costs also increased in the remaining NIEs. Japanese costs increased 5.3
percent in 2000 due to the strength of the yen, resulting in costs 11 percent
higher than in the United States.
Chart 2. Indexes of hourly compensation costs in U.S. dollars for
for production workers in manufacturing, 1999
PRINTED COPY CONTAINS CHART AT THIS POINT.
Compensation costs expressed in national currencies
For U.S. competitors, compensation costs in national currency grew at a
higher rate in 2000 than in 1999. The trade-weighted average cost increased 4.1
percent for all 28 foreign economies in 2000 compared with 2.8 percent in 1999,
returning to the same rate of growth as in 1998. Excluding Mexico and Israel,
both of which historically have had high rates of growth, the trade-weighted
increase in compensation costs for the foreign economies was 2.8 percent in
2000. Although the 16.6 percent rise in Mexican costs was the highest increase
of all countries in 2000, it was the lowest compensation increase in that
country in five years.
Compensation costs in Asia increased for every economy, with the exception
of Japan. Costs grew fastest in Korea at 9.6 percent. In Singapore, costs
increased 6.0 percent, partially offsetting a 7.0 percent decline in 1999 that
was due to a sharp reduction in employer contribution rates to the national
pension plan. Compensation costs in Japan decreased by 0.2 percent, the second
consecutive year in which costs have declined in that country.
Compensation costs grew in Europe at a rate of 3.3 percent in 2000, rising
more than 3 percent for the first time in three years. Costs increased the most
in Ireland, Finland, and France, at rates of 6.1, 5.5, and 5.1 percent,
respectively. Compensation costs in Belgium, Italy, and Switzerland increased
by less than 2 percent.
Following the compensation cost growth rates in all regions in 1999, which
were the lowest in the 25 years covered by this series, growth rates accelerated
in 2000 and were pushed up to or above their 1998 levels. In particular, the
Asian NIEs saw renewed growth in compensation costs for 2000, with costs rising
5.2 percent, following an increase of only 1.1 percent in 1999. The increase in
Europe was less dramatic, with costs rising 3.3 percent, compared with 2.6
percent in 1999. Growth in the OECD countries was 4.2 percent in 2000,
approximately one percentage point higher than in 1999.
Exchange rates
Appreciation of the dollar against the currencies of most foreign
countries continued in 2000 and at a greater rate than in 1999. The trade-
weighted value of the currencies of the 28 foreign economies declined 2.1
percent against the dollar in 2000. However, currencies in Mexico, Japan,
Korea, Taiwan, and Israel increased in value. For Japan, Korea, and Taiwan,
2000 marked the second consecutive year of currency appreciation against the
dollar.
The currency values of the three largest U.S. trading partners in the
study (as measured by trade weights) either improved or showed no significant
change. The Japanese yen (the currency with the second largest trade weight)
appreciated 5.5 percent, while the Mexican peso (with the third largest trade
weight) increased in value by 1 percent. The largest trading partner in the
study, Canada, saw the value of its currency remain essentially the same.
The currencies of the Asian NIEs appreciated 2.3 percent on average
against the dollar in 2000, the second consecutive year of appreciation
following a 16.3 percent depreciation in 1998. The Korean won appreciated 5.2
percent, and the New Taiwan dollar appreciated 3.4 percent. Currencies in Hong
Kong and Singapore declined in value, but only slightly.
BOX: A NOTE ON EUROPEAN EXCHANGE RATES FOR 1999 AND 2000
On January 1, 1999, several European countries joined the European
Monetary Union (EMU): Austria, Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland,
Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal, and Spain. At the same time,
currencies of EMU members were established at fixed conversion rates to the
euro, the official currency of the EMU. Exchange rates between the national
currencies of EMU countries and the U.S. dollar are no longer reported; only the
exchange rate between the euro and the U.S. dollar is available.
In this news release, exchange rates for 1999 and 2000 in national
currencies are calculated for the EMU countries by taking the number of euros
per U.S. dollar and then converting euros into national currencies at the fixed
conversion rates. The following are the fixed conversion rates between national
currencies and the euro for the EMU countries in this release:
1 euro = 13.7603 Austrian Schillings
= 40.3399 Belgian Francs
= 5.94573 Finnish Markkas
= 6.55957 French Francs
= 1.95583 German Marks
= .787564 Irish Pounds
= 1936.27 Italian Lire
= 40.3399 Luxembourg Francs
= 2.20371 Netherlands Guilders
= 200.482 Portuguese Escudos
= 166.386 Spanish Pesetas
In 1999, 1 euro was equal to 1.0653 U.S. dollars. In 2000, 1 euro was equal to
0.9232 U.S. dollars.
END OF BOX (A NOTE ON EUROPEAN EXCHANGE RATES FOR 1999 AND 2000)
The European currencies continued to depreciate against the U.S. dollar in
2000, falling a trade-weighted average of 11.7 percent. As in 1997, 1998, and
1999, the British pound remained the strongest European currency in 2000,
declining only 6.3 percent against the dollar. The currencies pegged to the
euro declined a little more than 13 percent from 1999 to 2000; the largest
decline in Europe occurred in Denmark (13.7 percent).
The movements of the foreign currencies relative to the U.S. dollar in
2000 had a significant influence on hourly compensation costs measured in U.S.
dollars. Hourly compensation costs on a national currency basis in the 28
foreign economies rose 4.1 percent, but, when adjusted for a 2.1 percent
depreciation of the foreign currencies against the U.S. dollar, those costs
increased only 1.9 percent. The effect that exchange rate changes can have on
hourly compensation costs is particularly evident when comparing European labor
costs with those of the Asian NIEs. On a national currency basis, the increase
in hourly compensation costs in 2000 was only 2 percentage points higher in the
Asian NIEs than in Europe. When costs are adjusted for changes in exchange
rates in the two regions, however, costs in the Asian NIEs increased 7.7
percent, while costs in Europe declined 8.8 percent.
Additional data available
In addition to the compensation cost measures covered in this news
release, data are available for comparative levels of hourly compensation costs,
hourly direct pay, pay for time worked, and the structure of compensation in
manufacturing for all years from 1975 through 2000.
BLS also computes comparative measures for 39 component manufacturing
industries. Data through 1998 are available upon request and via the Internet
(http://www.bls.gov/flshome.htm). Data for the component industries are not
included in this release; in general, the data limitations for them are greater
than for total manufacturing.
For further information, contact the Office of Productivity and
Technology, Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2 Massachusetts Avenue, NE, Room 2150,
Washington, DC 20212, or call
202-691-5654.
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.
This material is in the public domain and, with appropriate credit, may be
reproduced without permission. It may be translated into foreign languages
without permission, with a separate credit for the translation.
BOX: REVISED MEASURES
The hourly compensation measures are subject to revision in future updates. In
this update, revisions of particular note were made for the following countries:
Data for Belgium were revised back to 1993 with the incorporation of 1996 labor
cost survey data.
For Germany, data were revised back to 1993 (1975 for the former West Germany)
to incorporate information available in a new earnings survey begun in October
1999. Additional revisions were made back to 1993 with the incorporation of new
data on pay for time not worked and social insurance contributions.
For Ireland, revisions were made back to 1975 with the incorporation of earnings
data on a new industrial classification, NACE Rev. 1.
For Luxembourg, revisions were made back to 1995 with the incorporation of new
earnings data.
BLS recently received 1996 labor cost survey data from the Statistical Office of
the European Communities (EUROSTAT) and is in the process of reviewing the data
for incorporation into a future news release. Because 1996 labor cost survey
data were available earlier from national statistical offices, data for Germany
and Ireland were incorporated in prior BLS updates, and data for Belgium were
incorporated in this update.
END OF BOX (REVISED MEASURES)
Table 1. Indexes of hourly compensation costs in U.S. dollars for production workers
in manufacturing, 29 countries or areas and selected economic groups, selected years, 1975-2000
Country or area 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 1997 1998 1999 2000
North America
United States ......... 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
Canada ................ 94 88 84 107 94 90 84 82 81
Mexico ................ 23 22 12 11 9 10 10 11 12
Asia and Oceania
Australia ............. 88 86 63 88 89 91 80 82 71
Hong Kong SAR 1 ....... 12 15 13 22 28 30 29 29 28
Israel ................ 35 38 31 57 61 66 65 62 65
Japan ................. 47 56 49 86 139 107 98 109 111
Korea ................. 5 10 10 25 42 43 31 37 41
New Zealand ........... 50 53 34 55 58 59 49 48 41
Singapore ............. 13 15 19 25 43 45 42 37 37
Sri Lanka ............. 4 2 2 2 3 3 3 2 -
Taiwan ................ 6 10 12 26 35 32 28 29 30
Europe
Austria ............... 71 90 58 119 147 120 120 114 98
Belgium ............... 101 133 69 129 161 131 131 125 106
Denmark ............... 99 110 63 121 140 121 122 120 103
Finland ............... 73 84 63 141 140 117 117 112 98
France ................ 71 91 58 104 116 99 98 94 83
Germany, former West.. 99 124 73 146 184 151 148 140 121
Germany 2 ............. - - - - 176 144 141 134 116
Greece ................ 27 38 28 45 53 50 48 - -
Ireland ............... 48 61 46 79 80 76 73 71 63
Italy ................. 73 83 59 117 94 96 92 87 74
Luxembourg ............ 102 122 60 112 132 103 101 98 84
Netherlands ........... 104 122 67 121 140 114 115 112 96
Norway ................ 106 117 80 144 142 130 126 125 111
Portugal .............. 25 21 12 25 31 29 30 28 24
Spain ................. 40 60 36 76 75 67 65 63 55
Sweden ................ 113 127 74 140 125 122 119 113 101
Switzerland ........... 96 112 74 140 170 132 131 123 107
United Kingdom ........ 53 77 48 85 80 84 88 86 80
Trade-weighted measures 3,4
All 28 foreign economies 60 67 52 83 95 84 79 80 76
OECD 5 ................ 67 74 57 90 103 90 85 86 82
less Mexico, Korea 6 76 84 65 104 119 103 98 99 93
Europe ................ 80 100 61 116 128 112 111 107 93
Asian NIEs ............ 8 12 13 25 37 37 32 33 34
Dash means data not available.
1 Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of China.
2 Referred to as unified Germany in prior news releases.
3 Because data for Germany (referred to as unified Germany in prior news releases)
are not available before 1993, data for the former West Germany only are included
in the trade-weighted measures.
4 For description of trade-weighted measures and economic groups,
see the Technical Notes preceding these tables.
5 Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
6 Mexico joined the OECD in 1994, and Korea joined in 1996.
Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, September 2001.
Table 2. Hourly compensation costs in U.S. dollars for production workers in manufacturing,
29 countries or areas and selected economic groups, selected years, 1975-2000
Country or area 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 1997 1998 1999 2000
North America
United States ......... $6.36 $9.87 $13.01 $14.91 $17.19 $18.27 $18.59 $19.11 $19.86
Canada ................ 5.96 8.67 10.95 15.95 16.10 16.47 15.60 15.65 16.16
Mexico ................ 1.47 2.21 1.59 1.58 1.51 1.78 1.84 2.09 2.46
Asia and Oceania
Australia ............. 5.62 8.47 8.20 13.07 15.27 16.58 14.92 15.66 14.15
Hong Kong SAR 1 ....... .76 1.51 1.73 3.20 4.82 5.42 5.47 5.44 5.53
Israel ................ 2.25 3.79 4.06 8.55 10.54 12.04 12.02 11.91 12.88
Japan ................. 3.00 5.52 6.34 12.80 23.82 19.54 18.29 20.89 22.00
Korea ................. .32 .96 1.23 3.71 7.29 7.86 5.67 7.05 8.13
New Zealand ........... 3.15 5.22 4.38 8.17 9.91 10.80 9.01 9.14 8.13
Singapore ............. .84 1.49 2.47 3.78 7.33 8.24 7.77 7.13 7.42
Sri Lanka ............. .28 .22 .28 .35 .48 .46 .47 .46 -
Taiwan ................ .40 1.00 1.50 3.93 5.94 5.91 5.27 5.62 5.98
Europe
Austria ............... 4.51 8.88 7.58 17.75 25.32 21.97 22.21 21.85 19.46
Belgium ............... 6.41 13.11 8.97 19.17 27.62 23.98 24.31 23.92 21.11
Denmark ............... 6.28 10.83 8.13 18.04 24.07 22.03 22.69 22.96 20.44
Finland ............... 4.61 8.24 8.16 21.03 24.10 21.32 21.66 21.33 19.50
France ................ 4.52 8.94 7.52 15.49 20.01 17.99 18.28 17.98 16.38
Germany, former West.. 6.29 12.21 9.50 21.81 31.58 27.54 27.43 26.76 24.01
Germany 2 ............. - - - - 30.26 26.36 26.28 25.64 22.99
Greece ................ 1.69 3.73 3.66 6.76 9.17 9.20 8.91 - -
Ireland ............... 3.05 6.03 5.99 11.81 13.78 13.83 13.58 13.61 12.50
Italy ................. 4.67 8.15 7.63 17.45 16.22 17.57 17.11 16.60 14.66
Luxembourg ............ 6.50 12.03 7.81 16.74 22.62 18.74 18.70 18.65 16.69
Netherlands ........... 6.58 12.06 8.75 18.06 24.12 20.82 21.40 21.30 19.08
Norway ................ 6.77 11.59 10.37 21.47 24.38 23.72 23.50 23.91 22.05
Portugal .............. 1.58 2.06 1.53 3.77 5.37 5.38 5.48 5.35 4.75
Spain ................. 2.53 5.89 4.66 11.38 12.88 12.24 12.14 12.11 10.85
Sweden ................ 7.18 12.51 9.66 20.93 21.44 22.22 22.02 21.60 20.14
Switzerland ........... 6.09 11.09 9.66 20.86 29.30 24.19 24.38 23.56 21.24
United Kingdom ........ 3.37 7.56 6.27 12.70 13.67 15.42 16.39 16.48 15.88
Trade-weighted measures 3,4
All 28 foreign economies 3.83 6.59 6.74 12.35 16.38 15.30 14.75 15.27 15.16
OECD 5 ................ 4.25 7.30 7.39 13.48 17.74 16.46 15.88 16.48 16.31
less Mexico, Korea 6 4.82 8.30 8.48 15.54 20.39 18.80 18.23 18.83 18.52
Europe ................ 5.09 9.90 7.96 17.30 22.03 20.45 20.67 20.36 18.50
Asian NIEs ............ .52 1.17 1.65 3.72 6.41 6.83 5.91 6.29 6.79
Dash means data not available.
1 Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of China.
2 Referred to as unified Germany in prior news releases.
3 Because data for Germany (referred to as unified Germany in prior news releases)
are not available before 1993, data for the former West Germany only are included
in the trade-weighted measures.
4 For description of trade-weighted measures and economic groups,
see the Technical Notes preceding these tables.
5 Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
6 Mexico joined the OECD in 1994, and Korea joined in 1996.
Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, September 2001.
Table 3. Annual percent change in hourly compensation costs in U.S. dollars for production workers
in manufacturing, 29 countries or areas and selected economic groups, selected periods, 1975-2000
Country or area 1975- 1975- 1980- 1985- 1990- 1995- 1998 1999 2000
2000 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
North America
United States ......... 4.7 9.2 5.7 2.8 2.9 2.9 1.8 2.8 3.9
Canada ................ 4.1 7.8 4.8 7.8 .2 .1 -5.3 .3 3.3
Mexico ................ 2.1 8.5 -6.4 -.1 -.9 10.3 3.4 13.6 17.7
Asia and Oceania
Australia ............. 3.8 8.5 -.6 9.8 3.2 -1.5 -10.0 5.0 -9.6
Hong Kong SAR 1 ....... 8.3 14.7 2.8 13.1 8.5 2.8 .9 -.5 1.7
Israel ................ 7.2 11.0 1.4 16.1 4.3 4.1 -.2 -.9 8.1
Japan ................. 8.3 13.0 2.8 15.1 13.2 -1.6 -6.4 14.2 5.3
Korea ................. 13.8 24.6 5.1 24.7 14.5 2.2 -27.9 24.3 15.3
New Zealand ........... 3.9 10.6 -3.4 13.3 3.9 -3.9 -16.6 1.4 -11.1
Singapore ............. 9.1 12.1 10.6 8.9 14.2 .2 -5.7 -8.2 4.1
Sri Lanka .............(2)2.1 -4.7 4.9 4.6 6.5 - 2.2 -2.1 -
Taiwan ................ 11.4 20.1 8.4 21.2 8.6 .1 -10.8 6.6 6.4
Europe
Austria ............... 6.0 14.5 -3.1 18.6 7.4 -5.1 1.1 -1.6 -10.9
Belgium ............... 4.9 15.4 -7.3 16.4 7.6 -5.2 1.4 -1.6 -11.7
Denmark ............... 4.8 11.5 -5.6 17.3 5.9 -3.2 3.0 1.2 -11.0
Finland ............... 5.9 12.3 -.2 20.8 2.8 -4.1 1.6 -1.5 -8.6
France ................ 5.3 14.6 -3.4 15.5 5.3 -3.9 1.6 -1.6 -8.9
Germany, former West .. 5.5 14.2 -4.9 18.1 7.7 -5.3 -.4 -2.4 -10.3
Germany 3 ............. - - - - - -5.3 -.3 -2.4 -10.3
Greece ................(2)7.5 17.2 -.4 13.1 6.3 - -3.2 - -
Ireland ............... 5.8 14.6 -.1 14.5 3.1 -1.9 -1.8 .2 -8.2
Italy ................. 4.7 11.8 -1.3 18.0 -1.5 -2.0 -2.6 -3.0 -11.7
Luxembourg ............ 3.8 13.1 -8.3 16.5 6.2 -5.9 -.2 -.3 -10.5
Netherlands ........... 4.4 12.9 -6.2 15.6 6.0 -4.6 2.8 -.5 -10.4
Norway ................ 4.8 11.4 -2.2 15.7 2.6 -2.0 -.9 1.7 -7.8
Portugal .............. 4.5 5.4 -5.8 19.8 7.3 -2.4 1.9 -2.4 -11.2
Spain ................. 6.0 18.4 -4.6 19.6 2.5 -3.4 -.8 -.2 -10.4
Sweden ................ 4.2 11.7 -5.0 16.7 .5 -1.2 -.9 -1.9 -6.8
Switzerland ........... 5.1 12.7 -2.7 16.6 7.0 -6.2 .8 -3.4 -9.8
United Kingdom ........ 6.4 17.5 -3.7 15.2 1.5 3.0 6.3 .5 -3.6
Trade-weighted measures 4,5
All 28 foreign economies 6.2 12.5 1.0 12.8 5.7 .0 -3.9 4.9 1.9
less Mexico, Israel 6.6 13.0 1.7 14.1 6.4 -1.1 -4.7 4.1 .2
OECD 6 ................ 5.7 12.0 .1 12.4 5.1 -.1 -3.6 5.5 1.5
less Mexico, Korea 7 5.7 11.8 .7 13.3 5.4 -1.5 -3.2 3.4 -1.3
Europe ................ 5.4 14.5 -4.1 16.7 4.4 -2.8 1.4 -1.4 -8.8
Asian NIEs ............ 11.1 18.9 7.0 18.4 11.3 1.2 -12.6 7.5 7.7
Rates of change based on compound rate method.
Dash means data not available.
1 Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of China.
2 1975-99 for Sri Lanka; 1975-98 for Greece.
3 Referred to as unified Germany in prior news releases.
4 Because data for Germany (referred to as unified Germany in prior news releases)
are not available before 1993, data for the former West Germany only are included
in the trade-weighted measures.
5 Trade-weighted percent changes computed as the trade-weighted
average of the rates of change for the individual countries or areas.
For description of trade-weighted measures and economic groups,
see the Technical Notes preceding these tables.
6 Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
7 Mexico joined the OECD in 1994, and Korea joined in 1996
Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, September 2001.
Table 4. Hourly compensation costs in national currency for production workers in manufacturing,
29 countries or areas, selected years, 1975-2000
Country or area 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 1997 1998 1999 2000
North America
United States ......... 6.36 9.87 13.01 14.91 17.19 18.27 18.59 19.11 19.86
Canada ................ 6.06 10.13 14.95 18.62 22.10 22.81 23.15 23.26 24.02
Mexico ................ 18 51 409 4440 9.69 14.12 16.84 19.98 23.30
Asia and Oceania
Australia ............. 4.30 7.43 11.70 16.74 20.62 22.30 23.73 24.26 24.35
Hong Kong SAR 1 ...... 3.73 7.50 13.46 24.91 37.30 41.99 42.39 42.20 43.06
Israel ................ 1.44 19.42 4.79 17.24 31.73 41.52 45.67 49.32 52.50
Japan ................. 889 1245 1512 1856 2238 2367 2396 2375 2371
Korea ................. 157 583 1074 2623 5620 7471 7936 8391 9200
New Zealand ........... 2.60 5.37 8.80 13.70 15.10 16.29 16.79 17.26 17.80
Singapore ............. 2.00 3.20 5.43 6.85 10.39 12.25 12.99 12.08 12.80
Sri Lanka ............. 1.97 3.58 7.58 14.05 24.45 26.86 30.10 32.60 -
Taiwan ................ 15.17 36.13 59.60 105.69 157.30 169.96 176.88 181.72 186.84
Europe
Austria ............... 78.46 114.78 156.75 201.07 255.24 268.20 274.97 282.31 290.08
Belgium ...............235.10 382.88 532.39 640.60 814.04 858.84 882.83 905.68 922.54
Denmark ............... 36.00 60.98 86.18 111.65 134.77 145.60 152.11 160.49 165.50
Finland ............... 16.88 30.64 50.56 80.56 105.47 110.78 115.81 119.02 125.57
France ................ 19.34 37.73 67.49 84.38 99.77 105.05 107.88 110.71 116.37
Germany, former West 15.43 22.17 27.95 35.27 45.23 47.78 48.28 49.14 50.87
Germany 2 ............. - - - - 43.33 45.74 46.26 47.08 48.71
Greece ................ 55 159 506 1071 2124 2514 2632 - -
Ireland ............... 1.37 2.93 5.62 7.13 8.59 9.12 9.53 10.06 10.67
Italy ................. 3048 6966 14563 20900 26425 29945 29714 30186 30739
Luxembourg ........... 239 352 464 559 667 670 679 706 729
Netherlands ........... 16.59 23.93 29.04 32.90 38.69 40.66 42.46 44.07 45.54
Norway ................ 35.29 57.20 89.11 134.26 154.44 168.10 177.46 186.67 194.35
Portugal .............. 40.26 103.28 263.37 538.11 804.35 943.62 988.13 1007.08 1032.05
Spain ................. 145 422 792 1161 1604 1793 1814 1891 1956
Sweden ................ 29.73 52.91 83.12 123.98 153.14 169.87 175.11 178.73 184.77
Switzerland ........... 15.72 18.57 23.71 29.00 34.61 35.10 35.37 35.45 35.90
United Kingdom ....... 1.52 3.25 4.84 7.12 8.66 9.42 9.89 10.19 10.48
For currency units, see note to table 6.
Dash means data not available.
1 Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of China.
2 Referred to as unified Germany in prior news releases.
Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, September 2001.
Table 5. Annual percent change in hourly compensation costs in national currency for
production workers in manufacturing, 29 countries or areas and selected economic
groups, selected periods, 1975-2000
Country or area 1975- 1975- 1980- 1985- 1990- 1995- 1998 1999 2000
2000 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
North America
United States ......... 4.7 9.2 5.7 2.8 2.9 2.9 1.8 2.8 3.9
Canada ................ 5.7 10.8 8.1 4.5 3.5 1.7 1.5 .5 3.3
Mexico ................ 33.2 23.2 51.6 61.1 16.9 19.2 19.3 18.6 16.6
Asia and Oceania
Australia ............. 7.2 11.6 9.5 7.4 4.3 3.4 6.4 2.2 .4
Hong Kong SAR 1 ....... 10.3 15.0 12.4 13.1 8.4 2.9 1.0 -.4 2.0
Israel ................ 52.2 68.3 200.9 29.2 13.0 10.6 10.0 8.0 6.4
Japan ................. 4.0 7.0 4.0 4.2 3.8 1.2 1.2 -.9 -.2
Korea ................. 17.7 30.0 13.0 19.6 16.5 10.4 6.2 5.7 9.6
New Zealand ........... 8.0 15.6 10.4 9.3 2.0 3.3 3.1 2.8 3.1
Singapore ............. 7.7 9.9 11.2 4.8 8.7 4.3 6.0 -7.0 6.0
Sri Lanka ............(2)12.4 12.7 16.2 13.1 11.7 - 12.1 8.3 -
Taiwan ................ 10.6 19.0 10.5 12.1 8.3 3.5 4.1 2.7 2.8
Europe
Austria ............... 5.4 7.9 6.4 5.1 4.9 2.6 2.5 2.7 2.8
Belgium ............... 5.6 10.2 6.8 3.8 4.9 2.5 2.8 2.6 1.9
Denmark ............... 6.3 11.1 7.2 5.3 3.8 4.2 4.5 5.5 3.1
Finland ............... 8.4 12.7 10.5 9.8 5.5 3.6 4.5 2.8 5.5
France ................ 7.4 14.3 12.3 4.6 3.4 3.1 2.7 2.6 5.1
Germany, former West .. 4.9 7.5 4.7 4.8 5.1 2.4 1.0 1.8 3.5
Germany 3 ............. - - - - - 2.4 1.1 1.8 3.5
Greece ...............(2)18.3 23.7 26.1 16.2 14.7 - 4.7 - -
Ireland ............... 8.6 16.4 13.9 4.9 3.8 4.4 4.5 5.6 6.1
Italy ................. 9.7 18.0 15.9 7.5 4.8 3.1 -.8 1.6 1.8
Luxembourg ............ 4.6 8.1 5.7 3.8 3.6 2 1.3 4.0 3.3
Netherlands ........... 4.1 7.6 3.9 2.5 3.3 3.3 4.4 3.8 3.3
Norway ................ 7.1 10.1 9.3 8.5 2.8 4.7 5.6 5.2 4.1
Portugal .............. 13.9 20.7 20.6 15.4 8.4 5 4.7 1.9 2.5
Spain ................. 11.0 23.8 13.4 7.9 6.7 4.0 1.2 4.2 3.4
Sweden ................ 7.6 12.2 9.5 8.3 4.3 3.8 3.1 2.1 3.4
Switzerland ........... 3.4 3.4 5.0 4.1 3.6 .7 .8 .2 1.3
United Kingdom ........ 8.0 16.4 8.3 8.0 4.0 3.9 5.0 3.0 2.8
Trade-weighted measures 4,5
All 28 foreign economies 9.7 13.6 14.0 11.7 6.3 4.3 4.1 2.8 4.1
less Mexico, Israel 6.8 12.0 8.0 6.4 5.1 2.7 2.4 1.0 2.8
OECD 6 ................ 9.2 12.8 12.3 11.7 5.9 4.4 4.0 3.1 4.2
less Mexico, Korea 7 5.7 10.5 7.3 5.0 3.9 2.1 2.0 1.0 2.3
Europe ................ 6.8 12.4 8.7 5.8 4.4 3.1 2.6 2.6 3.3
Asian NIEs ............ 11.9 19.6 11.6 12.9 10.7 5.5 4.5 1.1 5.2
Rates of change based on compound rate method.
Dash means data not available.
1 Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of China.
2 1975-99 for Sri Lanka; 1975-98 for Greece.
3 Referred to as unified Germany in prior news releases.
4 Because data for Germany (referred to as unified Germany in prior news releases)
are not available before 1993, data for the former West Germany only are included
in the trade-weighted measures.
5 Trade-weighted percent changes computed as the trade-weighted
average of the rates of change for the individual countries or areas.
For description of trade-weighted measures and economic groups,
see the Technical Notes preceding these tables.
6 Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
7 Mexico joined the OECD in 1994, and Korea joined in 1996
Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, September 2001.
Table 6. Exchange rates, 29 countries or areas, selected years, 1975-2000
(National currency units per U.S. dollar)
Country or area 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 1997 1998 1999 2000
North America
United States ......... 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Canada ................ 1.017 1.169 1.366 1.167 1.373 1.385 1.484 1.486 1.486
Mexico ................ 12.50 22.97 256.9 2813 6.419 7.918 9.152 9.553 9.459
Asia and Oceania
Australia ............. .7647 .8772 1.428 1.281 1.350 1.345 1.590 1.549 1.720
Hong Kong SAR 1 .... 4.939 4.976 7.791 7.790 7.736 7.743 7.747 7.759 7.792
Israel ................ .6390 5.124 1.179 2.016 3.011 3.449 3.800 4.140 4.077
Japan ................. 296.7 225.7 238.5 145.0 93.96 121.1 131.0 113.7 107.8
Korea ................. 484.0 607.4 870.0 707.8 771.3 950.8 1400 1190 1131
New Zealand ........... .8254 1.027 2.010 1.677 1.524 1.509 1.865 1.889 2.189
Singapore ............. 2.371 2.141 2.200 1.813 1.417 1.486 1.672 1.695 1.725
Sri Lanka ............. 7.050 16.53 27.16 40.06 51.25 59.00 64.45 70.64 -
Taiwan ................ 38.00 36.02 39.85 26.92 26.50 28.78 33.55 32.32 31.26
Europe
Austria ............... 17.40 12.93 20.68 11.33 10.08 12.21 12.38 12.92 14.91
Belgium ............... 36.69 29.20 59.34 33.42 29.47 35.81 36.31 37.87 43.70
Denmark ............... 5.735 5.629 10.60 6.190 5.600 6.609 6.703 6.990 8.095
Finland ............... 3.665 3.719 6.197 3.830 4.376 5.196 5.347 5.581 6.440
France ................ 4.282 4.220 8.980 5.447 4.986 5.839 5.900 6.157 7.105
Germany, former West 2.455 1.815 2.942 1.617 1.432 1.735 1.760 1.836 2.119
Germany 2 ............. - - - - 1.432 1.735 1.760 1.836 2.119
Greece ................ 32.29 42.62 138.1 158.5 231.7 273.1 295.5 - -
Ireland ............... .4500 .4860 .9379 .6033 .6236 .6595 .7019 .7393 .8531
Italy ................. 652.4 855.1 1909 1198 1629 1704 1737 1818 2097
Luxembourg ............ 36.78 29.24 59.38 33.42 29.48 35.77 36.30 37.87 43.70
Netherlands ........... 2.523 1.985 3.318 1.822 1.604 1.953 1.984 2.069 2.387
Norway ................ 5.214 4.936 8.593 6.254 6.336 7.086 7.552 7.807 8.813
Portugal .............. 25.45 50.05 172.1 142.7 149.9 175.4 180.3 188.2 217.2
Spain ................. 57.39 71.64 170.0 102.0 124.6 146.5 149.4 156.2 180.2
Sweden ................ 4.142 4.229 8.603 5.923 7.141 7.645 7.952 8.274 9.174
Switzerland ........... 2.581 1.675 2.455 1.390 1.181 1.451 1.451 1.505 1.690
United Kingdom ........ .4501 .4300 .7708 .5605 .6335 .6106 .6034 .6184 .6598
1 Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of China.
2 Referred to as unified Germany in prior news releases.
Note: National currency units are: United States, dollar; Canada, dollar;
Mexico, peso; Australia, dollar; Hong Kong, dollar; Israel, shekel (1975-84),
new shekel (1985-2000); Japan, yen; Korea, won; New Zealand, dollar;
Singapore, dollar; Sri Lanka, rupee; Taiwan, dollar; Austria, schilling;
Belgium, franc; Denmark, krone; Finland, markka; France, franc;
Germany, mark; Greece, drachma; Ireland, pound; Italy, lira; Luxembourg, franc;
Netherlands, guilder; Norway, krone; Portugal, escudo; Spain, peseta; Sweden, krona;
Switzerland, franc; United Kingdom, pound.
Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, September 2001.
Table 7. Annual percent change in exchange rates (U.S. dollars per national currency unit),
29 countries or areas and selected economic groups, selected years, 1975-2000
Country or area 1975- 1975- 1980- 1985- 1990- 1995- 1998 1999 2000
2000 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
North America
United States ......... - - - - - - - - -
Canada ................ -1.5 -2.7 -3.1 3.2 -3.2 -1.6 -6.7 -.1 .0
Mexico ................ -23.3 -11.5 -38.3 -38.0 -15.2 -7.5 -13.5 -4.2 1.0
Asia and Oceania
Australia ............. -3.2 -2.7 -9.3 2.2 -1.0 -4.7 -15.4 2.6 -9.9
Hong Kong SAR 1 ....... -1.8 -.1 -8.6 .0 .1 -.1 -.1 -.2 -.4
Israel ................ -29.6 -34.1 -66.3 -10.2 -7.7 -5.9 -9.2 -8.2 1.5
Japan ................. 4.1 5.6 -1.1 10.5 9.1 -2.7 -7.6 15.2 5.5
Korea ................. -3.3 -4.4 -6.9 4.2 -1.7 -7.4 -32.1 17.6 5.2
New Zealand ........... -3.8 -4.3 -12.6 3.7 1.9 -7.0 -19.1 -1.3 -13.7
Singapore ............. 1.3 2.1 -.5 3.9 5.1 -3.9 -11.1 -1.4 -1.7
Sri Lanka ............(2)-9.2 -15.7 -9.5 -7.5 -4.8 - -8.5 -8.8 -
Taiwan ................ .8 1.1 -2.0 8.2 .3 -3.2 -14.2 3.8 3.4
Europe
Austria ............... .6 6.1 -9.0 12.8 2.4 -7.5 -1.4 -4.2 -13.3
Belgium ............... -.7 4.7 -13.2 12.2 2.5 -7.6 -1.4 -4.1 -13.3
Denmark ............... -1.4 .4 -11.9 11.4 2.0 -7.1 -1.4 -4.1 -13.7
Finland ............... -2.2 -.3 -9.7 10.1 -2.6 -7.4 -2.8 -4.2 -13.3
France ................ -2.0 .3 -14.0 10.5 1.8 -6.8 -1.0 -4.2 -13.3
Germany, former West .. .6 6.2 -9.2 12.7 2.5 -7.5 -1.4 -4.1 -13.4
Germany 3 ............. - - - - - -7.5 -1.4 -4.1 -13.4
Greece ...............(2)-9.2 -5.4 -21.0 -2.7 -7.3 - -7.6 - -
Ireland ............... -2.5 -1.5 -12.3 9.2 -.7 -6.1 -6.0 -5.1 -13.3
Italy ................. -4.6 -5.3 -14.8 9.8 -6.0 -4.9 -1.9 -4.5 -13.3
Luxembourg ............ -.7 4.7 -13.2 12.2 2.5 -7.6 -1.5 -4.1 -13.3
Netherlands ........... .2 4.9 -9.8 12.7 2.6 -7.6 -1.6 -4.1 -13.3
Norway ................ -2.1 1.1 -10.5 6.6 -.3 -6.4 -6.2 -3.3 -11.4
Portugal .............. -8.2 -12.7 -21.9 3.8 -1.0 -7 -2.7 -4.2 -13.4
Spain ................. -4.5 -4.3 -15.9 10.8 -3.9 -7.1 -1.9 -4.4 -13.3
Sweden ................ -3.1 -.4 -13.2 7.8 -3.7 -4.9 -3.9 -3.9 -9.8
Switzerland ........... 1.7 9.0 -7.4 12.0 3.3 -6.9 .0 -3.6 -10.9
United Kingdom ........ -1.5 .9 -11.0 6.6 -2.4 -.8 1.2 -2.4 -6.3
Trade-weighted measures 4,5
All 28 foreign economies -2.6 -.5 -9.4 2.9 -.4 -4.0 -7.6 2.3 -2.1
less Mexico, Israel -.1 1.0 -5.8 7.3 1.2 -3.7 -6.9 3.1 -2.5
OECD 6 ................ -2.7 -.3 -9.6 2.8 -.6 -4.2 -7.2 2.5 -2.6
less Mexico, Korea 7 .0 1.3 -6.1 7.9 1.4 -3.6 -5.0 2.5 -3.4
Europe ................ -1.3 2.0 -11.7 10.3 .0 -5.7 -1.2 -3.8 -11.7
Asian NIEs ............ -.7 -.5 -4.2 4.9 .7 -4.0 -16.3 6.0 2.3
Rates of change based on compound rate method.
Dash means data not available.
1 Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of China.
2 1975-99 for Sri Lanka; 1975-98 for Greece.
3 Referred to as unified Germany in prior news releases.
4 Because data for Germany (referred to as unified Germany in prior news releases)
are not available before 1993, data for the former West Germany only are included
in the trade-weighted measures.
5 Trade-weighted percent changes computed as the trade-weighted
average of the rates of change for the individual countries or areas.
For description of trade-weighted measures and economic groups,
see the Technical Notes preceding these tables.
6 Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
7 Mexico joined the OECD in 1994, and Korea joined in 1996
Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, September 2001.
TECHNICAL NOTES
The tables in this news release present international comparisons of hourly
compensation costs for production workers in manufacturing in selected countries
or areas. The total compensation measures are prepared by the Bureau of Labor
Statistics in order to assess international differences in employer labor costs.
Comparisons based on the more readily available average earnings statistics
published by many countries can be very misleading. National definitions of
average earnings differ considerably; average earnings do not include all items
of labor compensation; and the omitted items of compensation frequently
represent a large proportion of total compensation.
The compensation measures are computed in national currency units and are
converted into U.S. dollars at prevailing commercial market currency exchange
rates. The foreign currency exchange rates used in the calculations are the
average daily exchange rates for the reference period. They are appropriate
measures for comparing levels of employer labor costs. They do not indicate
relative living standards of workers or the purchasing power of their income.
Prices of goods and services vary greatly among countries, and commercial market
exchange rates are not reliable indicators of relative differences in prices.
Definitions
Hourly compensation costs include (1) hourly direct pay and (2) employer social
insurance expenditures and other labor taxes. Hourly direct pay includes all
payments made directly to the worker, before payroll deductions of any kind,
consisting of (a) pay for time worked (basic time and piece rates plus overtime
premiums, shift differentials, other premiums and bonuses paid regularly each
pay period, and cost-of-living adjustments) and (b) other direct pay (pay for
time not worked (vacations, holidays, and other leave, except sick leave),
seasonal or irregular bonuses and other special payments, selected social
allowances, and the cost of payments in kind). Social insurance expenditures
and other labor taxes include (c) employer expenditures for legally required
insurance programs and contractual and private benefit plans (retirement and
disability pensions, health insurance, income guarantee insurance and sick
leave, life and accident insurance, occupational injury and illness
compensation, unemployment insurance, and family allowances) and, for some
countries, (d) other labor taxes (other taxes on payrolls or employment (or
reductions to reflect subsidies), even if they do not finance programs that
directly benefit workers, because such taxes are regarded as labor costs). For
consistency, compensation is measured on an hours-worked basis for every
country.
The BLS definition of hourly compensation costs is not the same as the
International Labour Office (ILO) definition of total labor costs. Hourly
compensation costs do not include all items of labor costs. The costs of
recruitment, employee training, and plant facilities and services(such as
cafeterias and medical clinics(are not included because data are not available
for most countries. The labor costs not included account for no more than 4
percent of total labor costs in any country for which the data are available.
Production workers generally include those employees who are engaged in
fabricating, assembly, and related activities; material handling, warehousing,
and shipping; maintenance and repair; janitorial and guard services; auxiliary
production (for example, powerplants); and other services closely related to the
above activities. Working supervisors are generally included; apprentices and
other trainees are generally excluded.
Methods
Total compensation is computed by adjusting each country's average earnings
series for items of direct pay not included in earnings and for employer
expenditures for legally required insurance, contractual and private benefit
plans, and other labor taxes. For the United States and other countries that
measure earnings on an hours-paid basis, the figures are also adjusted in order
to approximate compensation per hour worked.
Earnings statistics are obtained from surveys of employment, hours, and earnings
or from surveys or censuses of manufactures.
Adjustment factors are obtained from periodic labor cost surveys and
interpolated or projected to nonsurvey years on the basis of other information
for most countries. The information used includes annual tabulations of
employer social security contribution rates provided by the International
Studies Staff of the U.S. Social Security Administration, information on
contractual and legislated fringe benefit changes from ILO and national labor
bulletins, and statistical series on indirect labor costs. For other countries,
adjustment factors are obtained from surveys or censuses of manufactures or from
reports on fringe-benefit systems and social security. For the United States,
the adjustment factors are special calculations for international comparisons
based on data from several surveys.
The statistics are also adjusted, where necessary, to account for major
differences in worker coverage; differences in industrial classification
systems; and changes over time in survey coverage, sample benchmarks, or
frequency of surveys. Nevertheless, some differences in industrial coverage
remain and, with the exception of the United States, Canada, and several other
countries, the data exclude very small establishments (less than 5 employees in
Japan and less than 10 employees in most European and some other countries).
For the United States, the methods used, as well as the results, differ somewhat
from those for other BLS series on U.S. compensation costs.
Hourly compensation costs are converted to U.S. dollars using the average daily
exchange rate for the reference period. The exchange rates used are prevailing
commercial market exchange rates as published by either the U.S. Federal Reserve
Board or the International Monetary Fund.
For further details on survey sources and on special estimation procedures for
some countries because of incomplete data, see International Comparisons of
Hourly Compensation Costs for Production Workers in Manufacturing, 1995 (Report
909, Bureau of Labor Statistics, September 1996).
Country notes
The following are exceptions to the standard coverage and definitions explained
above:
Australia. Compensation relates to production workers and nonproduction workers
other than those in managerial, executive, professional, and higher supervisory
positions.
Hong Kong SAR. Average of selected manufacturing industries. The industries
covered accounted for about 70 percent of all persons employed in manufacturing
in 1988. Compensation excludes overtime pay. Hong Kong became a Special
Administrative Region (SAR) of China in July 1997.
Austria. Excludes workers in establishments considered handicraft
manufacturers. (All printing and publishing and miscellaneous manufacturing
establishments are classified in handicrafts.) In 1986, handicraft employment
was about 35 percent of all manufacturing employment. Average compensation per
employee was about 10 percent lower in manufacturing including handicrafts than
in manufacturing excluding handicrafts.
Finland. Includes workers in mining and electrical power plants. For
comparability with other countries, compensation excludes some obligatory
training and plant facilities costs; these costs would add 1.6 percent to
average hourly compensation costs in 1994.
Germany. Excludes workers in establishments considered handicraft
manufacturers. In 1990, handicraft employment in the former West Germany was
about 25 percent of all manufacturing employment. Average hourly earnings of
production workers were about 3 percent lower in manufacturing including
handicrafts than in manufacturing excluding handicrafts.
Ireland. Data refer to September for 1975.
Norway. For comparability with other countries, compensation excludes some
obligatory training and plant facilities costs; these costs would add 2.2
percent to average hourly compensation costs in 1994.
Trade-weighted measures
The trade weights used to compute the average compensation cost measures for
selected economic groups are relative importances derived from the sum of U.S.
imports of manufactured products for consumption (customs value) and U.S.
exports of domestic manufactured products (free along side {f.a.s.} value) in
1992 for each country or area and each economic group. See table below.
Table A. Share of total U.S. imports and exports
of manufactured products in 1992(in percent)
Country or area 1992 Country or area 1992
and trade and trade
economic group share economic group share
Canada 19.2 Greece .1
Mexico 7.6 Ireland .6
Italy 2.3
Australia 1.4 Luxembourg .1
Hong Kong SAR 1 2.0 Netherlands 1.9
Israel .8 Norway .3
Japan 15.8
Portugal .2
Korea 3.4 Spain .8
New Zealand .3 Sweden .8
Singapore 2.4 Switzerland 1.0
Sri Lanka .1 United Kingdom 4.4
Taiwan 4.4 Economic groups:
Austria .3 28 foreign
Belgium 1.5 economies 80.8
Denmark .3 OECD 3 71.1
Finland .2 Europe 23.4
France 3.2 European Union 22.1
Germany 2 5.4 Asian NIEs 12.2
1 Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of China.
2 Former West Germany.
3 Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
The trade data used to compute the weights are U.S. Bureau of the Census
statistics of U.S. imports and exports converted to an industrial classification
basis from data initially collected under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule
commodity classification system.
The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) includes
Canada, Mexico, Australia, Japan, Korea, New Zealand, and all European
countries. Europe consists of Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France,
Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal,
Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom. The group labeled "Asian
NIEs" consists of the four newly industrializing economies of Hong Kong SAR,
Korea, Singapore, and Taiwan.
The trade weighted measures relate to all the countries or areas covered in the
series. Data for Germany relate to the former West Germany. Estimates are
computed for missing country data using the average trend in other economies to
estimate the missing data. Trade weighted average percent changes for the 28
foreign economies are computed both including and excluding Mexico and Israel
because their rapid rates of inflation and currency changes in several years
distort the trade-weighted averages.
The trade-weighted average rates of change are computed as the trade-weighted
arithmetic average of the rates of change for the individual countries or areas;
the trade-weighted average hourly compensation costs are computed as the trade-
weighted arithmetic average of cost levels for the individual countries or
areas. Rates of change derived from the trade-weighted average hourly
compensation cost levels need not be the same as the trade-weighted average
rates of change.
Data limitations
Because compensation is partly estimated, the statistics should not be
considered as precise measures of comparative compensation costs. In addition,
the figures are subject to revision as the results of new labor cost surveys or
other data used to estimate compensation costs become available.
The comparative level figures in this report are averages for all manufacturing
industries and are not necessarily representative of all component industries.
In the United States and some other countries, such as Japan, differentials in
hourly compensation cost levels by industry are quite wide. In contrast, other
countries, such as Sweden, have narrow differentials.
Labor costs versus labor income
The hourly compensation figures in U.S. dollars shown in the tables provide
comparative measures of employer labor costs; they do not provide intercountry
comparisons of the purchasing power of worker incomes. Prices of goods and
services vary greatly among countries, and the commercial market exchange rates
used to compare employer labor costs do not reliably indicate relative
differences in prices. Purchasing power parities(that is, the number of foreign
currency units required to buy goods and services equivalent to what can be
purchased with one unit of U.S. or other base-country currency(must be used for
meaningful international comparisons of the relative purchasing power of worker
incomes.
Total compensation converted to U.S. dollars at purchasing power parities would
provide one measure for comparing relative real levels of labor income. It
should be noted, however, that total compensation includes employer payments to
funds for the benefit of workers in addition to payments made directly to
workers. (For a few countries, the compensation measures also include taxes or
subsidies on payrolls or employment even if they do not finance programs which
directly benefit workers.) Payments into these funds provide either deferred
income (for example, payments to retirement funds), a type of insurance (for
example, payments to unemployment or health benefit funds), or current social
benefits (for example, family allowances), and the relationship between employer
payments and current or future worker benefits is indirect. On the other hand,
excluding these payments would understate the total value of income derived from
work because they substitute for worker savings or self-insurance to cover
retirement, medical costs, etc.
Total compensation, because it takes account of employer payments into funds for
the benefit of workers, is a broader income concept than either total direct
earnings or direct spendable earnings. An even broader concept would take
account of all social benefits available to workers, including those financed
out of general revenues as well as those financed through employment or payroll
taxes.