View original document

The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.

April 2003


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

U.S. Department of Labor
Elaine L. Chao, Secretary
Bureau of Labor Statistics
Kathleen P. Utgoff, Commissioner
The Monthly Labor Review ( usps 987-800) is published
monthly by the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S.
Department of Labor. The Review welcomes articles on the
labor force, labor-m anagement relations, business
conditions, industry productivity, com pensation,
occupational safety and health, demographic trends, and
other economic developments. Papers should be factual
and analytical, not polemical in tone. Potential articles, as
well as communications on editorial matters, should be
submitted to:
Editor-in-Chief
Monthly Labor Review
Bureau of Labor Statistics
Washington, dc 20212
Telephone: (202) 691-5900
E-mail: mlr@bls.gov
Inquiries on subscriptions and circulation, including address
changes, should be sent to: Superintendent of Documents
Government Printing Office Washington, dc 20402
Telephone: (202) 512-1800
Subscription price per year—$45 domestic; $63 foreign.
Single copy—$13 domestic; $18.20 foreign. Make checks
payable to the Superintendent of Documents.
Subscription prices and distribution policies for the Monthly
Labor Review ( issn 0098-1818) and other government
publications are set by the Government Printing Office, an
agency of the U.S. Congress.
The Secretary of Labor has determined that the publication of
this periodical is necessary in the transaction of the public
business required by law of this Department. Periodicals
postage paid at Washington, dc, and at additional mailing
addresses.
Unless stated otherwise, articles appearing in this
publication are in the public domain and may be reprinted
without express permission from the Editor-in-Chief. Please
cite the specific issue of the Monthly Labor Review as the
source.
Information is available to sensory impaired individuals
upon request:
Voice phone: (202) 691-5200
Federal Relay Service: 1-800-877-8339.
Send address changes to Monthly Labor
Review, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, dc
20402-0001.

P ostmaster :

Cover designed by Melvin B. Moxley


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

MONTHLY LABOR

REVIEW_______________________
Volume 126, Number 4
April 2003

Distribution of retirement income benefits
Lump sums have become more popular as an alternative to annuity payments in defined
benefit retirement plans and remain prevalent in defined contribution plans
Allan P. Blostin

Immigration and poverty: how are they linked?

3

10

The growing immigrant share of the U.S. population was neither the sole, nor even
the most important, factor in the relatively flat poverty rate from 1989 to 1999
J e ff Chapman and Jared Bernstein

Differences in productivity growth:Canadian-U.S. business sectors

16

Productivity growth picked up significantly in 1995 for the United States,
and in 1996 for Canada, driven in both cases by a resurgence of productivity in services
Umar Faruqui, and others

Departments
Labor month in review
Précis
Book review
Current labor statistics

2
30
31
33

Editor-in-Chief: Deborah P. Klein • Executive Editor: Richard M. Devens • Managing Editor Anna Huffman Hill • Editors: Brian
I. Baker, Richard Hamilton, Leslie Brown Joyner • Book Reviews: Richard Hamilton • Design and Layout: Catherine D. Bowman,
Edith W. Peters • Contributor: James B. Leonard


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Labor Month in Review

The April Review

in Canada has remained slower than in
the United States.

Once upon a time, pensions were pretty
sim ple to understand. Once you had
w orked for your com pany until their
specified retirement age, they arranged
for you to get a regular payment until
you reached the end o f your allotted
years on earth. (Retirement income was
alw ay s a m o re c o m p lic a te d issu e:
relatively few got company pensions at
all, those pensions v aried w idely in
generosity, and indexing was something
librarians did.)
Allan R Blostin’s report shows how
m u ch m o re c o m p le x th e issu e o f
retirem ent income benefits has become.

In addition to the well-documented fact
that retirement incomes are now far more
lik e ly to be from so le ly a d e fin e d
contribution plan than from a traditional
defined-benefit pension, the nature o f
the payout in defined benefit plans is
changing. In 1997, less than one-fourth
o f participants in a defined benefit plan
had a lump-sum option. In 2000, nearly
half o f workers with defined benefit plans
had such a choice.
J e ff Chapm an and Jared B ernstein
outline the surprisingly small impact the
growing share o f the population that is
foreign born has had on the rate o f
poverty. Chapman and Bernstein point
out that in the race between the share
effect o f th e increasing num bers o f
immigrants (immigrants, on average, are
somewhat more likely to be poor) and
the effect o f their substantial income
grow th (again on average), there was
something o f a photo finish in favor o f
the income effect, at least on average for
the Nation as a whole.
Umar Faruqui and several co-authors
have updated us on the evolution o f the
productivity gap between the business
sectors o f Canada and the United States.
In both economies, productivity began
to pick up its pace o f growth in the mid1990s, and in both cases, according to
this report, the gains reflected additional
growth in productivity in services in­
dustries. However, productivity growth

2 Monthly Labor Review

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

April 2003

Fewer work stoppages
in 2002
During 2002,46,000 workers were idled
due to major work stoppages. This was
a historic low for the series, which dates
back to 1947. One w ork stoppage,
beginning in 2002, accounted for 20
p ercen t o f all w orkers idled. This
sto p p age was betw een the P acific
M aritim e A sso ciatio n and the In ­
ternational Longshore and Warehouse
Union, with 10,500 workers idled.
There were 19 major work stoppages
th a t b egan in 2002. N one o f the
remaining stoppages idled 5,000 or more
workers. O f the major work stoppages
beginning in 2002, the largest number
(five) occurred in the manufacturing
sector, followed by the construction
sector (three) and the transportation
and w arehousing sector (three). In
S ta te and lo c a l g o v e rn m e n t, tw o
stoppages were in education services
and one was in public administration.
See news release USDL 03-100, “Major
Work Stoppages in 2002,” for more
information. Major work stoppages are
defined as strikes or lockouts that idle
1,000 or more workers and last at least
one shift.

Time lost to injuries in

2001
Truckdrivers suffered more injuries and
illnesses with days away from work in
2001 th a n w o rk e rs in any o th e r
occupation. Truckdrivers experienced
129,100 w o rk -related in ju ries and
illnesses that required recuperation
away from work beyond the day o f the
incident. Nursing aides and orderlies
suffered the second highest number o f
o ccupational injuries and illnesses
involving tim e away from w ork at

71,000, followed by nonconstruction
laborers at 68,900 and construction
laborers at 44,100.
Floors and other surfaces, w orker
motion or position, containers, and parts
and materials were the sources o f 57.4
percent o f the occupational injuries and
illnesses involving time away from work
in 2001. Floors, walkways, and ground
surfaces accounted for 17.2 percent o f
lost-worktime injuries and illnesses, and
worker motion or position accounted for
16.0 percent. Containers were the source
o f 13.6 percen t o f the injuries and
illnesses resulting in time away from
work and parts and materials accounted
for 10.6 percent.

A dded value from
associate degree
Compared with workers whose highest
level o f educational attainment was a
high school diploma, workers with an
associate degree averaged an extra $ 128
a week in 2001. People with associate
degrees also are more likely to find jobs:
the unemployment rate in 2001 was less
than 3 percent for associate degree
holders, com pared with more than 4
percent for high school graduates. And,
according to several academic studies,
advantages in the job market might be
even greater for those ju st starting their
careers and for those who w ork in a
career related to their degree.
An associate degree is a college
degree awarded after the completion o f
about 20 classes. It either prepares
students for a career following grad­
uation or allows them to transfer into a
bachelor’s degree program. Associate
d eg rees are a v a ila b le from p u b lic
com m unity colleges, p rivate 2-year
colleges, for-profit technical institutes,
and m any 4 -y e a r c o lle g e s and
universities. More information can be
found in “Associate degree: Two years
to a career or a jum p start to a bachelor’s
d e g re e ,” in O c c u p a tio n a l O u tlo o k
Quarterly, Winter 2002-03.
□

Distribution of Retirement Incom e

Distribution of retirem ent
incom e benefits
Lump sums have become more popular as an alternative
to annuity payments in defined benefit retirement plans
and remain the prevalent distribution option
in defined contribution plans

Allan P. Blostin

Allan P. Blostin is an
economist in the
Division of
Compensation Data
Analysis and Planning,
Bureau of Labor
Statistics. E-maH:
Blostin_A@bls.gov

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

enefits under the two kinds o f retirement
plans offered by U.S. private industry—
defined benefit and defined contribution
plans— may be distributed to an individual in a
variety o f ways. Quite often, the individual will
have a choice o f payment options at retirement.
According to a 2000 bls survey o f employee
benefits in private industry,1virtually all employ­
ees under defined benefit plans had a joint and
survivor annuity available at retirement, a feature
that provides a portion o f the retiree’s annuity to
the spouse after the retiree dies.2 (See table 1.)
Approximately three-fourths o f the participants
with such a benefit were given a choice of various
options; for example, 50 percent, 67 percent, or
100 percent o f the retiree’s benefit could be
provided to the spouse. Although traditionally,
defined benefit plans have paid out benefits to
the em ployee and spouse in the form o f an
annuity, more and more plans in recent years have
been offering some type o f lump-sum benefit as a
paym ent option. The survey indicated that 44
percent o f all workers in defined benefit plans were
offered some type o f lump-sum benefit option.
Defined contribution plans come in several
varieties, and, as with defined benefit plans, their
benefits may be distributed in a number of ways.
The most prevalent type o f defined contribution
plan is the savings and thrift plan, followed by the
profit-sharing plan and money purchase plan.3 In
1978, section 401(k) was added to the Internal
Revenue Code, allow ing em ployees to make

B

pretax contributions into an employer-sponsored
defined contribution plan through salary reduction
agreements. These types of arrangements are called
401(k) plans.4Virtually all savings and thrift plans
include a 401(k) feature; certain other types o f
defined contribution plans may include such a
feature as well.
Regardless o f the type of defined contribution
plan, the payment options at retirement are similar.
Most data in this article are based on savings and
thrift plans, primarily because o f their prevalence.
Lump-sum payment, by far the most widespread
method o f distribution o f retirement income, was
provided as an option to 87 percent o f all par­
ticipants in savings and thrift plans. (See table 2.)
Installments paid out over a specified period were
available to 54 percent o f participants, while 34
percent had an annuity option.

Defined benefit plans
U nder a defined benefit plan, the em ployer
guarantees the em ployee’s future benefit on the
basis o f a predetermined formula, usually tied to
the em ployee’s earnings. Traditionally, there
have been three types o f defined benefit formu­
las. A final-pay formula , the most prevalent type,
is based on a percentage o f the average earnings
o f an individual during a given number o f years
at the end o f the work career, the period when the
individual’s earnings are typically highest. For
example, a plan may pay 1.5 percent o f the inMonthly Labor Review

April 2003

3

Distribution of Retirement Income

Percent of all employees offered and participating in defined benefit plans, by choice of payment options
provided, private industry, National Compensation Survey, 2000

Table 1.

O ffe re d

Participating

O p tio n
P ercen t

N um ber

Total..............................................................
With joint and survivor annuity option.................
With choice of joint and survivor
percentages.....................................................
With lump-sum option......................................
Without lump-sum o ption................................
No choice of joint and survivor percentages ....
With lump-sum option......................................
Without lump-sum o ption................................
Choice of joint and survivor percentages
not determinable.............................................
Distribution options not determinable1.................

100
96

22,349,000
21,347,000

100
95

20,613,000
19,612,000

77
42
35
18
2
15

17,240,000
9,430,000
7,809,000
3,912,000
462,000
3,450,000

76
41
35
18
2
16

15,672,000
8,532,000
7,140,000
3,753,000
444,000
3,308,000

1
4

196,000
1,001,000

1
5

187,000
1,001,000

Total with lump-sum option available2 ..................

44

9,921,000

44

8,997,000

11ncludes cases In which the joint and survivor annuity data alone were
unknown, cases in which the lump-sum data were unknown, and cases in
which both the joint and survivor annuity and the lump-sum data were un­
known.

Table 2.

P ercen t

Num ber

! Total with lump-sum option also included in other rows of the table.

Note: Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal
totals.

Percent of all employees participating in various types of defined contribution plans, by choice of payment
options provided, private industry, National Compensation Survey, 2000
All d e fin e d
contribution plans

O p tio n

P ercen t

Total..................................
With lump-sum option............
No other op tio n ...................
With annuity option............
With installment o p tio n ......
With annuity and
installment o p tio n ...........
With annuity and installment
option..................................
Annuity o n ly ...........................
Other distribution options2 ....
Distribution options not
determinable........................
Total with annuity option
available3.............................
Total with installment option
available3.............................

N um ber

401 (k ) plans

P ercen t

P ercen t

N um ber

Profit-sharing plans

P ercen t

Num ber

100
83
30
5
21

45,091,000
37,320,000
13,466,000
2,087,000
9,252,000

100
88
28
6
23

32,104,000
28,397,000
9,078,000
1,829,000
7,533,000

100
87
29
4
25

28,597,000
25,010,000
8,371,000
1,248,000
7,254,000

100
83
36
7
14

8,364,000
6,928,000
3,029,000
586,000
1,145,000

28

12,515,000

31

9,956,000

28

8,136,000

26

2,167,000

(')
1
20

142,000
339,000
9,191,000

(’)

128,000
339,000
7,089,000

(’)

1
23

113,000
339,000
6,604,000

-

1
22

14

1,130,000

12

5,418,000

10

3,241,000

11

3,135,000

17

1,436,000

33

15,083,000

38

12,252,000

34

9,836,000

33

2,754,000

49

21,909,000

55

17,617,000

54

15,503,000

40

3,313,000

1 Less than 0.5 percent.
2 Other options, such as a rollover into an individual retirement account,
were not tabulated separately.
3 Total with annuity and installment option also included in other rows of

dividual’s average earnings during the highest 5 o f the last
10 years o f service, multiplied by each year o f service. A
career-average-pay form ula is based on the individual’s
earnings over his or her entire career. Such a formula might be
stated, for example, as 2.0 percent o f the individual’s earnings
for each year worked. The third and final type o f traditional
formula provides a flat dollar amount for each year worked—
such as $30 per month— times the number o f years o f service.
In recent years, a new type o f defined benefit plan has
4
Monthly Labor Review

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

N um ber

S avings a n d thrift pians

April 2003

-

_
-

the table.

Note: Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal
totals. Dash indicates no employees.

become more prominent. A cash balance plan credits a dollar
amount into a hypothetical employee account, usually on
the basis o f a percentage o f the participant’s earnings. Each
year, the value o f the account is credited with an interest rate
specified by the plan. While similar to a defined contribution
plan in many respects, a cash balance plan is considered a
defined benefit plan, because it guarantees future benefits.
Both traditional defined benefit plans and cash balance plans
have various methods for distributing benefits at retirement.5

Defined benefit plans must make an annuity available to
retirees. An annuity provides monthly or annual payments
for a specified num ber o f years or for life. For married em­
ployees, the plan m ust offer a survivor annuity, w hich
guarantees continued benefits to a spouse should the retiree
die. The m ost prevalent survivor annuity is the joint and
survivor annuity. To pay for this option, the em ployee’s
benefit is reduced. For example, a joint and survivor option of
50 percent m ight require a 10-percent reduction in the
em ployee’s benefit at the tim e o f retirem ent. Thus, the
em ployee’s benefit at retirement would be 90 percent o f the
accrued benefit, and the surviving spouse would receive 50
percent o f that benefit. Under the jo in t and survivor annuity,
the norm al form o f paym ent is to provide the surviving
spouse a m onthly incom e o f at least 50 percent o f the
em ployee’s vested benefit at the time o f his or her death. A
benefit is vested once the employee works for a specified
number o f years. After satisfying the vesting requirement,
the employee is entitled to a nonforfeitable right to a pension,
even if he or she leaves the company prior to retirement. The
joint and survivor annuity is frequently offered under a 50percent, 67-percent, or 100-percent option: the higher the
percentage provided to the surviving spouse, the more the
em ployee’s benefit is reduced at retirement.
In addition to offering the standard 50-percent joint and
survivor annuity, many plans give the employee a choice of
several other types o f annuity. Under a single-life-only option,
the employee will be the sole recipient o f a monthly pension
benefit for the duration o f his or her life. Payments cease upon
the em ployee’s death. In accordance with the Employee
Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), this option—along with
any other— can be selected only if the employee and the spouse
decline the joint and survivor annuity in writing.

H M H i

Traditional defined benefit plans also offer a periodcertain option— som etim es called a period-certain and
continuous option— which is similar to a single-life annuity
in that it guarantees the employee a monthly benefit for life.
The difference is that, for a specified period after the employee
retires, the period-certain option provides a benefit to the
beneficiary if the employee dies. The benefit is the same
amount the employee began receiving at retirement. The
specified period is commonly 5, 10, or 15 years. After the
designated period ends, the employee receives benefits until
his or her death; no further benefits go to the beneficiary.
Another type o f annuity paid at retirement is the levelincome option. Under this method o f distribution, if the
participant retires before being eligible for Social Security
(generally at age 62), a larger payment will be made until that
time; benefits are reduced once the employee starts receiving
Social Security payments.
In addition to offering the aforesaid types o f annuity at
retirement, traditional defined benefit plans may provide the
option o f lump-sum benefits. Under this option, the present
value o f the participant’s benefit is converted into a lump­
sum amount and paid out in a single cash payment. The
present value represents the total am ount that m ust be
invested to pay a series o f future payments.6 Once the lump­
sum amount is paid, no additional payments are made to the
employee, or to the beneficiary upon the employee’s death.
Under present law, the defined benefit plan may make a lump­
sum payment o f $5,000 or less without obtaining approval
from the participant or the surviving spouse.7 When the plan
allows a lump-sum benefit o f more than $5,000, the employee
must be given the option to select it. In 2000, lump-sum
payment options were offered to 35 percent o f all employees
in traditional defined benefit plans. (See table 3.)

Percent of all employees participating in traditional defined benefit and cash balance plans, by choice of
payment options provided, private industry, National Compensation Survey, 2000
C ash b a la n c e plans

Traditional plans
O p tio n

j

P ercen t

P ercen t

N um ber

Total.............................................................
With joint and survivor annuity option.................
With choice of joint and survivor percentages..
With lump-sum option......................................
Without lump-sum o ption................................
No choice of joint and survivor percentages ....
With lump-sum option......................................
Without lump-sum option................................
Choice of joint and survivor percentages
not determinable.............................................
Distribution options not determinable2 .................

100
94
71
34
36
22
1
21

15,823,000
14,822,000
11,163,000
5,420,000
5,744,000
3,491,000
183,000
3,308,000

1
6

167,000
1,001,000

0

Total with lump-sum option available3 ..................

35

5,603,000

71

1 Less than 0.5 percent.
2 Includes cases in which the joint and survivor annuity data were un­
known, the lump-sum data were unknown, and both the joint and survivor
annuity and the lump-sum data were unknown.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

100
100
94
65
29
5
5
-

—

Num ber

4,790,000
4,790,000
4,509,000
3,113,000
1,396,000
261,000
261,000
—
20,000

—

3,394,000

3Total with lump-sum option also included in other rows of the table.

Note: Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal
totals. Dash indicates no employees.

Monthly Labor Review

April 2003

5

Distribution of Retirement Income

Percent of full-time employees participating in defined benefit plans, by choice of payment options provided,
private industry, National Compensation Survey, 2000

O p tio n

All plans

Traditional plans

C ash b a la n c e plans

Total............................................................
With joint and survivor annuity option.................
With choice of joint and survivor percentages....
With lump-sum option......................................
Without lump-sum option................................
No choice of joint and survivor percentages ....
With lump-sum option......................................
Without lump-sum option................................
Choice of joint and survivor percentages not
determinable....................................................
Distribution options not determinable2 .................

100
95
76
41
35
18
2
16

100
94
70
33
37
22
1
21

100
100
94
64
30
6
6

1
5

1
6

(’)

Total with lump-sum option available3 ..................

43

34

70

1 Less than 0.5 percent.
2 Includes cases in which the joint and survivor annuity data were un­
known, the lump-sum data were unknown, and both the joint and survivor
annuity and the lump-sum data were unknown.

Cash balance plans have becom e m ore prominent in
recent years. In 2000,23 percent o f full-time participants in
defined benefit plans were covered by a cash balance plan, a
significant increase over the 6 percent recorded in the 1997
survey o f private establishments with 100 or more workers.8
As mentioned earlier, a cash balance plan credits a dollar
amount into a hypothetical employee account, usually based
on a percentage o f the participant’s earnings. The balance in
each em ployee’s account is designed to be equal to the
present value o f future annuity payments. Cash balance
plans generally offer their participants the option o f selecting
an annuity or a lump-sum payment from their account at the
time o f retirement or termination o f employment. The cal­
culation o f the annuity amount is the inverse o f the cal­
culation o f the lump-sum amount in the traditional defined
benefit plan. That is, the cash balance is the present value o f
the account and is converted into a series o f future payments
based on investment assumptions.
Having a lump-sum payment as an option in most plans is
one o f the m ajor differences between a cash balance plan
and a traditional defined benefit plan. The 2000 survey
indicated that 43 percent o f full-time participants in defined
benefit plans had the option o f receiving a lump sum as a
method o f payment; in 1997, 23 percent o f the participants
were given a lump-sum option. The increase is attributable
largely to a sharp rise in the number o f cash balance plans
over the 3-year period. Lump-sum payments were included
as an option for 70 percent o f full-time participants in cash
balance plans; in contrast, 34 percent o f those participating
in a traditional defined benefit plan had a lump-sum option
available. Cash balance plans also provide the same type o f
6
Monthly Labor Review

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

April 2003

3 Total with lump-sum option also included in other rows of the table.

Note: Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal
totals. Dash indicates no employees.

annuity payment options that traditional plans offer. (See table
4.)

Defined benefit distribution options
The following examples o f defined benefit plan features
illustrate some o f the aforementioned distribution options
available under this type o f plan.

Straight-life and jo in t and survivor annuities.

I f the
employee is single at retirement, he or she will receive a
straight-life annuity. This form o f payment provides a monthly
benefit for the em ployee’s lifetime. W hen the employee dies,
payments stop. If the participant is married at retirement, a 50percent joint and survivor annuity will be available. This form
o f payment provides a reduced monthly benefit to the em­
ployee for his or her lifetime, and, after the employee’s death,
the surviving spouse receives 50 percent o f the employee’s
reduced monthly benefit for the remainder o f the spouse’s
lifetime. Thus, the joint and survivor benefit is a reduced
single life annuity that provides a benefit over two lifetimes
instead o f one. The amount o f reduction in the employee’s
benefit depends on both his or her age and the spouse’s age
when benefits begin.

Joint and survivor annuity with different survivor options.
The employee receives a reduced monthly benefit for life. After
the employee dies, the surviving beneficiary receives 100
percent, 75 percent, 67 percent, or 50 percent o f the reduced
benefit, as elected. If the employee is single, he or she can
name anyone as beneficiary. If the employee is married, the

spouse must agree in writing to any option other than a joint
and survivor annuity with the spouse as beneficiary.

Level income.

If the employee retires before being eligible
for Social Security benefits, and this option is elected, larger
payments will be made prior to the start o f Social Security
benefits and smaller payments after. In this way, the combined
income from the plan and Social Security are about even
throughout retirement. The adjustment can begin at age 62 or
65. This option can be elected as a straight-life annuity or as
a joint and survivor annuity.

Lump sum.

The current value o f the benefit is converted
into a lump-sum amount paid to the employee in a single cash
payment. Once the employee receives the single payment, no
further amounts are due to that person, or to the beneficiary
upon the em ployee’s death. I f the present value o f the
em ployee’s pension benefit is $5,000 or less, he or she may
elect to receive the benefit as one lump-sum payment.

Period certain.

This is a reduced annuity paid to the
employee over his or her lifetime. If the employee dies during
a specified period (the “period certain”), say, 10 years,
monthly payments will continue to be made to the beneficiary
for the rem ainder o f the 10 years. No further payments are
made to the beneficiary after 10 years. If the employee lives
for more than 10 years, payments will be made until his or her
death.

installment option provides equal payments at set periods for
a specified number o f years. For example, installment payments
may be made quarterly, monthly, or annually for a period o f 5,
10, or 15 years. In addition, participants in defined contri­
bution plans sometimes have the option o f choosing an
annuity as a method o f payment. W hen an annuity is offered,
it is usually similar to those offered in defined benefit plans.
The employee’s account balance is converted into an annuity
amount in the same way that a cash balance plan is. Other
forms o f distribution at retirem ent include paym ents in
company stock, rollovers o f the taxable account balance to
another employer plan or to an individual retirement account,
and a combination o f these two options. In one scenario, a
plan might pay a percentage o f the account balance in a lump
sum and the remainder in installment payments.

Defined contribution distribution options
v

The following examples o f defined contribution plan features
illustrate some o f the preceding distribution options that are
available under this type o f plan.

Lump-sum payment option.

The employee receives a lump­
sum payment equal to the value o f the account. If the account
is funded wholly or partially with life insurance or annuity
contracts, the account balance will be equal to the surrender
value o f the contracts.

Installment option.
Lump-sum benefit under a cash balance plan.

The em­
ployee can take the entire vested cash balance account at
any time upon leaving the company. The plan, however, is
governed by the Internal Revenue Service’s regulations con­
cerning retirem ent plans. There are tax consequences for
taking the account balance earlier than the date o f retirement.

The employee receives a benefit payable
in equal monthly installments for a selected period (not longer
than the so-called joint and life expectancy o f the employee and
spouse), but with no payments thereafter. Upon the death o f the
employee or the spouse, the survivor will continue to receive the
unpaid installments for the balance o f the period selected.

Life annuity option.

Defined contribution plans
Defined contribution plans specify the amount o f employer
contributions that must be placed in individual employee
accounts. As with defined benefit plans, contributions to the
account are guaranteed, but not future benefits, which, in
defined contribution plans, fluctuate on the basis o f invest­
ment earnings. There are several types o f defined contribu­
tion plans, all o f which generally follow the same pattern o f
payment options at retirement.
Under defined contribution plans, the employee is likely
to be offered more than one payment option at retirement.
Lump-sum payments, where by there is an immediate dis­
tribution o f the em ployee’s account balance, are offered to
nearly all defined contribution participants. The installment
option is another m ethod o f paym ent at retirem ent. An

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

The em ployee receiv es m onthly
payments for as long as he or she lives, but with no benefit
payable upon death.

Joint and survivor annuity option.

The employee and the
beneficiary receive monthly payments. W hen either one dies,
the survivor continues to receive 50 percent, 67 percent, or
100 percent o f the monthly amount that had previously been
paid to the employee and the beneficiary.

Contingent survivor annuity option. The em ployee re ­
ceives m onthly payments. W hen the em ployee dies, the
spouse, as the contingent annuitant, continues to receive 50
percent, 67 percent, or 100 percent o f the monthly amount
that had been previously paid to the employee.
Life annuity with payments-certain option.
Monthly Labor Review

The employee
April 2003

7

Distribution of Retirement Income

receives monthly payments for as long as he or she lives. If
the employee dies before receiving the number o f monthly
payments selected, the remainder continues to be paid to the
beneficiary.
Four more options are as follows:
• Leave the account invested in the plan until age 7072.
• Receive the taxable account balance in the form o f a
direct rollover to an individual retirement account or
another em ployer’s tax-qualified plan.
• Receive the balance o f the account as a lump sum in
cash or in shares o f company stock.
• Receive the payments in the form o f quarterly install­
ments over a period between 10 and 15 years.

Data on payment options
The types o f payment option offered at retirement vary among
defined benefit plans and defined contribution plans. In 2000,51
percent o f all participants in defined benefit plans were offered
some type o f joint and survivor annuity without a lump-sum
option. The 51-percent figure compares with 44 percent that
have both a joint and survivor annuity and a lump-sum option.
O f those workers with both a lump-sum option and a joint and
survivor annuity, almost all— 41 out o f 44 percent—had a choice
o f various types o f joint and survivor annuities— for example,
50 percent, 67 percent, and 100 percent. The proportion of
workers with different choices for joint and survivor benefits
was somewhat lower when there was no lump-sum payment
offered at retirement.
There also were variations in payment options offered at
retirement between traditional defined benefit plans and cash
balance plans. Fifty-seven percent o f all participants in
traditional plans were provided some form o f joint and survivor
annuity without a lump-sum option, while 35 percent had
available to them both a joint and survivor annuity and a lump­
sum option. Cash balance plans, by contrast, offered both a
joint and survivor benefit and a lump-sum option to 71 percent
o f the workers, while providing only a joint and survivor annuity
to 29 percent o f employees. Cash balance plans also were
more likely than traditional plans to provide different choices
for jo in t and survivor benefits: upwards o f nine-tenths o f the
workers in cash balance plans were given a choice o f different
jo in t and survivor annuities, compared with seven-tenths in
traditional plans.
Paym ent options o f defined benefit plans varied with
establishm ent employment, occupation, and union status.
Nonunion workers were much more likely than union workers
(51 percent, compared with 31 percent) to be in plans that
provided both a jo in t and survivor annuity and a lump-sum
benefit. The availability o f both options was more prevalent
among white-collar workers than blue-collar workers (49
8
Monthly Labor Review

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

April 2003

percent and 40 percent, respectively). Finally, sm aller
establishments— those with fewer than 100 workers— offered
a greater percentage o f participants both options than did
larger establishments— those with 100 or more workers (57
percent, as opposed to 40 percent).9
Under savings and thrift plans in which some type o f
payment option was described, the vast m ajority o f workers
was offered a lump-sum benefit at retirement. Participation
was nearly split between workers offered lump-sum benefits
as the only option (29 percent), those offered lump-sum
benefits and installments (25 percent), and those given a
choice among lump-sum benefits, annuities, and installments
(28 percent). In addition, one-fourth o f the savings and thrift
participants were given the option o f other forms o f payment
at retirement, including a distribution in company stock and
rollovers into an individual retirement account or another
qualified employer plan.10
Although the survey is designed to estimate the number
and percentage o f workers currently participating in benefit
plans, as well as the percentage covered by certain plan
features, limited data can be obtained on the number and
percentage o f workers offered benefit plans, regardless o f
whether the workers are current participants. Workers may
be offered a plan, but may not participate because they have
not met an eligibility requirement (such as the completion o f
1 year o f service) or because they have chosen not to make
required contributions. For defined benefit plans, the data
show little difference between the number o f workers offered
a plan and the number participating. This concordance is
expected, as these plans are typically provided to all workers
w ithin sp ecific gro u p s (such as fu ll-tim e em ployees
completing 1 year o f service) and rarely require an employee
contribution. In contrast, the num ber offered a defined
contribution plan is nearly 50 percent greater than the number
participating. This disparity is likely due to the fact that most
defined contribution plans require em ployees to make a
contribution in order to be a participant.
For both types o f plans, distribution options were tabulated
for workers offered the plans and for those actually participating.
As tables 1,2, and 5 indicate, there were no differences in options
between the two groups o f workers, a finding not unexpected
for defined benefit plans. For defined-contribution plans,
however, distribution options appear not to be a determinant in
an employee’s decision to participate in a plan.
In sum, there are various options for distributing payment
benefits at retirement in both defined benefit and defined
contribution plans. Traditionally, payment to individuals in
the form o f an annuity has been the m ain m ethod o f
distribution at retirement in defined benefit plans; in recent
years, how ever, lum p-sum options have becom e m ore
prominent as an alternative to annuity payments. This changing
scenario is the direct result o f growth in cash balance plans,

Table 5.

Percent of all employees offered various types of defined contribution plans, by choice of payment options
provided, private industry, National Compensation Survey, 2000

O p tio n

Total..................................
With lump-sum option............
No other o p tio n ...................
With annuity option............
With installment o p tio n ......
With annuity and installment
option...............................
With annuity and installment
option..................................
Annuity o n ly ...........................
Other distribution options2 ....
Distribution options not
determinable........................
lotal with annuity option
available3.............................
Total with installment option
available3.............................

Plans with
401 (k ) option

All d e fin e d
contribution plans

Plans with savings
a n d thrift o p tio n

Plans w ith profitsharing optio n

P ercen t

N um ber

P ercen t

N um ber

P ercen t

N um ber

P ercen t

Num ber

100
83
31
4
20

65,299,000
53,977,000
20,556,000
2,641,000
13,300,000

100
88
30
5
23

47,427,000
41,665,000
14,187,000
2,322,000
10,930,000

100
87
31
4
24

43,320,000
37,623,000
13,385,000
1,674,000
10,597,000

100
85
39
6
15

11,033,000
9,432,000
4,357,000
617,000
1,628,000

27

17,480,000

30

14,227,000

28

11,968,000

26

2,830,000

0)

147,000
528,000
14,074,000

1
24

113,000
528,000
10,266,000

-

1
23

128,000
528,000
10,855,000

-

-

16

1,786,000

12

7,699,000

11

5,106,000

12

5,056,000

15

1,601,000

32

20,796,000

36

17,205,000

33

14,282,000

31

3,446,000

47

30,927,000

53

25,284,000

52

22,677,000

40

4,458,000

1
22

( 1)

1 Less than 0.5 percent.
2Other options, such as a rollover into an individual retirement account,
were not tabulated separately.

which generally allow individuals the option o f receiving lump­
sum payments at retirement. In defined contribution plans, lump­
sum payments have always been the most prevalent distribution

( ’)

3

Total with annuity and installment also included in other rows of the table.
Note: Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal
totals. Dash indicates no employees.

option at retirement. When alternatives to lump-sum payments
are provided, they are usually in the form o f an annuity, or both
an annuity and an installment option.
□

Notes
1 This survey, part of the National Compensation Survey, includes
data on both full-tim e and part-tim e workers in private-sector
establishm ents, regardless o f their employment. Prior to 1999,
surveys o f different employment size classes were conducted in
alternating years; medium and large private establishments—with 100
or more workers— were studied during odd years, small private
establishments—with fewer than 100 workers—during even years.
The 2000 benefits survey provides data on the incidence and
characteristics of medical, dental, and vision care, private retirement
plans, and other benefits. (For more details, visit the website http://
w ww.bls.gov/ncs/ebs/hom e.htm .)
2 Under the Employee Retirement Income and Security Act (erisa)
of 1974, defined benefit plans must make a qualified joint and survivor
annuity the normal form of benefit payment for married participants.
This method of payment provides the surviving spouse at least onehalf of the amount of the employee benefit during the course of the
spouse’s lifetime.

employee’s earnings. Money purchase plans generally do not allow
employees to make contributions.
4 For a more detailed description o f 401(k) plans, see Marc
Kronson, “Employee Costs and Risks in 401(k) Plans,” Compensation
and Working Conditions, summer 2000, pp. 12-15.
5 For a more detailed description of cash balance plans, see Kenneth
R. Elliott and James H. Moore, Jr., “Cash Balance Pension Plans: The
New Wave,” Compensation and Working Conditions, summer 2000,
pp. 3-11.
6 Eugene F. Brigham and Louis Gapenski, Financial Management: Theory
and Practice, 7th ed. (Fort Worth, tx, Dryden Press, 1994), p. 231.
7 The Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 amended Section 203(e) of
by increasing the maximum dollar amount that a plan can pay in
a lump sum without consent from $3,500 to $5,000, starting after
August 5, 1997.
erisa

8 See Employee B enefits in Medium and Large Private
3
Under a savings and thrift plan, an employee contributes to aEstablishments, 1997, Bulletin 2517 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics,
fund, generally on a pretax basis. All or a portion of the employee’s
1999), table 126, p. 103.
contribution, usually a percentage of the employee’s earnings, is
matched by the employer, most commonly on a fixed-percentage
9 It is important to keep in mind that defined benefit plans are less
basis. In a deferred profit-sharing plan, the employer credits a portion
prevalent among smaller establishments. In 2000, 8 percent of workers
of company profits to the individual’s account. Some deferred profitin smaller establishments participated in such plans, compared with
sharing plans allow employee contributions, but employees are usually
33 percent in larger establishments.
not required to make contributions. Under a money purchase plan,
the employer makes fixed contributions to an employee’s account.
10 The survey did not code for these options separately; thus, data
The fixed contributions are usually based on a percentage o f the
are not available for each of them individually.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Monthly Labor Review

April 2003

9

Imm igration and Poverty

Immigration and poverty:
how are they linked?
The growing immigrant share o f the U.S. population
was neither the sole, nor even the most important, factor
in the relatively flat poverty rate from 1989 to 1999;
in fact, poverty rates fell faster fo r immigrants
than fo r natives
Jeff C hapm an
and
Jared Bernstein

Jeff Chapman is a
policy analyst, and
Jared Bernstein is an
economist, at the
Economic Policy
Institute, Washington,
DC.

ecently released data from the 2000
census show that the N ation’s poverty
rate fell less than 1 percentage point, from
13.1 percent to 12.4 percent, between 1989 and
1999.1 In some States, including California and
New York, the poverty rate was higher in 1999
than in 1989. In addition, some areas o f the
country posted only sm all increases in real
median family income, even given the strong
economy o f the latter 1990s. For example, census
data reveal that median annual family income in
New York grew only $113 (0.2 percent) in real
terms over the decade.
M edia coverage has attributed the findings
regarding poverty chiefly to the effects of a growing
immigrant population composed o f many lowincome families.2 The idea is that, because the
immigrant share o f the population increased from
1989 to 1999, and because immigrants’ incomes are,
on average, lower than natives’, overall income
growth was subject to a downward pressure over
the decade, a phenomenon referred to in this article
as the share effect. The question, however, is
whether the share effect does in fact implicate
immigration as the sole, or even the most important,
factor behind the census figures. Without more
evidence, the role of im migration in what are
essentially flat poverty statistics remains open.
The needed evidence is at least twofold. First,
th e m ag n itu d e o f th e share effect m ust be
quantified; that is, how much did the increase in
the share of the im m igrant population lower real
income or raise the poverty rate? Second, the
im pact of the share effect can be offset by trends

R

10
Monthly Labor Review

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

April 2003

in im m igrants’ own income and poverty status,
herein called the income effect. Thus, analysts need
to quantify this effect as well, to learn whether and
by how much it contributed to changes in real
income or the poverty rate.
In a period such as the 1990s, when both the
population share and the incomes of immigrants
rose, the question of immigration’s impact can be
viewed as the outcome of a race between the share
and income effects. That is, did immigrants’ income
improve fast enough to offset the downward pres­
sure exerted by their increased share in the population?
Without quantifying these two countervailing effects,
researchers have little useful authoritative information
to bring to the discussion. This article shows that,
over the 1994—2000 period, immigrants’ rising in­
comes offset the negative impact of their rising
shares.
At the time of this writing, the Census 2000
microdata have not yet been released, and the
available data are insufficient to fully explore the
issue.3 Still, the available data introduce a note
o f caution regarding any interpretation of the
census results that depends heavily on increased
immigration. To bring out the caution required of
any such interpretation, the article examines both
national data and data from New York and
California—two States in which one might expect
im m igration to play a large role in the deter­
m ination of the poverty rate. These States are
im portant to consider because (1) more than 1 in
4 New Yorkers and 1 in 3 C alifornians are
immigrants and (2) both States had poverty rates
that were higher in 1999 than in 1989, according

to Census 2000 data. (See the appendix for the more inclusive
definition o f immigrants used in this article.)
A n analysis o f the currently available data brings out the
following facts:
•

Over the 1994-2000 period, poverty rates fell much more
quickly for immigrants than for natives. For example, the
national poverty rates o f recent im m igrants (those here
for 10 or fewer years) fell about 4 times as fast as that of
natives (11.6 percentage points, com pared w ith 2.9
points); the rate for all immigrants fell 2.7 times as fast as
that o f U.S. natives.

•

Im m igrant families also experienced greater increases
than U. S. natives did in real median family incomes from
1994 to 2000. After adjustment for inflation, the median
family incomes o f im m igrants rose 26.3 percent during
the period, while the m edian family incomes o f native
U.S. families grew half that fast. For recent immigrants,
the growth in real median family income was an even
greater 40.5 percent.

•

These gains in im m igrant income over the 1994-2000
period were substantial enough to offset the negative
impact o f the share effect.

•

A preliminary analysis of the census figures for California
and New York from 1989 to 1999 indicated that the
increase in im m igration added about 1 percentage point
to the growth in poverty over the decade. Absent this
effect, poverty would have been unchanged in California
and would have risen slightly in New York.

•

Im m igration did not play as large a role as other, more
fundam entally economic factors, such as inequality and
unemployment, in keeping the poverty rate relatively flat.
These factors hurt the economic prospects of all lowwage workers, not just immigrants.

Poverty rates and median family income
As the following tabulation, based on March Current Population
Survey (cps) data shows, immigrants are much more likely to five
in poverty than are natives:

All p e rs o n s ..........
U.S. n a tiv e s ..............
Im m igrants................
Recent im m igrants...

P overty rate (percent)
1994
2000
14.5
11.3
13.1
10.2
25.7
17.8
34.0
22.4

Percentage-point
change,
1994-2000
-3 .3
-2 .9
-7 .9
-1 1 .6

Indeed, the poverty rate of recent immigrants is more than
twice that o f U.S. natives. Because of this, at any point in


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

time, the poverty rate would most certainly be lower in the
absence of immigration. Also, increasing the immigrant share
will raise the poverty rate. However, as noted, this share
effect, as well as the offsetting income effect (the impact of
faster income growth among immigrants), that occurred over
the 1989-99 period needs to be quantified.
As shown in both chart 1 and the preceding tabulation,
the national poverty rates of recent imm igrants fell about 4
times as fast as they did for U.S. natives from 1994 to 2000;
the rates for all immigrants fell 2.7 times as fast as those of
U.S. natives during the same period. The following tabulation,
again based on M arch cps data, shows that the poverty rates
of immigrants living in New York and California fell even
further than did the poverty rates of U.S. natives:
N ew York________

California______

Percentagepoint
change,
1994
All persons .. . 17.0
U.S. natives .... . 13.7
Im m igrants...... . 28.3
Recent
immigrants ... 35.5

2000
13.4
11.4
19.1
22.2

19 9 4 2000 1994
-3 .6
17.9
-2 .4
12.1
-9 .2
30.1
-13.3

39.3

Percentagepoint
change,
2000
12.8
9.1
20.3

1 99 4 2000
-5 .0
-3 .0
-9 .8

26.8 -12.5

From 1994 to 2000, the poverty rates of recent immigrants fell
13.3 percentage points in New York and 12.5 percentage
points in California, while those of natives fell 2.4 points in
New York and 3.0 points in California.
Immigrants also experienced greater increases in real median
family income during the same period. After adjustment for
inflation, the median family income of immigrants rose 26.3
percent from 1994 to 2000, while the median family income of
U.S. natives grew half that fast. For recent immigrants, the growth
in real median family income was even larger: 40.5 percent, an
increase of more than $10,000 over the 1994-2000 period. The
following tabulation, based once more on M arch cps data,
presents income figures for each o f the demographic groups
examined in this article:

R eal median family income Percent change,
1994
All p e rs o n s .......... . $44,573
U.S. n a tiv e s ............. . 46,011
Im m igrants................ . 33,601
Recent im m igrants... . 26,257

2000
$50,985
52,057
42,440
36,887

1994-2000
14.4
13.1
26.3
40.5

Because immigrants’ income growth outpaced that of natives,
we need to measure the extent to which this income effect offsets
the share effect in order to assess the census results.

Monthly Labor Review

April 2003

11

Immigration and Poverty

Chart 1.

Poverty rates for all persons, U.S. natives, immigrants, and recent immigrants, 1994-2000

Percent

Percent

The impact of the share and income effects
The share effect is largely driven by the magnitude of the
increase in the immigrant share of the population. Nationally,
this share grew by 2.6 percentage points between 1994 and 2000.
The share o f the population consisting of recent immigrants
grew less than 1 percentage point during the same period.4 In
New York, the immigrant share of the population grew by 3.6
percentage points, in California by 1.2 percentage points.
In the analysis that follows, a simple shift-share technique
decomposes the change in the overall poverty rate, assigning
separable contributions to the im pact o f changes in the
population shares of im m igrants and natives (holding the
poverty rate constant) and to changes in their poverty rates
(holding the population shares constant).5 Table 1 shows that,
as expected, the increase in the share of immigrants raised
poverty in each case, although in no case by as much as even a
percentage point. For recent immigrants, the increase in poverty
due to their larger national share was only two-tenths of a
percentage point.
The decline in immigrant poverty rates (the income effect),

12
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

April 2003

however, as shown in chart 1, more than offset the share effect,
so the net result was that immigration lowered poverty for each
group. Take, for example, the case of California. Although the
share effect added three-tenths of a percentage point to the
poverty rate, the income effect— the fall in immigrant poverty in
California— contributed 3.2 percentage points to poverty’s
decline. The net impact of immigration on California poverty
was to lower the State’s rate by 2.9 percentage points. For New
York, the result was less dramatic, because, whereas the
immigrant poverty rate fell steeply (see the second tabulation
on page 3), the share grew more quickly than in California and
thus added just under a point to the change in poverty between
1994 and 2000. Here, too, however, the poverty-reducing impact
of the income effect more than offset the share effect.
Median incomes do not allow the same type of decomposition
as do poverty rates. So, to gauge the relationship between share
and income effects, on the one hand, and changes in median
income, on the other, a technique is applied that is similar in
spirit to the poverty shift-share analysis.6 The following
tabulation shows the growth (in percent) in real median family
income from 1994 to 2000 in two ways—the actual growth itself

and the growth with the immigrant share held constant:

N a tio n a l.....................
C alifornia.................
N ew Y o rk ................

A ctu a l
14.4
10.1
14.4

C onstant shares
15.0
11.7
16.1

Difference
-0 .6
-1 .6
-1 .6

If the national immigrant population had remained at its 1994
population share in 2000, then real m edian family income
would have been only 0.6 percent higher than it actually was.
In both New York and California, the share effect lowered
income growth by 1.6 percent. Although we cannot isolate
the income effect here, as we could w ith the poverty rates,
the large growth in im m igrant income likely offset any share
effects o f the magnitude shown in the tabulation.

The 1989-99 period: preliminary analysis
As noted earlier, the census data needed to perform an
analysis of the full 1990s business cycle are not yet available.
To gain some prelim inary insight into what these results are
likely to show, this section examines the poverty rates and
population shares of im m igrants and natives in New York
and California— in 1989 using the 1990 Census data, and in
1999 using the M arch cps .
By crossing data sets in this manner, some error is certainly
introduced into the analysis. For example, the 1999 cps poverty
rates for New York and California are 14.1 percent and 13.8
percent, respectively, while the corresponding published census
rates are 14.6 percent and 14.2 percent. However, these errors
are likely o f a relatively small order o f magnitude, so that,
while the numbers would surely be a bit different if Census 2000
microdata were used, the substance of the results would likely

Table 1.

be unchanged. Still, because census and cps estimates of median
family incomes are quite different, the focus here is solely on
poverty rates.
Table 2 shows poverty rates in the two periods, along with a
shift-share analysis like the one in table 1. According to the
analysis of cps data presented herein, California poverty went
up 1.4 percentage points, from 12.4 percent to 13.8 percent,
between 1989 and 1999. Poverty rates were essentially unchanged for immigrants in California from 1989 to 1999 and were
slightly higher for natives (1.1 percentage points). However, the
immigrant share (not shown) rose by 6.2 percentage points, so
the question is, again, How quantitatively meaningful are these
shifts in determining California poverty rates over the period?7
The shift share shows that, with poverty rates held constant,
the increase in the immigrant share of the population added 1.3
percentage points to California’s poverty over the 1989-99
period. In other words, the strong economy of the 1990s (the
impact of which was concentrated in the second half of the
decade) failed to reduce California’s poverty, even after the
impact of a larger immigration share of the population is extracted.
The New York data tell a similar story. Poverty rose 1.3
percentage points on the whole, with natives’ poverty up 1.5
points and immigrant poverty down slightly. The immigrant share
grew by 4.5 percentage points, which, with poverty rates held
constant, added nine-tenths of a percentage point to the growth
in poverty. (The decline in immigrant poverty reduced the overall
growth slightly, by two-tenths of a percentage point.) Thus,
even in the absence of a larger New York immigrant share,
poverty rates in that State would have increased from 1989 to
1999.
Given that the analysis shifts between the two data sets,
the 1989-99 results are less reliable than the 1994-2000 cps

Shift-share analysis: impact of changes in share and rate of poverty, 1994-2000

[In percent]
N a tio n or S tate a n d c a te g o r y
o f Im p a c t

U.S. natives

All
Immigrants

Total

National:
T otal........................................................................
Impact of change in share of population...................
impact of change in rate of poverty...........................

-2.8
-.3
-2.5

-0.4
.6
-1.0

-3.3
.3
-3.6

-2.1
-.1
-2.0

-2.9
.3
-3.2

-5.0
.2
-5.2

-2.2
-.5
-1.8

-1.4
.9
-2.2

-3.6
.4
-4.0

California:
T otal........................................................................
Impact of change in share of population...................
Impact of change in rate of poverty...........................
New York:
Total........................................................................
Impact of change in share of population...................
Impact of change in rate of poverty...........................

Note:

,

Dash indicates no analysis performed because sample size was

too small.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

S ource:

U.S. natives

R ecent
Immigrants

-2.9
-.1
-2.8

-.4
.2
-.6

_
-

_
-

-

_
-

-

Total

-3.3
.1
-3.4
-

-

Authors’ analysis of March cps data.

Monthly Labor Review

April 2003

13

Immigration and Poverty

Table 2.

the chief cause of the standstill in poverty rates and leave it at
that. Other factors were responsible and need to be under­
stood as well.

Poverty rates and shift-share analysis,
California and New York, 1989-99

[In percent]

U.S. natives

P overty ra te or shift sh are

Im migrants

A l t h o u g h t h e b o o m o f t h e l a t t e r 1990 s l i f t e d l o w
Total

C alifornia

Poverty rate:
1989 census ra te ...................
1999 cps ra te ..........................
Change, 1989-99...................
Shift share, 1989-99:
Total....................................
Impact of change in share
of population.......................
Impact of change in rate
of poverty............................

9.3
10.4
1.1

20.6
20.5
-.1

12.4
13.8
1.4

.2

1.2

1.4

-.6

1.3

.7

.8

.0

.8

10.6
12.1
1.5

20.1
19.5
-.7

12.7
14.1
1.3

.6

.7

1.3

-.5

.9

.4

1.1

-.2

1.0

N e w York

Poverty rate:
1989 census ra te ...................
1999 cps ra te ..........................
Change, 1989-99...................
Shift share, 1989-99:
Total....................................
Impact of change in share
of population........................
Impact of change in rate
of poverty............................

S ource: Authors’ analysis of

cps and 1990 census data.

results, but they have the advantage o f covering the full
b u sin e ss cycle. T he 1 9 8 9 -9 9 an aly sis show s th a t the
conventional wisdom regarding im m igrants’ contribution to
poverty has som e m erit in th a t th e increased share of
im m igrants did place upward pressure on poverty rates in
both California and New York.
The results, however, also show that immigration is by no
means the whole story in understanding poverty trends over the
1990s. On the basis of a simple shift-share analysis, once the
impact o f the growth o f im m igration is extracted, poverty is
seen to have been unchanged over the decade in California and
to have risen slightly in New York. Given the acknowledged
economic prosperity of the 1990s, this finding implies that, as
the census data are released and scrutinized, researchers
cannot simply cite the increase in im m igration as the only or

i n c o m e s , census data reveal that economic progress by­
passed some dem ographic groups, particularly in certain
States. With very little analysis, some commentators have
cited increased immigration as the sole or the chief causative
factor of flat poverty rates. By contrast, while no analysis
could completely account for the effects of im m igration (both
positive and negative), the one presented in this article
indicates that poverty rates would have been only slightly
lower, and median income only slightly higher, between 1994
and 2000 if immigration rates had remained constant.
The preliminary analysis of the 1989-99 period yields a
similar conclusion. Although data limitations suggest that the
results be viewed with caution, it is still the case that, had
immigration not increased between 1989 and 1999, poverty
rates would not have fallen in California and would have
increased slightly in New York.
None of the preceding discussion should be taken to imply
that immigration plays no role in the economic trends of the
1990s, but, thus far, immigration’s role appears to have been
overstated at the expense of other, more fundamentally economic
factors. Both New York and California, for example, saw largerthan-average increases in inequality over the decade, and the
incomes of the wealthy pulled far ahead of those at the middle
and the bottom of the income scale.8In many States, the increase
in inequality m eant that the grow th that did occur went
disproportionately to those at the top of the income scale, leaving
those at the lower end more vulnerable to poverty, regardless of
their status as natives or immigrants.
The 1990s economic boom arrived later in New York and
C alifornia than it did in the rest of the United States. For
example, unemployment in New York City was 8 percent in
1998, compared with 4.5 percent for the Nation. The fact that
unemployment rem ained high for a tim e in New York City
m eant that all less advantaged workers, not ju st immigrants,
faced a slack labor market. Any defensible accounting o f the
trends in incom e and poverty over the 1990s needs to
include at least these explanations and probably others as
well.
□

Notes
The authors thank the Foundation for Child
Development, the Joyce Foundation, the John D. and Catherine T.
MacArthur Foundation, the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation, and the
Rockefeller Foundation for their support of our work that culminated in
this article. We also benefited from comments by Steve Camarota, Deborah
ACKNOWLEDGMENT:

14
Monthly Labor Review

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

April 2003

Reed, Cordelia Reimers, and Larry Mishel.
1
Because the poverty rate tends to rise during recessions and fall
during expansions, it is desirable to compare poverty rates at similar
points in the business cycle. Fortunately, the years covered by the

2000 census began with one peak and ended in a near peak. (The
1990s recovery went through 2000). The official source for year-toyear estimates of poverty and income is the March Current Population
Survey ( c p s ), the main data source in this article. According to the CPS,
the U.S. poverty rate grew from 12.8 percent in 1989 to 15.1 percent
in 1993 and then fell to 11.8 percent in 1999.

multiplied by the average population share. The sum of these components
equals the change in the overall poverty rate. Note that this technique
measures only the share and income effects as described in the text. There
is a large literature evaluating the impact of the presence of immigrants
on native citizens’ incomes, employment, and wages that goes well beyond
this simple shift-share analysis.

2 See, for example, Janny Scott, “Census Finds Immigrants Lower
C ity ’s Income,” The New York Times, Aug. 6, 2002; and “Census Finds
Rising Tides, Many Who Missed Boat,” The New York Times, June 17,
2002. See also “ ’90s Boom Had Broad Impact; 2000 Census Cites
Income Growth Among Poor, Upper Middle Class,” The Washington
Post June 5, 2000.

6 The approach is to adjust the sample weights in the final year so
that the immigrant share of the population is the same as it was in the
base year and to recalculate median income in the final year by using
these adjusted weights. Because of the share effect, this approach will
result in a higher value of median income than the actual level. The
difference between the simulated and actual median then represents
the impact of the increased share of immigrants on income growth
between the base and final year.

3 The Census Bureau will release two sets of microdata: a 1-percent
sample and a 5-percent sample. Each of these data sets contains a
sample o f answers to the long-form survey. For reasons of
confidentiality, the Census Bureau does not release the full set of
answers to the long-form survey, which was sent to 1 in 6 households.
4 Data from the 2000 census support these findings. According to
those data, the share of the national population that was foreign bom
increased 3.2 percentage points from 1990 to 2000, and the share of
the population that entered the United States recently increased 1.2
percentage points. These figures do not include persons bom in U.S.
territories or the citizen children of immigrants.
5 The first component mentioned is the change in population shares
for each group, multiplied by the average poverty rate across the 19942000 period. The second component is the change in the poverty rates,

Appendix:

7 The 2000 March CPS weights will be adjusted to reflect data
collected from the 2000 census. However, comparing the 2000 census
counts of the foreign-bom population with the 2000 March CPS counts
suggests that the CPS undercounted naturalized citizens and overcounted
noncitizens. Because naturalized citizens have a lower poverty rate
than noncitizens have, this adjustment should actually lower the
im migrant poverty rate, decreasing estim ates o f the im pact of
immigration on poverty and income.
8 Jared Bernstein, Heather Boushey, Elizabeth McNichol, and Robert
Zahradnik, Pulling Apart: A State-by-State Analysis o f Income Trends
(Washington, DC, Economic Policy Institute and Center on Budget and
Policy Priorities, 2002).

Data considerations

M ost o f the analysis presented in the text o f this article runs from
1994 to 2000, the years for w hich data are available for examining
changes in native and immigrant income trends and their population
shares. The widely cited census data, by contrast, provide com ­
parisons between 1989 and 1999. Because the Census B ureau’s
2000 m icrodata are not yet available, that period cannot be fully
analyzed, although the article does compare 1990 census data (which
cites poverty data for 1989) with M arch 2000 C urrent Population
Survey ( cps) data for 1999.
The eventual release o f the Census Bureau’s microdata will allow
the researcher to analyze trends in poverty rates from one business
cycle peak (1989) to the next (1999, although 2000 was the actual
peak). The microdata are also consistent over the 2 years and have large
sample sizes. The census-to-CPS comparison used in the analysis
presented herein, while meeting the peak-to-peak criterion, introduces
some inconsistencies because the data are from two different data sets.
Still, there are num erous advantages to the CPS data. M ost
importantly, the cps allows the calculation o f income levels and poverty
rates for U.S. natives and immigrants from 1994 to 2000, and, while
these years do not cover the entire business cycle, they do cover the
boom years. I f the share effect truly dampened progress against poverty
or lowered income growth, these data should reveal it as effectively as
the census data. Also, because the main objective o f this article is to
compare immigrants with natives in respect o f poverty (and to measure
the extent to which increased immigration kept poverty from falling
further), there is somewhat less o f a concern with going peak to peak
than with comparing the two groups over the same years. Presumably,


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

both groups were affected by the growing U.S. economy over this
period, which provides some control over the cycle.
The analysis presented here looks at the Nation as a whole and
specifically at N ew York and California— two States in which one
might reasonably expect immigration to play a large role in determining
poverty rates. More than 1 in 4 N ew Yorkers and 1 in 3 Californians
are immigrants (as defined in the next paragraph). Also, the poverty
rates o f these two States were higher in 1999 than in 1989, according to
2000 census data.
The Bureau o f Labor Statistics and the Census Bureau define the
fo reig n -b o m population as those persons born abroad to parents
who are not U.S. citizens. For the purposes o f the current article,
persons bom in Puerto Rico and other U.S. territories are added, because
they share many o f the economic characteristics o f the foreign bom.
Children bom within the United States are U.S. citizens and are not
included in the census statistics on the foreign bom. However, given
that the income level (and hence poverty status) o f children depends
on that o f their parents, we define children living with only immigrant
parents as immigrants. Both Puerto Ricans and the citizen children o f
immigrants have higher poverty rates than the census-defined foreignbom persons, so including them in the definition thereof should increase
estimates o f the impact o f immigration. Thus, immigrants are defined
as persons born abroad to parents who are not U.S. citizens, persons
bom in Puerto Rico or some other U.S. territory, and children living
with only immigrant parents. Finally, for the purposes o f the article,
recent immigrants are defined as those immigrants who entered the
United States within the last 10 years.

Monthly Labor Review

April 2003

15

Differences in productivity growth:
Canadian-U.S. businesssectors, 1987-2000
Productivity growth picked up significantly in 1995
fo r the United States, and in 1996for Canada,
driven in both cases by a resurgence o f productivity
in services, however, Canadian productivity growth
has remained lower than that in the United States
Umar Faruqui,
Wulong Gu,
Mustapha Kad,
Mireille Laroche,
and
Jean-Pierre Maynard

he p ro d u c tiv ity perfo rm an ce o f the
Canadian business sector relative to its
U.S. counterpart has been the subject of
numerous recent studies.1 However, previous
work has focussed mainly on the manufacturing
sector to explain the Canada-U.S. gap, without
really exploring the role played by other industry
groups. Furtherm ore, previous studies have
tended to concentrate on Canada-U.S. industrylevel productivity performance in the early 1990s.2
In th is study, we use an in d u stry -le v e l
decomposition to better assess the role played
by various industries in the Canada-U.S. gap in
productivity growth in the business sector.3 Our
methodology takes into account the fact that both
industry-level productivity performance and the
industrial com position o f the economy affect
aggregate productivity grow th.4 Ideally, our
Umar Faruqui is an
economist at the
analysis should cover the period from 1985
Department of Finance,
onwards.5 Because o f data constraints, however,
Ottawa, Canada, Ethe study looks at Canadian and U.S. productivity
mail:
Faruqui.UmarAhmed@fin. growth from 1987 to 2000 only.6 Furthermore, our
gc.ca. Wulong Gu and
analysis pays special attention to the subperiod
Mustapha Kaci are
1996 to 2000 for two reasons. First, by the late
economists at Statistics
C anada;
1990s, productivity growth had picked up in both
Mireille Laroche is an
the
Canadian and the U.S. business sectors, but
economist at the
it remained lower in Canada. Emphasis on this
Departmet of Finance,
O ttawa, Canada; and p e rio d b rin g s to lig h t the in d u stries m ost
Jean-Pierre Maynard is
responsible for the remaining difference. Second,
Chief of Labor
our study examines industry-level productivity
Productivity Section,
MEAD Statistics
growth for Canada and the United States for the
Canada, Ottawa,
post-1996
period using comparable data. Therefore,
Canada. E-mail:
maynard@statcan,ca, we seek to highlight these new data in the study.

T

16
Monthly Labor Review

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

April 2003

Trends
The slow er productivity grow th in Canada,
compared with that in the United States is often
identified as the m ain factor explaining the
growing Canada-U.S. real income gap per capita.
Since 1981, C anada’s standard o f living per­
formance has lagged, on average, behind that o f
the U nited S tates.7 The m ajor b reak in the
Canada-U.S. productivity performance seems to
have occurred around 1985, when productivity
growth in Canada slowed significantly, relative
to U.S. growth.8 (See chart 1.)
Two distinct time periods can be identified:
from 1970 to 1985, productivity growth in the
Canadian business sector gain ground on their
American counterpart; after 1985, however, the
United States outperformed Canada. By the end
o f the 1990s, the Canada-U.S. productivity level
gap expanded by 7 percentage points, relative to
its value in the m id-1980s.
Our analysis shows that productivity growth
picked up significantly in the U nited States
starting in 1995 and in Canada starting in 1996,
driven in both cases by a resurgence in service
sector productivity. However, this growth has
remained lower in Canada than in the United
States. Our analysis suggests that the service
sector contributed m ost significantly to the
Canada-U.S. business sector growth gap from
1987 to 1996, whereas the manufacturing sector
was the dominant player in explaining the gap
from 1996 to 2000.

Chart 1.

Ratio of Canada/U.S. relative labor productivity performance in the business sector,
1970-2000

1970 = 100

1970 =100
106

104

-

102
100

98

96

94

92

90

1970 1972 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002
Source:

Canadian data extracted from

c a n s im

tables 383-0005; U.S. data extracted from

The data
The sample period for our analysis is from 1987 to 2000, with
special emphasis on 1996 to 2000. The analysis focuses on
labor productivity, defined as output per hour worked.9 To
ensure comparability across countries, we measure productivity
on a value-added chain-Fisher basis for both Canada and the
United States. Our data allow for a comparison o f annual
productivity growth rates between the two countries over the
1987-2000 period for the total business sector and four major
industrial sectors: primary,10construction, manufacturing and
services. Because o f data limitations for Canada,11 we can
perform more detailed analysis within each o f these sectors
for the 1987-97 period only.

Canadian data.

P ro ductivity data for Canada are from
Statistics Canada. In the past, industry-level output and
productivity data have been available with only a considerable
lag. These data are derived from the input-output accounts and
often lag the latest aggregate output and productivity data by 3
to 4 years. Previous studies examining the industry-level
productivity performance in the Canadian business sector,
therefore, have had to either manage with somewhat out-ofdate data or resort to using other sources for the industrylevel output data. One alternate source for output data by
industry is the gross dom estic pro d u ct at basic prices
(GDPBP) accounts. The GDPBP, however, are on a Laspeyres

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

b ls

Web site.

fixed-price basis, whereas U.S. data are on a chain-Fisher
basis. O ur study presents C anadian broad sector-level
details on a chain-Fisher basis for labor productivity for the
post-1996 period.
The output data for the 1987-97 period are derived from
revised input-output tables, w hich now incorporate the
capitalization o f software.12 The real output estimates are
constructed from a chain-Fisher index up to the most current
year for which the input-output tables are available (currently
1997). These data embody the industry-level data available
to researchers prior to this study. For this period, output and
hours data are available for 230 industries within the business
sector.
Post-1997 industry-level data are a unique aspect o f this
study. For the post-1997 period, output data for the aggregate
business sector correspond to the average annual estimates
o f quarterly value-added growth. Industry-level output data
for the post-1997 period are restricted to only four industry
groups (as opposed to 230 industries for the pre-1997 period)
and are based on chain-Fisher estimates13 o f the real value
added. These estimates are constructed from Laspeyres
volume indexes o f industry real gross domestic product at
basic prices published by Statistics C anada’s Industry
Measures and Analysis Division, with some adjustments.
Since complete data for the full sample (1987 to 2000) are
available only for the business sector and the four main
industry groups, the focus here will be on these industry

Monthly Labor Review April 2003

17

Differences in Productivity Growth

groups. However, in a second step, we also examine the
manufacturing and service sectors in more detail over the
limited sample period (1987 to 1997).
Hours worked represent the total number o f hours that a
person devotes to work, whether paid or unpaid. We calculate
this num ber as the product o f the number o f jobs times the
average hours w orked, both o f w hich are derived from
household and establishment surveys.

U.S. data. Industry-level productivity data for the United
States are harder to obtain than for Canada, as the Bureau o f
Labor Statistics does not publish these data for industry
groups other than the m anufacturing, retail trade, and
wholesale trade sectors. Therefore, we have constructed
these data from source data for our analysis.14
The output data used are from the Bureau o f Economic
Analysis ( b e a ) .15 The gross domestic product by industry or
“gross product originating” (GPO) include nominal valueadded and chain-w eighted real o utput for 62 detailed
industries for the period 1987 to 2000.16 U.S. disaggregated
output by industry is available only for private industries
and not the business sector. The primary distinction between
the two categories is that ‘business sector’ includes government
enterprises, whereas ‘private industries’ excludes them .17
A lthough different conceptually, there is no significant
disparity in the behavior o f the two series.18 Hence, in our
study, we use the private sector aggregate as a close proxy
for the U.S. business sector.
We use the BLS hours worked data that are for total hours
worked o f all employed persons, including proprietors. Data
for both industry-level output and hours are available for 62
industry groups within the business sector.

Results
The productivity performance in both the Canadian and the
U.S. business sectors over the period 1987-2000 can be
broken into two distinct episodes: an era o f relatively modest
productivity growth, followed by a period o f more robust
performance.
The U.S. productivity revival over the second half o f the
1990s has been well documented in the literature.19 Indeed, the
productivity performance o f the U.S. business sector has been
nothing short o f spectacular since 1995: average annual
productivity growth increased from 1.5 percent over the 1987—
96 period to 2.6 percent over the 1996-2000 period. Canada
also showed a revival in business sector productivity over
the same p eriod20— average annual productivity growth
increased from 1.0 percent over the 1987-96 period to 2.2
percent over 1996-2000. These numbers suggest that al­
though average annual productivity growth has remained
lower in Canada than in the United States, the improvement

18
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

April 2003

in productivity growth from the earlier to the later period has
been as significant in Canada (1.2 percentage points) as it
has been in the United States (1.1 percentage points).21
The C anada-U .S. gap in productivity grow th in the
business sector has remained roughly unchanged over the
last 15 years: -0 .5 percentage points from 1987 to 1996 a n d 0.4 percentage points from 1996 to 2000.22 An issue con­
cerning the U.S. data should be mentioned before we turn to
the industrial sources o f the Canada-U.S. productivity gap.
As mentioned in the previous section, we use output data
from the BEA in our analysis. A trouble-some aspect o f the
BEA output data is that a statistical discrepancy exists in the
estim ate o f output for private industries (our proxy for
business sector output). This statistical discrepancy is the
difference between the sum o f gross domestic product from
the expenditure side and the sum obtained from the industry
output side. Because the BEA views the expenditure-side data
as more reliable, the statistical discrepancy is added as an
“industry” to the industry output accounts.23 As the statistical
discrepancy is quite large and negative over the second half o f
the 1990s, the use o f industiy-level productivity growth over
recent years may be misleading, particularly when one wants to
better understand the aggregate U.S. picture or do country
comparisons.
To ensure co n sisten cy betw een th e ag g reg ate and
industry-level productivity growth rates, we have to adjust
industry output levels for the statistical discrepancy. Our
approach to this problem is to divide the real statistical
discrepancy among the industries. (See appendix section
“Industry decomposition productivity gap” for details.)24
Table 1 documents the unadjusted and adjusted industrylevel productivity growth rates for the U.S. industries. The first
thing to note is that adjusted numbers for business sector
productivity are roughly equivalent to the official BLS data for
business sector productivity growth. The same cannot be
said for the unadjusted data. The table also shows that
although the effect o f the adjustm ents on industry-level
productivity performance is minimal for the period 1987 to
1996, there is a noticeable impact for the period 1996 to 2000.
Since the statistical discrepancy is large and negative in the
late 1990s, the adjusted productivity growth rates are lower
than the unadjusted figures.
In the remainder o f this section, we investigate the industrial
sources o f the Canada-U.S. gap in productivity growth in four
steps. Aggregate productivity growth for each country is a
function of both industry-level productivity performance as well
as the industrial composition o f the economy.25 Therefore, the
first two steps are to examine industry-level productivity
performance and the industrial structure o f the business sector
in each country. The third step involves an industrial de­
composition o f the aggregate productivity growth in each
country. Finally, in the fourth step, we put all the pieces together

Table 1.

U.S. average annual labor productivity growth using adjusted and unadjusted data, 1987-2000

(In percent)
1987 -1 996
Business s e c to r 2

19 96-2000

1.5
U n a d ju sted

Swing1

2.7
A djusted

Unadjusted

1.2
A djusted

Unadjusted

A dju ste d

Business sector (sector aggregation).......

*1.5

1.5

33.2

2.6

1.7

1.1

Primary industries......................................
Construction..............................................
Manufacturing............................................
Services.....................................................

2.7
.1
2.6
1.1

2.7
.2
2.6
1.1

4.5
-.5
5.1
2.8

3.9
-1.0
4.6
2.3

1.8
-.6
2.5
1.7

1.2
-1.2
2.0
1.2

Based on official BLS published data.
Using private sector aggregate calculated as a sum of industry outputs.

1 “Swing” is the change in average annual productivity growth across
the 1987-96 and 1996-2000 periods.

and carry out a contribution to growth analysis by industry
for the Canada-U.S. gap in productivity growth. Note again
that our prim ary analysis is done using adjusted U.S. output
data. However, as a robustness check, industry decomposition
analysis using the unadjusted U.S. industry data is shown in
the appendix.

Productivity growth by industry. Table 2 com pares the
productivity performance o f Canadian and U.S. industries.
Over the 1987-96 period, Canada lagged behind the United
States in alm ost all major industry groups except for the
prim ary sector. In contrast, between 1996 and 2000, the
difference becam e less significant. Unadjusted U.S. data
suggest that Canada lagged behind the United States in the
service and manufacturing sectors, whereas the adjusted data
suggest that Canada has lower productivity growth only in
the m anufacturing sector.
Two other points also emerge from the analysis. First,
U.S. and C anadian growth in service sector productivity
surged from the earlier to the later period. Furthermore, the
improvement in service sector productivity performance from
the earlier to the later period was as significant for Canada as
it was for the United States. Second, table 2 shows that while
the productivity performance o f the Canadian manufacturing
sector deteriorated across the periods, the U.S. manufacturing
sector registered an impressive surge in productivity.26 This
implies that the gap in productivity growth (Canada minus
the United States) in the manufacturing sector opened up
significantly across the two periods.

Industrial structure. Industrial structure can be explored,
among other ways, by focussing on the shares of nominal
output and hours accounted for by individual industries. The
table below presents the average shares of nom inal output
and hours by industry in the Canadian and U.S. business
sectors over the 1987-2000 period27:


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Nominal output

Hours worked

United
United
Canada States Canada States
Prim ary in d u stries.....
C o n stru ctio n............... .......
M anufacturing............ .......
Services........................ .......

8.2
7.8
24.6
59.3

3.6
4.9
20.0
71.4

7.3
9.1
19.8
63.8

3.6
7.8
22.1
66.5

Four m ain messages emerge from this analysis:
1.

The service sector forms a smaller share of the business
sector in Canada than it does in the United States.28

2.

The importance of the service sector within the business
sector has increased considerably since the late 1980s
for both Canada and the United States: from 1987 to 1997,
the service sector’s share of nom inal output increased
from 56 percent to 60 percent for Canada, and from 68
percent to 73 percent for the United States. (See appendix
table A -3.)

3.

The manufacturing sector has greater relative importance
in Canada than in the United States in its contribution to
nom inal output. However, the m anufacturing sector
accounts for a larger share of hours in the U nited States
than it does in Canada.

4.

The primary and construction industries are relatively
small in both countries, accounting for less than 15
percent o f nom inal output and total hours in both
countries.

Decomposing aggregate productivity growth.

The in ­
dustrial structure and productivity performance by industry
can be combined w ithin a growth decomposition framework
to exam ine the contribution o f each industry toward ag­
gregate productivity growth. In our study, we adopt the
methodology outlined in the McKinsey study.29 Using this

Monthly Labor Review April 2003

19

Differences in Productivity Growth

methodology, changes in aggregate productivity ( p p ) in
country c between period t-1 and t can be written as follows:30
lp ;

= ^

'Z W .- i - X u - i ) - h ;

h:

H‘

='£Pu-r(LK)+R;

(!)

w here CC-',^ is the lagged n om inal output share o f
ind u stry ‘i ’, Pu_x= {H ctj H ‘ )ofi t_x, X h -i is the lagged hours
worked share o f industry ‘f , iH >represents hours worked,
‘Y ’ represents chain-Fisher measure of real value-added output
and the dot (‘ ’) over a variable indicates the growth operator.
Equation (1) consists of two interrelated parts: a ‘direct’ effect
and a ‘reallocation’ effect. The direct effect, the first term of
equation (1), is the w eighted average o f industry-level
productivity performance, with the weights equaling the nominal
output shares of the industries. As industries improve their

Table 2.

productivity, aggregate productivity rises in proportion with
industry size. The reallocation effect, R ct in equation (1), can be
thought of as the impact on aggregate productivity growth from
the movement of resources across industries. The reallocation
effect is positive if resources move into industries that have
higher nominal labor productivity. The direct effect can be
interpreted at the industry level, whereas the reallocation effect
makes sense for the aggregate only.31
Using equation (1), the gap in aggregate productivity growth
between two countries^ and B can be expressed as follows:32

L P ° - LPf

=

X

♦<*?-*,'*>

(2)

In equation (2), we decompose the aggregate productivity
growth gap into three parts: a “pure productivity” effect, a

Canada-U.S. industry-level productivity growth, 1987-2000
1 9 8 7 -9 6

19 96-2000

Swing'

Industry
C anada

Business sector...............................
Primary industries............................
Construction.....................................
Manufacturing..................................
Services...........................................

1.0
3.1
-.7
2.1
.7

U nited States

1.5
2.7
.2
2.6
1.1

2.2
5.2
.4
1.9
2.3

1 “Swing” is the change in average annual productivity growth across
the 1987-96 and 1996-2000 periods.

Table 3.

Canada2

U nited States

C anada

U nited S tates

2.6
3.9
-1.0
4.6
2.3

1.2
2.1
1.1
-.2
1.6

1.1
1.2
-1.2
2.0
1.2

2 Estimates for the 1998-2000 period at the industry-level are preliminary
and subject to revisions.

Contribution to business sector productivity growth in Canada and United States, 1987-2000
Industry a n d e ffe c t

1987-9 6

19 96-2000

Swing1

C anada

Average business sector productivity growth2.......
Direct contribution from—
Primary.................................................................
Construction.........................................................
Manufacturing.......................................................
Services...............................................................

1.0

2.2

1.1

.3
-.1
.5
.4

.4
.0
.5
1.4

.1
.1
0
.9

Reallocation effect...................................................

-.1

.0

.0

Average business sector productivity grow th.......
Direct contribution from—
Prim ary.................................................................
Construction.........................................................
Manufacturing.......................................................
Services........................................ .......................

1.5

2.6

1.1

.1
.0
.5
.8

.1
-.1
.9
1.7

.0
-.1
.3
.9

Reallocation effect...................................................

.1

.0

-.1

U nited States

1“Swing" is the change from the 1987-96 to the 1996-2000 period.


20
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

April 2003

Figures may not sum due to rounding and residual errors.

“structure” effect and a “reallocation” effect. The pure produc­
tivity effect (the first term) captures the contribution from
differences in productivity performance o f industries between
the two countries. The structure effect (the second term) in­
dicates the contribution from differences in the size o f the
industry (relative to the respective business sector) across
countries. The structure effect is positive if country B has a
higher share o f industries with faster productivity growth.
Finally, the reallocation effect (the third term) measures the
difference in the movement o f resources across industries be­
tween the two countries. The reallocation effect is positive if there
are fester shifts in resources toward industries that are more
productive. Akin to the analysis in the last section, only the pure
productivity effect can be analyzed at the industry level; the other
two effects are examined at the aggregate level only.
Table 3 presents the decomposition results for Canada and
the United States. The results show that the Canadian manu­
facturing sector contributed most significantly to business
sector productivity growth over the 1987-96 period, followed
by the service and primary sectors. For the 1996- 2000 period,
however, it is the service sector that contributes most signi­
ficantly to aggregate productivity growth followed by the
manufacturing sector. Our decomposition o f the pickup in
productivity growth across the two periods clearly shows that
the service sector was responsible in large part for this phe­
nomenon. Finally, the contribution from the reallocation effect is
small but negative over the 1987-96 period.33
A similar decomposition o f the U.S. aggregate productivity
growth shows the service sector as the dominant industry over
both periods (1987-96 and 1996-2000), followed by the
manufacturing sector. As is the case in Canada, we find that the
importance o f the service sector to overall productivity growth
has increased in recent years. The results also show that the
pickup in overall productivity in the late 1990s can be attributed
in large part to the improvement in service sector productivity.
Lastly, the estimated contribution from the reallocation effect is
found to be minimal over both periods. Using unadjusted BEA
data provides similar results. (See appendix section, “Industry
decomposition”)
The follow ing tabulation presents the industrial decom ­
position o f the Canada-U.S. productivity growth gap (Canada
minus the United States) using equation (2). (Note: figures
may not sum due to rounding.):
1 987-96 1996-2000
Canada-U.S. productivity growth gap ....
‘P ure’ productivity contribution from—
P rim a ry ......................................................
C o n stru ctio n .............................................
M an u factu rin g .........................................
S ervices......................................................

-0 .5

-0 .4

.0
-.1
-.1
-.2

.0
.1
-.6
- .0

Structure e ffe c t............................................
Reallocation effect......................................

.1
-.1

.1
.0


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Two key findings emerge from the results in the tabulation:
1.

In terms o f the “pure” productivity effect, the service
sector is the largest contributor to the business sector
gap over the 1 9 8 7-96 period, com pared w ith the
manufacturing sector for the 1996-2000 period.

2.

At the aggregate level, structure and reallocation effects
are small and offsetting.

Before we proceed further, however, two caveats to the results
are in order. First, our industrial decomposition results for the
1996-2000 period are considerably affected by the adjustments
made to the U.S. output data: when we use unadjusted data,
both the manufacturing and the service sectors contribute to
the pure productivity gap over the 1996- 2000 period (See
appendix section on “industry decomposition,” table A-3
showing the contribution to business sector productivity gap
betw een C anada and U nited States.); as in the analysis,
how ever, the contribution from the manufacturing sector
remains most significant.
Second, the decomposition between productivity, structure,
and reallocation effects is sensitive to the level o f disaggre­
gation, as the next section demonstrates. This suggests that if
the analysis o f data presented in the previous tabulation was
redone with more disaggregated data,34 perhaps the pure
productivity effect from the manufacturing sector would not
be as dominant as it is now in explaining the business sector
productivity gap over the 1996 -2 0 0 0 period. It is possible,
for example, that the productivity growth difference in the
manufacturing sector across the two countries reflects a
difference in the industrial structure o f the manufacturing
sector.

Detailed industry analysis
The results from the previous section suggest that both the
service and the manufacturing sectors have played important
roles in the Canada-U.S. gap in productivity growth. This
section examines these two sectors in more detail.
Data availability for Canada restricts the detailed industry
analysis to the 1987-97 period. For the United States, we
continue to use adjusted U.S. output data. (See productivity by
industry, p. 19. ) However, since the average statistical
discrepancy from 1987 to 1997 is close to 0, our results are not
affected by using adjusted, versus unadjusted data. Note that
we do not break the sample into two subperiods. Instead, the
estimates presented in this section are for the whole period
for which detailed data are available, 1987-97.

Manufacturing sector. Detailed data are available for 20
industries within the manufacturing sector for both Canada
Monthly Labor Review April 2003

21

Differences in Productivity Growth

and the United States.35 (See table 4.) We also define two
subaggregates from these industries: high-tech and non­
high-tech manufacturing industries. The high-tech industries
include the machinery and electrical and electronics product
industries, and the non-high-tech industries make up the re­
mainder of the m anufacturing industries.

3.

In Canada, average annual productivity growth is highest
for refined petroleum , followed by m achinery and
transportation industries, but the electronics and
machinery industries dominate in the U.S. manufactur­
ing sector.

4.

For Canada, the largest negative gap in productivity
growth (Canada minus United States) by industry is
for the electrical and electronic industries, while the
most significant positive gap is for the transportation
equipment industries.

5.

H ig h -tech m a n u factu rin g has had m uch slow er
productivity growth in Canada than in the United States.
From 1987 to 1997, productivity growth in the U.S. hightech industries was about twice that in their Canadian
counterparts. Meanwhile, non-high-tech manufacturing
productivity growth was higher in Canada than in the
United States.

Share and productivity analysis o f the manufacturing sector
industries for the 1987-97 period shows that:
1.

In terms o f nominal output share, the transportation
equipm ent in dustry is th e larg est m anufacturing
industry in Canada, whereas the food and beverage
industry is the largest in the United States.

2.

High-tech manufacturing industries are less important
in terms o f size (both nominal output and hours) in
Canada than they are in the United States, whereas
non-high-tech m anufacturing industries are more
important (in terms o f nominal output share) in Canada
than they are in the United States.

Table 4.

Using the contribution to growth methodology outlined
in the previous section, we exam ine the contribution of
manufacturing sector in the Canada-U.S. gap in productivity

Shares and productivity growth in 2-digit manufacturing industries, 1987-97
N o m in a l ou tp ut share

Hours share

Productivity grow th

Industry
Canada

U nited
S tates

C anada

U nited
S tates

Canada

United
States

C a n a d ia n U.S. g a p

Business sector................................................
Manufacturing sector........................................
High-tech industries1.........................................
Non-high tech industries2 .................................

24.4
2.9
21.5

20.5
4.4
16.2

19.9
2.6
17.3

22.7
4.5
18.2

1.2
2.2
4.1
1.9

1.6
2.7
9.9
.7

-0.4
-.5
-5.8
1.2

Logging and wood industries............................
Food and beverage industries.........................
Tobacco products industries............................
Rubber product industries................................
Textile industries...............................................
Leather and allied products..............................
Clothing industries............................................
Furniture and fixture industries........................
Paper and allied products industries...............

2.2
3.1
.2
.9
.5
.1
.6
.4
1.9

2.2
3.1
.2
.7
.4
.1
.5
.3
.9

1.9
2.4
.0
.8
.6
.2
1.0
.6
1.1

1.0
2.0
.1
1.1
.8
.1
1.1
.6
.8

.0
1.0
1.6
1.7
2.4
.2
2.4
2.5
2.6

-3.0
.8
-.7
4.3
3.1
3.5
2.8
1.2
1.2

3.0
.2
2.3
-2.6
-.8
-3.3
-.4
1.3
1.5

Printing, publishing and allied industries.........
Primary metal industries...................................
Fabricated metals products..............................
Machinery industries.........................................
Transportation equipment industries...............
Electrical and electronic product industries....
Nonmetallic mineral product industries............
Refined petroleum and coal product industries.
Chemical and chemical products industries....
Scientific and professional equipment............
Other manufacturing industries.......................

1.5
1.6
1.4
1.4
3.4
1.5
.7
3
2.1
.3
.4

1.4
.8
1.4
2.2
2.3
2.2
.5
.5
2.2
.9
.4

1.4
1.0
1.5
1.4
2.5
1.2
.6
.2
1.0
.2
.6

1.9
.9
1.7
2.5
2.3
2.0
.7
.2
1.3
1.1
.5

-1.8
3.8
1.2
4.9
4.8
3.8
1.0
6.0
2.9
-1.9
3.8

-2.5
2.2
1.2
7.0
-.3
13.1
3.1
1.3
2.9
-.6
1.2

.7
1.5
.0
-2.1
5.0
-9.4
-2.2
4.7
.0
-1.4
2.6

1 Machinery industries plus electrical and electronic product
industries.
2 Manufacturing minus machinery industries minus electrical and

22
Monthly Labor Review

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

April 2003

electronic product industries.

Note: Nominal output and hour shares are expressed relative to the
business sector and represent an average for 1987-97.

growth in the business sector over the 1987-97 period. Our
investigation shows that when viewed in isolation, the hightech m anufacturing industries can account for a large portion
o f the C anada-U .S. gap in business sector productivity
growth over this period. (See table 5.) However, the negative
impact o f the high-tech industries is countered by a positive
contribution to the gap in business sector productivity growth
from ‘other manufacturing industries’ led by transportation
equipment industries. These two effects together partially
offset one another. Therefore, while the high-tech m anu­
facturing industries figure significantly in the Canada-U.S.
gap in productivity growth, the overall contribution of the
manufacturing sector to the gap is close to zero for the 198797 p erio d .
O ur analysis also shows the sensitivity o f decomposition
analysis to the level of aggregation used for the examination.
The first p a rt o f table 5 shows the contribution o f the
m anufacturing sector industries to the business sector gap
using the 20 industries w ithin the manufacturing sector for
I

the calculations. The last four rows show the same calculations
using only the aggregate manufacturing sector data. Note that
although the total contribution of the manufacturing sector to
the gap is unchanged, the component effects are different across
these two calculations. This raises the possibility that if we were
to explore the high-tech industries in even more detail, the
productivity effect may disappear and be replaced by a struc­
ture impact: Canada may just be producing more products
requiring lower productivity growth than the United States
does.

Service sector. D etailed industry data is available for seven
industries within the service sector36 for both C anada and
the U nited States.37 Share and productivity analysis of the
service sector industries for the 1987-97 period (table 6)
shows that:
1.

In terms of nominal output share, the service sector as a
whole is much larger in the United States than in Canada.

C o n trib u tio n o f m a n u fa c tu rin g in d u s trie s to C a n a d a -U .S . busin e ss s e c to r p ro d u c tiv ity g a p , 19 8 7-9 7
1987-97

Industry and effect

Total contribution of manufacturing sector to business sector g a p ....................................................................
Pure productivity effect- ..................................................................................................................................
Sum of manufacturing industries'....................................................................................................................
High-tech industries2 ................................................................................................................................
Non-high-tech industries3 ...........................................................................................................................

-0.39
-.01
.01
-.21
.22

Logging and wood industries
.............................................................................................................
Food and beverage industries.................................................................................................................
Tobacco products industries...................................................................................................................
Rubber Product Industries
.......................................................................................................
Textile Industries.......................................................................................................................................
Leather and allied products.....................................................................................................................
Clothing industries .................................................................................................................................
Furniture and fixture industries
.......................................................................................................
Paper and allied products industries .....................................................................................................
Printing publishing and allied industries................................................................................................

.04
.00
.00
-.02
.00
.00
.00
.00
.01
.01

Primary metal industries..........................................................................................................................
Fabricated metals products.....................................................................................................................
Machinery Industries, except electrical machinery...............................................................................
Transportation equipment industries........................................................................................................
Electrical and electronic product industries............................................................................................
Non-metallic mineral product industries..................................................................................................
Refined petroleum and coal product industries......................................................................................
Chemical and Chemical Products Industries...........................................................................................
Scientific and professional equipment....................................................................................................
Other manufacturing industries...............................................................................................................

.02
.00
-.04
14
-.17
-.01
03
00
-.01
.01

Structure effect.........................................................................................................................................
Reallocation effect...................................................................................................................................

-.04
.02

Total contribution of manufacturing sector to business sector gap (alternate calculation)4...............................
Pure productivity effect
.............................................................................................................................
Structure effect...................................................................................................................................................
Reallocation effect
.....................................................................................................................................

-.01
-.13
09
.02

1 Contribution of manufacturing sector to business sector productivity
gap is calculated as the sum of industry-level effects using 20 disaggregate
industries.
2 Machinery industries, except electrical machinery, plus electrical and
electronic product industries.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

3 Manufacturing minus machinery industries, except electrical machinery,
minus electrical and electronic product industries.
4Alternate calculation of manufacturing sector’s contribution to business
sector productivity gap calculated using only aggregate manufacturing sector
data.

Monthly Labor Review April 2003

23

Differences in Productivity Growth

Table 6.

Shares and productivity growth in the service sector, 1987-97
N om inal share

Industry

Business sector.................
Service se cto r....................
Transportation....................
Communication....................
U tilities................................
Wholesale trad e .................
Retail trade..........................
Finance, insurance,
and real estate.................
Other services....................

Hours share

Productivity grow th

C anada

United
S tates

C anada

United
S tates

C anada

United
S tates

59.3

71.1

63.5

66.1

1.2
.9

1.6
1.2

-0.4
-.3

5.3
3.9
4.5
7.0
7.8

3.7
3.1
3.3
7.8
10.3

5.6
2.5
1.1
6.9
14.8

4.4
1.5
1.1
7.4
19.4

2.0
3.2
-.4
1.8
1.0

1.5
3.9
2.5
4.1
2.4

.5
-.7
-2.9
-2.3
-1.4

13.6
17.2

20.9
22.2

7.2
25.6

7.7
24.7

1.6
.0

1.8
-.5

-.2
.5

C a n a d ia n
-U.S. g a p

Note: Figures may not sum due to rounding. Nominal output and hour shares are expressed relative to the business sector and reoresenit an average
for 1987-97.

Interestingly, both service sectors have similar shares
o f hours.
2.

Retail trade, finance, insurance and real estate and “other
business services”38 industries are significantly larger in
the United States, in terms o f nominal output share, than in
Canada. However, transportation service and utilities
industries are larger in Canada than in the United States.

3.

From 1987 to 1997, communications industries had the
strongest productivity performance for Canada, whereas
wholesale trade industries registered the m ost robust
average annual productivity growth among U.S. service
sector industries.

4.

For the most part, the productivity performance o f U.S.
service-sector industries has exceeded the performance of
Canadian industries over the 1987-97 period. The ex­
ceptions are the transportation and other business service
industries, where Canada did better.

are used, the pure productivity contribution from the service
sector is twice as large as when aggregate service-sector data
are used. The results in this section, therefore, suggest caution
in concluding that the service sector played a very small role in
explaining the business sector gap over the period 1996 to 2000
(text tabulation, page 21), because the decomposition results
are subject to change based on the level o f aggregation used.40
s in g r e c e n t in d u s t r y - l e v e l d a t a , our work examines the
industry-level productivity performance in the Canadian and
U .S. business sectors. O ur analysis suggests th a t the
productivity revival in both the United States (starting in
1995) and Canada (starting in 1996) can be attributed in large
measure to the performance o f the service sector. The service

U

5.

The largest negative gap in productivity growth (in favor
o f the U nited States) by industry is for the utilities,
followed by the wholesale and retail trade.

A decomposition o f the contribution o f each industry to
the Canada-U.S. gap in productivity growth in the business
sector (table 7) shows that, consistent with our previous
findings, the service sector contributed quite significantly to
this Canada-U.S. gap over the 1987-97 period. (See the text
tabulation on page 21.) Furthermore, we find that among the
service industries, the wholesale and retail trade industries
contributed most significantly toward the gap in business
sector productivity over the same period (-0.3 percentage
points).39
Table 7, again illustrates that the results from the decom­
position analysis are sensitive to the level o f aggregation used
for the examination: when disaggregated service-sector data
24
Monthly Labor Review

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

April 2003

Contribution of service sector industries
to business sector productivity gap, 1987-97
Industry a n d e ffe c t

1 9 87-9 7

Business sector productivity growth gap...................
Total contribution of service sector
to business sector g a p ..........................................
‘Pure’ productivity effect:
Sum of service industries1......................................
Transportation..................................................
Communication................................................
Utilities..................................................
Wholesale trade.............................................
Retail trade...........................................................
Finance, insurance, and real e sta te.......................
Other services....................................................

-0.39

Structure effect...............................................
Reallocation e ffect................................................
Total contribution of service sector to business
sector gap (Alternate calculations)..........................
Productivity effect2........................................
Structure effect........................................
Reallocation effect.........................................

-.10
-.01

-.46
-.35
.02
-.02
-.11
-.17
-.13
-.02
.08

-.47
-.16
-12
-20

1 Contribution of service sector to business sector productivity gap is
calculated as sum of industry-level effects using seven disaggregated
industries.
2 Alternate calculation of the service sector’s contribution to business
sector productivity gap calculated using only aggregate service sector
data.

sector’s heavy investment in information and communication
technologies ( ict) provides support to the view that what
really matters for improving productivity growth is the
incorporation or the use o f ict into the service-sector
industries, rather than its production in manufacturing.
We find that although productivity growth has improved
markedly in the C anadian business sector since 1996, it still
lags behind the performance o f the U. S. business sector. Our
investigation into the industrial sources of the Canada-U.S.
gap in productivity growth suggests that the service sector

contributed most significantly to this gap from 1987 to 1997,
whereas the manufacturing sector was the dom inant player
from 1996 to 2000. Given the role that high-tech industries
played in U. S. manufacturing productivity performance over
the late1990s, it would seem that the gap over the 1996-2000
period reflects a Canada-U.S. gap in high-tech productivity.
However, it remains unclear whether the contribution from
the manufacturing sector reflects a pure productivity gap or
differences in the industrial composition of the high-tech
sector.
□

Notes
A cknowledgment: The authors thank Mike Woollatt for his help on
the project and Claude Lavoie, Bing-Sun Wong, Benoit Robidoux,
John Baldwin, Someshwar Rao, and Allan Crawford for very useful
comments and suggestions. We also thank William Gullickson,
formerly with BLS for making some of the U.S. data available to us.

1 See for example, S. Rao and S. Nadeau, “The role of Industrial
Structure in Canada’s Productivity Performance” in Productivity Issues
in Canada, May 2002, pp. 137-164, and L. Eldridge, and M.
Sherwood, “A perspective on the U .S.-Canada M anufacturing
Productivity Gap,” Monthly Labor Review, February 2001, pp. 3148, among others.
2 The reason is that data for these most recent years are always
preliminary and subject to revisions. For the last 2 years, the United
States has revised its GDP downward by more than 1 percentage point.
3 Our study does not look at the productivity level gap between the
two countries. Instead our focus is solely on the Canada-U.S.
productivity growth gap.
4 This implies that a low productivity growth within an industry
can contribute significantly to aggregate productivity growth if the
industry is relatively large. Similarly, a high productivity growth for a
given industry combined with a small relative importance of that
industry within the business sector might lead to a small contribution.
5 The major break in Canada-U.S. productivity performance over the
last 30 years seems to have occurred around 1985. (Please see chart 1.)
6 Canadian input-output tables (on which our output data are based)
switched their commodity classification in 1987. We are working on
getting Canadian data back to 1981 on a comparable post-1987 basis,
and will be updating our results when they are available.
7 Canadian data for standard of living, which is measured as real gross
domestic product per capita, are from Statistics Canada. This indicator
equals gross domestic product in chained 1997 dollars (available in CANSIM
tables 380-0017) divided by the total population (available in CANSIM
table 051-0001). The U.S. data for per capita gross domestic product in
chained 1996 dollars are taken from National Income and Product
Accounts Tables (accessible via Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) Web
site, table 8.7).
8 Chart 1 shows the productivity index for the Canadian business
sector divided by productivity index in the U.S. (1970=100 for both
countries). A reading above 1 implies that the relative Canada/U.S.
productivity level is above the level in the base period (1970). A
decrease in the relative index implies that productivity growth in
Canada is slower than the productivity growth in the U.S. business
sector. Data are from Statistics Canada (available in CANSIM table
383-008) and BLS (accessible via the BLS Web site, http://stats.bls.gov
detailed statistics, series ID: PRS84006092).
9 In the remainder of this article, ‘productivity’ will refer to labor
productivity.
10 The primary sector includes agriculture, fishing, mining and


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

forestry industries.
11 The use of the North American Industry Classification System
(NAICS) for the input-output tables after 1997 causes a break in data
at detailed industry level.

12 A more detailed discussion of the Canadian data (including the
impact of the revisions to the output data) appears in the appendix.
13 Note that these estimates are preliminary at this point and subject
to revision.
14Another option is to use the STAN database from the Organisation
for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) data, which is
a com pilation of industry-level data for OECD countries in a
standardized format. There are two problems with using these data.
First, the data are on a Laspeyres (1992 dollars) basis. Second, the
OECD data do not include the latest revisions that our data set includes.
15 These output data are taken from the BEA Web site at: http://
www.bea.doc.gov/bea/dn2/gpo.htm.

16 See S. Lum and B. Moyer, “Gross output by Industry 1997-1999,”
Survey o f Current Business, December 2000, pp. 24-35 and S. Lum, B.
Moyer, and R. K. Yuskavage, “Improved Estimates of Gross Product
Originating by Industry for 1947-1998,” Survey o f Current Business,
June 2000, pp. 24-54. Lum and Moyer summarize the recent data and
Lum and others provide details on the data construction and sources.
17 The other distinction is that “private industries” include non­
profit organizations and paid employees of private households, whereas
“business sector” excludes these two categories.
18 For the 1987-2000 period, average annual growth for business
sector output is 3.6 percent, compared with 3.5 percent for private
industries.
19 See, for example, K. Stiroh, Information technology and the
U.S. Productivity Revival: What do Industry Data Say? (New York,
Federal Reserve Bank of New York, 2001) and C. Stiendel and K.
Stiroh, “Productivity: What is it and Why do we care about it?”
Business Economics, October 2001. In fact, Stiroh’s 2001 study goes
on to suggest that the pickup in productivity growth in 1996 signalled
a shift in trend productivity in the United States.
20 While productivity revival in the U.S. seems to have begun in
1995, productivity growth in Canada started to accelerate in 1996.
21 Note that the latest revisions to U.S. and Canadian business sector
productivity (in June 2002 for Canada and September 2002 for the U.S.)
are not reflected in our analysis. The revisions to the U.S data were
mostly for the 1999-2001 period and would not change our results
drastically.
22 Interestingly, the magnitude of the Canada-U.S. productivity
growth gap along with the evolution of the gap over periods is quite
sensitive to the periods chosen. For example, if we divide our sample
(1 9 8 7 -2 0 0 0 ) in two periods according to the pickup in U.S.
productivity performance (1987-95, 1995-2000), the productivity
gap increases significantly from the first to the second period (-0.1
percentage point over 1987-95 to -1.0 percentage point over 1995Monthly Labor Review April 2003

25

Differences in Productivity Growth

2000). However, if we use the pickup in Canadian productivity
growth as the breakpoint in the sample (1987-96, 1996-2000), the
productivity growth gap declines slightly across the two periods
(table 1). The one constant across these two scenarios is that
regardless of how we break the sample, a productivity growth gap
exists between Canada and the United States over the second half of
the 1990s, and that is what is important for our analysis.
23 For the years prior to 1996, the statistical discrepancy is
relatively small (accounting for less than 0.1 percent of nominal
business sector output), post 1996, however, the discrepancy is
nontrivial (averaging 0.4 percent of nominal output).
24 Another alternative is to use the industry aggregate of private
industries that excludes the statistical discrepancy. This is not done,
however, because there is a large discrepancy between the average
annual growth rate of business sector output (from BLS) and this
proxy of the business sector output.
25 See formula for decomposing aggregate productivity growth
by industry, equations (1) and (2) in the text.
26 Stiroh, Information technology and the U.S. Productivity
Revival, 2001, and Steindel and Stiroh, “Productivity: What is it
and Why do we care about it?”, 2001, suggest that the surge in U.S.
manufacturing productivity performance over the late 1990s was
due, in large part, to the performance of the high-tech manufacturing
industries, an element missing on the Canadian side.
27 Note that we do not have any data on nominal output for
Canada (total and industry-level) post 1997. To “fill-in” this missing
data we assume that that nominal output shares follow the same
growth pattern as real output shares over the 1998-2000 period.
The average nominal output shares for Canada over 1987-2000
shown in table 2, therefore, represent an approximation.
28 This may, in part, reflect the fact that health and educational
services are largely public in Canada (thus excluded from the
definition of the business sector) whereas these services are often
privately provided in the United States and thus counted as part of
the U.S. service sector.
29 McKinsey Global Institute Study, U.S. Productivity Growth
1995-2000: Understanding the Contribution o f Inform ation

Appendix:

Technology Relative to Other Factors, 2001.
30 It should be noted that decomposing aggregate productivity growth
into the contribution o f component industries is quite difficult and
several alternative methods to the formula used in our study exist (for
example, Stiroh, Information technology and the U.S. Productivity
Revival 2001 and Eldridge and Sherwood “Perspective on the U.S.Canada Manufacturing Productivity Gap,” 2001). However, using
alternative methods to decompose aggregate productivity growth does
not change the main findings of our article. See section on decomposition
in appendix.
31 Reallocation involves resource shifts across individual industries
of the total business sector. As such, it measures the contribution from
the total business sector, rather than from individual industries.
32 See B. Ark, R. Inklaar, and M. Timmer, “The Canada-U.S.
Manufacturing Productivity Gap Revisited: New ICOP Results,” University
of Groningen, 2000. Ark uses a similar methodology to decompose the
Canada-U.S. level gap in the manufacturing sector. Our modification is to
adapt the methodology to analyze the growth gap.
33 This might suggest a movement of resources from higher to lower
productivity level industries.
34 Unfortunately, more detailed industry data are not yet available
for Canada for the 1997-2000 period.
35 The 20 industries correspond to a 2-digit SIC level of disaggregation
for the manufacturing sector.
36 The seven industries correspond to a pseudo-1-digit SIC level of
disaggregation for the service sector.
37 Caveats to the detailed analysis of the service sector: Both
Statistics Canada and BLS acknowledge that data for the service sector
are, in general, of a poorer quality than those for the manufacturing
sector.
38 This subgroup includes health, education, travel, and food services
industries.
39 Concentrating on the productivity effect.
40 Unfortunately, the lack of detailed industry data for Canada post
1997 prevents a test of this hypothesis.

Methodologies and detailed data

Canadian data
To ensure that the final estim ates in Canada are comparable with
those in the United States, we measure labor productivity as real
value-added per hour and real value-added as a chain-Fisher index
in both countries.
For productivity measurement, output should be defined from
the point o f view o f the producer and valued at basic prices. This
includes subsidies and excludes all indirect taxes on products as
well as trade and transportation margins incurred in the deliveries
o f output to other sectors. Similarly, intermediate inputs should
be defined from the producer-as-purchaser point o f view and
valued at purchaser’s prices. The value o f inputs includes all
taxes, as well as trade and transportation margins associated with
taking delivery o f interm ediate inputs from other sectors.
In Canadian input-output tables, the valuation o f inputs is at
purchasers’ prices, but the valuation o f output does not reflect
basic prices. Instead, output is valued at modified basic prices.
The main difference between basic prices and modified basic
prices relates to subsidies on products: valuation at basic prices
includes subsidies on products, whereas valuation at modified
basic prices excludes them. As subsidies on products are quite

26
Monthly Labor Review

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

April 2003

small in Canada except in a few industries (such as field crops and
urban transit system industries), there is norm ally little difference
between the value o f output at basic prices and that at modified
basic prices.
As part o f the 2001 revision o f the Canadian System o f N ational
A ccounts, business purchases and governm ent expenditures for
software, including ow n-account production o f software are now
recognized as investment instead o f intermediate inputs. The valueadded estim ates in this article reflect the results o f the recent
revision. These are summarized in tables A -l and A-2.
As shown in table A -l, the recognition o f business expenditures
on software as investm ent has very little effect on the grow th rate
o f real value added for all major industry groups. The growth o f real
value added fo r th e b u sin ess secto r w as revised up by 0.03
percentage points for the 1987-97 period. The effect o f the revision
was small for all sectors, ranging from -0 .1 6 percentage points in
the w holesale trade industry to 0.28 percentage points in the
agriculture industry.
The nominal valued added for the business sector was revised
up by about 1 percent for the period 1987 to 1997 as a result o f the
treatm ent o f software expenditures as investm ent (table A-2). The
effects o f th e rev isio n on nom in al valu e ad d ed vary across

Table A - l.

Revisions to average annual growth of real value added by major industry sectors, 1987-97

(In percent)

Industry

W ithout
so ftw a re

With
so ftw a re

Revision

2.06
4.14
1.74
1.38
-.34
3.03
3.97
.96
3.49
1.72
3.65
2.16

2.10
4.42
1.77
1.47
-.40
2.98
3.88
.98
3.33
1.71
3.71
2.19

0.03
.28
.03
.09
-.06
-.05
-.09
.02
-.16
-.01
.05
.02

Business sector.............................................................................................................
Agriculture......................................................................................................................
Mining.............................................................................................................................
Manufacturing................................................................................................................
Construction...................................................................................................................
Transportation................................................................................................................
Communication...............................................................................................................
Other utilities.................................................................................................................
Wholesale trade.............................................................................................................
Retail trade.....................................................................................................................
Finance, Insurance, and real estate..............................................................................
Other services...............................................................................................................

Note: The manufacturing sector includes logging industries to conform
to the U.S. definition, and “other services” include agriculture services,
fishing and trapping. The revision for the agriculture industry includes the

Table A -2.

treatment of rent on land as property income, hence it became part of value
added instead of intermediate expenditures.

Revisions to value added in current dollars by major industry sectors

(In billions C a n a d ia n dollars)
1987
Industry

Business sector..................................
Agriculture...........................................
Mining..................................................
Manufacturing.....................................
Construction........................................
Transportation.....................................
Communication....................................
Other utilities......................................
Wholesale trade..................................
Retail trade..........................................
Finance, insurance, and real estate ....
Other services....................................

Without
so ftw a re

With
so ftw a re

P ercen t
d iffe re n c e

Without
so ftw a re

$426.2
9.8
25.8
111.4
38.0
23.2
15.6
18.4
30.3
35.4
49.5
68.7

$431.0
10.8
25.7
111.1
37.8
23.2
15.6
18.4
30.4
35.4
53.6
69.0

1.1
9.6
-.2
-.3
-.6
.1
.1
.0
.2
-.1
8.3
.5

$606.0
11.2
35.0
153.5
42.8
33.1
22.7
26.5
44.7
43.9
81.2
111.5

Note: The manufacturing sector includes logging industries to conform to
the U.S. definition, and “other services” include agriculture services, fishing and
trapping. The revision for agriculture industry includes the treatment of rent on

industries. In 1997, the revision had significant effects on nominal
value added for agriculture (12.4 percent), retail trade (5.9 percent),
and finance, insurance, and real estate (7.3 percent), but it had very
little effect for other industries.1

Industry decomposition of productivity gap
One troublesome aspect o f the Bureau o f Economic Analysis output
data we used for our analysis was that a statistical discrepancy was
included in the estimate o f output for private industries. To ensure
consistency betw een the aggregate and industry-level productivity
grow ths, we adjusted industry output levels for the statistical
discrepancy. Our approach to this problem was to assume that the
statistical discrepancy was proportional to the size o f the industries.
We divided the real statistical discrepancy among the industries in


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

1997
With
so ftw a re

$612.2
12.6
33.9
152.4
43.0
33.0
22.3
26.8
43.8
46.4
87.1
110.9

P e rc e n t
d iffe re n c e

1.0
12.4
-3.0
-.7
.5
-.2
-1.8
1.1
-2.0
5.9
7.3
-.5

land as property income, hence it became part of value added instead of
intermediate expenditures.

proportion to their nominal shares and then added the two together
using Fisher aggregation to obtain a new real output level adjusted
for statistical discrepancy.
In this appendix, we present a similar analysis o f the industrylevel decomposition o f the Canada-U.S. productivity gap as in the
main text o f the article. This is meant to highlight the sensitivity o f
our findings to the adjustments made to the data. Table A-3 shows
average annual labor productivity growth in percent for industries
in Canada and the United States in the top panel, contributions to
business sector productivity growth in the United States in the
middle panel, and contributions to the business sector productivity
growth gap in the bottom panel.

Contribution to growth methodology
K. J. Stiroh decomposes aggregate labor productivity growth in the

Monthly Labor Review April 2003

27

Differences in Productivity Growth

U.S. private industries using the follow ing m ethodology2:

,‘^N.

I

II

ß tJ =

Y"

1

SCL

CTG,

y N

11

+ y

N
I t-1

H .,

/

.Vißi.i-SJ-Hi,,

(3 )

2

(4 )

H ,.
= ■

(5 )

H,

W here Y is the chain-Fisher measure o f real output, YN is the nominal
value-added output and H is total hours worked.
Stiroh’s m ethodology is quite similar in structure to the one
adopted in our w ork (equation 1). Like the M cK insey Global
Institute, Stiroh divides the total contribution from industry T to
the aggregate productivity growth into a “direct” effect and a “cross”
effect.3 The interpretation o f the direct and indirect effects is also
quite sim ilar to McKinsey. The direct effect, given by the first term
in equation 4, is a w eighted average o f ind u stry -lev el lab o r

Table A -3.

productivity growth, with the w eights representing the average
nominal output share o f industry T in period M and t. Therefore,
as industries im prove th eir individual productivity, aggregate
productivity also rises, in proportion with relative industry size.
The cross effect, on the other hand, reflects the effect on aggregate
productivity grow th from a reallocation o f hours. T his effect
implies that as industries with nominal shares larger than labor
shares experience growth in hours, aggregate productivity rises in
tandem, and vice versa.
There are only two differences, both relatively minor, between
the two methodologies. First, whereas M cKinsey uses the lagged
nominal output share, Stiroh uses an average o f current and last
period nominal output share as the weight on the direct effect.
Second, the M cKinsey form ula has an adjustm ent term ( h
) in
the formula, whereas the M cKinsey form ula does not.
H<
The direct, cross and total contribution effects shown by our
testing using the Stiroh method are similar to those obtained by the
M cKinsey formula.

Detail industry tables
Table A-4 presents the nominal output and hour shares in Canada
and the United States.

Canada-U.S. industry level productivity performance, contribution to U.S. business sector productivity growth, and
contribution to business sector productivity growth gap (Canada minus United States), 1987-2000

1 9 8 7 -9 6
C a n a d a U.S.

Industry

Business sector.
Primary industries.
Construction........
Manufacturing......
Services...............

S w ing2
C a n a d a U.S.

1 9 9 6 -2 0 0 0
C a n a d a 1 U.S.

1.0

1.5

2.2

3.2

1.2

1.7

3.1
-.7

2.7
.1
2.6
1.1

5.2
.4
1.9
2.3

4.5
-.5
5.1
2.8

2.1
1.1
-.2
1.6

1.8
-.6
2.5
1.7

2.1
.7
1 9 8 7 -9 6

Average business sector productivity growth
in the United States..........................................

1996-2000

Swing2

1.5

3.2

1.7

Direct contribution fromPrimary......................
Construction.............
Manufacturing...........
Services....................

.1

.1

.0

.0

.0
-.0

5
.7

.9
2.1

.4
1.4

Reallocation effect.

.1

.0

-.1

1 9 87-9 6

Canada-U.S. productivity growth gap .
‘Pure’ productivity contribution from—
Primary.............................................
Construction........................:............
Manufacturing...................................
Services...........................................
Structure e ffe c t....
Reallocation effect.
1 Estimates for the 1998-2000 period at the industry-level are
preliminary and subject to revisions.

28
Monthly Labor Review

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

April 2003

-0.5

0
-.1
-.1

1 9 9 6 -2 0 0 0
-

1.0
.0
.1

-.2

-.7
-.4

.1

.1

-.1

.0

2 “Swing” is the change in average annual productivity growth across the
1987-96 and 1996-2000 periods.

Nominal output and hours shares in Canada and the United States, 1987 and 1997
N o m in a l share (p e rc e n t)

Hours shares (p e r c e n t)

1987

1997

1987

1997

9.6
3.1
6.5
8.6
25.3
2.9
22.4
56.5
5.8
3.8
4.4
6.8
8.4
12.5
15.0

8.0
2.4
5.5
7.0
24.9
3.2
21.7
60.1
5.4
3.6
4.4
7.2
7.6
14.2
17.8

8.2
6.6
1.7
9.3
21.9
2.8
19.1
60.6
5.8
2.4
0.9
6.6
15.0
6.9
23.3

7.0
5.5
1.6
8.7
19.0
2.5
16.4
65.4
5.4
2.4
1.0
7.3
14.4
7.1
27.5

4.4
2.2
2.3
5.4
21.8
4.5
17.3
68.4
3.9
3.1
3.5
7.6
10.7
20.3
19.4

3.5
1.8
1.7
4.7
19.1
4.3
14.8
72.8
3.6
3.1
2.9
7.9
10.3
21.7
23.4

4.3
3.3
1.0
7.8
24.3
4.8
19.5
63.6
3.9
1.6
1.2
7.5
19.6
8.1
21.5

3.3
2.6
.8
7.9
21.1
4.3
16.7
67.8
3.6
1.5
1.0
7.1
19.3

Industry

C anada

Primary industries............................................................
Agriculture......................................................................
Mining.............................................................................
Construction......................................................................
Manufacturing...................................................................
High-tech........................................................................
Non high-tech.................................................................
Services............................................................................
Transportation...............................................................
Communication..............................................................
Other utilities.................................................................
Wholesale tra d e ............................................................
Retail trade....................................................................
Finance, insurance, and real estate.............................
Other services..............................................................
U nited States

Primary industries............................................................
Agriculture......................................................................
Mining.............................................................................
Construction......................................................................
Manufacturing..................................................................
High-tech........................................................................
Non-high-tech.................................................................
Services............................................................................
Transportation................................................................
Communication..............................................................
Other utilities..................................................................
Wholesale tra d e ............................................................
Retail trade.....................................................................
Finance, insurance, and real estate.............................
Other services..............................................................

7.6
26.7

Notes to the appendix
1 The revision for agriculture includes the treatment of rent on
land as property income, hence it became part of value added instead
of intermediate expenditures.
2 K. Stiroh, Information technology and the U.S. Productivity
Revival: What do Industry Data Say? Federal Reserve Bank of New


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

York, 2001.
3 Global McKinsey Institute, U. S Productivity Growth 1995-2000:
Understanding the Contribution o f Information Technology Relative
to Other Factors, 2001.

Monthly Labor Review April 2003

29

Precis

Jobs, gender, and marriage
There are at least three theories of gender
segregation of occupation extant, and, like
faculty departments, they often do not
com m unicate m uch w ith each other.
Feminist scholars, according to M. V. Lee
Badgett and Nancy Folbre, often suggest
it is a straightforward matter of continuing
discrimination by employers. Sociologists
look to socialization and social norming.
Econom ists say occupational sorting
might be a rational maximization of the
work and family problem.
Badgett and Folbre suggest that as
none of these is actually inconsistent with
the others, it m ight be best to cross
disciplinary boundaries. In their article, a
maximization model is extended to include
the marriage market and the marriage
m a rk e t acco u n ts b o th fo r p o sitiv e
assortative mating (meaning likes often
attract) and for a social norm under which
gender nonconform ity in occupation
reduces ones desirability as a marriage
partner.
Although their model and hypothesis
w ere thus “econ o m istic,” th e ir data
gathering used a factorial survey method
that has been used by both economists
and sociologists. Here, the survey was
designed as a set of “vignettes” in the form
of personal ads. Several such “ads” were
shown to a panel that was asked how
many positive responses each ad would
receive. Badgett and Folbre “ .... believe
that respondents’ subjective evaluations
of the attractiveness of the biographies to
other people correspond closely to the
re sp o n d e n ts’ ow n v a lu atio n s o f the
characteristics in each personal ad.”
Their statistical analysis used dummy
variables for occupations o f high and
low status and masculine or fem inine
employment patterns (for example, day
care w orker and family therapist as low
and high status “feminine” occupations
an d au to m ech an ic a n d o rth o p ed ic
su rg e o n as low a n d h ig h s ta tu s
“masculine” occupations). Badgett and


30 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

April

2003

Folbre conclude that “ ...w herever the
gender associated w ith an occupation
matters w ithin a status category, gender
n o n c o n fo rm ity is p e n a liz e d .” In
p a rtic u la r, m en in h ig h -sta tu s b ut
feminine jobs are rated less highly than
m en in h ig h -s ta tu s m a sc u lin e o c­
cupations and conversely, wom en in
low- status masculine jobs are rated less
h ig h ly th a n w om en in lo w -sta tu s
feminine jobs. The model, conclude the
authors, suggests that wom en face a
low er rate o f return in the m arriage
market to investments in human capital
than do men and that gender conformity
is rewarded for both sexes.

Marriage, motherhood, and
earning power
Does marriage itself correlate with wages?
In the case of men, economists have docu­
mented a substantial wage premium for
being married, a premium that carries over
even to divorced men. Does a similar
premium exist for women?
Abbigail L. Chiodo and Michael T.
Owyang say no. Once other factors such
as education, experience, and children are
taken into account, they find, “[Tjhe effect
of marriage on women’s wages becomes
statistically insignificant.” They do find
evidence, however, of a correlation be­
tween the timing of marriage and women’s
earnings. Women who delay marriage
have, on average, higher wages than
wom en who m arry early. Economists
speculate that such an effect suggests
that the early years of a career are crucial
to developing the human capital needed
to raise one’s wage profile.
Another difference between the wage
analyses for women and men is the effect
o f children. A lthough there is little
impact of children on the marriage pre­
m ium for husbands, wom en’s average
earnings go down if children are present.
As was the case for marriage, delaying
childbearing has a positive effect on
wages, if only to attenuate the losses

associated w ith having a family. In one
study cited by Chiodo and Owyang,
early childbearing was as-sociated with
roughly a 4-percent decline in wages
and later childbearing was associated
with barely a 1-percent loss.
C hiodo an d O w yang conclude,
“Therefore, the theories that explain the
relationship between m en’s wages and
th e ir m a rital status are necessarily
different from the theories that explain this
relationship for women. In short, this is
because, compared to the average married
man, the average married woman faces
much more dramatic tradeoffs between her
career and her family responsibilities.”

Midwest work force
composition
The im pact o f labor com position by
education and experience on productivity
in the Midwest is almost exactly the same
as the impact of labor composition on
productivity figure for the Nation. In both
cases, according to a W orker Quality
Index calculated by D aniel A aronson
and D aniel S ullivan o f the Federal
Reserve B ank of Chicago, there has
been an increase in w orker “quality”
(measured by education and experience)
that has accounted for about 10 percent
of productivity growth since the mid1960s.
The way the Midwest has arrived at
the average is interesting, however, and
gives A aronson an d S u llivan som e
concern. The Midwest has both fewer
high school dropouts than other regions,
a fact that increases the quality of the
region’s labor composition, and fewer
college graduates, a fact that works in
the opposite direction. T he authors
point out in the Chicago Fed Letter that
with the rate of high school graduation
so high in the Midwest, the region will
have to increase its share o f workers
w ith post-secondary training to continue
to advance.
□

Book Review

Federal overtime law
“Moments Are the Elements o f Profit”:
Overtime and the Deregulation o f
Working Hours under the Fair La­
bor Standards Act. By Marc Linder.
Fanpihua Press, Iowa City, 2000,524
pp., $15/paperback.
The Federal overtime law, which is part
o f the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)
originally enacted in 1938, requires that
em ployees be paid one and one-half
times their regular rate o f pay for all hours
above 40 worked in each workweek. The
purpose o f this requirement is typically
claimed to be twofold: (1) to spread em­
ployment among a greater number o f
workers by imposing an additional wage
cost on employers who require their em­
ployees to work more than 40 hours a
week; and (2) to provide an extra reward
to those workers who have to work more
than 40 hours a week, and thus have less
time to spend in activities o f their own
choosing. These are admirable goals,
but the fact remains that in the more than
60 years since passage o f the FLSA, there
are still millions o f workers in the United
States who work much more than 40
hours a week, often unwillingly.
How is it that the FLSA has not been a
greater force for the reduction o f work­
ing hours? This is the question explored
in the four lengthy essays that consti­
tute Moments Are the Elements o f Profit,
by Marc Linder, professor o f law at the
University o f Iowa, as well as a practic­
ing attorney.
The first chapter is a history o f the
origins and development o f the overtime
provision, including a discussion o f
overtime laws before the FLSA was en­
acted and o f selected overtime laws in
various States and foreign countries.
The remaining three chapters illustrate
in detail how special provisions in the
overtime law have undermined its force.
Two o f these chapters deal with exemp­
tions to the overtime (as well as mini­
mum wage) provisions that excuse em­
ployers from paying time-and-one-half

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

overtime compensation— in the one case
to salaried managers, and in the other
case to certain employees of certain small
businesses. These exemptions reduce
the number o f employees who are pro­
tected by the FLSA’s overtime compen­
sation provisions. The other chapter
shows how Congress in 1947 excluded
certain kinds o f activities from being
compensable, and in effect shortened
many employees’ workweeks, thus re­
ducing or eliminating these w orkers’
overtime pay by legislative fiat.
The chapter on the origins and de­
velopment o f the overtime law explores
the various methods by which excessive
hours could be curtailed by means other
than time-and-one-half wages for work
o f more than 40 hours in a week. Work
o f more than 40 hours in a week could be
forbidden altogether (except perhaps in
certain emergency situations). Employ­
ers could be required to request workers
to work overtime, and be barred from tak­
ing any adverse action against an em­
ployee who declines to work overtime.
The overtime premium could be raised
to double-time or higher. The minimum
wage could be raised to a high enough
rate to reduce the financial need of work­
ers to work long hours in order to be
paid a living wage each week. Linder
discusses these various options and
others by concrete examples, mainly leg­
islative debates about such proposals
and some laws that adopted variants of
these approaches.
The chapter on the exemption for cer­
tain salaried workers (executive, admin­
istrative, and professional employees)
traces the legislative origins o f this ex­
emption to the National Industrial Re­
covery Act o f 1933, and notes that when
Congress included a similar provision in
the FLSA, it directed the Department o f
Labor to flesh out the details in regula­
tions. These regulations set forth a twopart test: in order to be exempt, an em­
ployee must be paid at least a specified
amount per week on a salary basis, and
must satisfy certain duty requirements.
The theory behind the regulation was

that managerial workers who are de­
prived o f minimum-wage and overtimecom pensation protections should be
paid on a salary basis because that is
the hallmark o f such workers (they are
paid to do a job, no matter how many or
few hours per week they work, whether
on account o f major projects that require
long hours or slow weeks that leave time
for golf and similar outings); that the
salary had to be high enough to provide
the workers with a living wage; and that
they had to perform specified true mana­
gerial duties.
At least 32 million workers are de­
prived o f FLSA wage protections because
o f this exemption, Linder notes. More
than 25 years ago, when the salary test
was high enough to reflect what bona
fide executives were actually earning, it
was typically a clear dividing line be­
tween who was exempt and who was not.
Today, by contrast, most purported ex­
ecutives have their exempt or nonexempt
status determined by the necessarily less
precise managerial duties tests.
The chapter on the narrower defini­
tion o f compensable activities enacted
by Congress in 1947 is a riveting story
that, as Linder ruefully notes, “has re­
ceded into oblivion.” The story starts
shortly after the end o f World War II.
Unionized workers, facing shorter work­
weeks because o f reduced military pro­
duction after the war, instituted lawsuits
seeking back pay for the time at the be­
ginning o f the workday for the time that
they spent walking, riding, or traveling
from the factory gate or place where they
punched a time clock to their actual
place o f work, and for the time spent in
the return trip at the end o f the day. The
Supreme Court ruled in the workers’ fa­
vor in three cases.
Congress responded by enacting the
Portal-to-Portal Act o f 1947, which in ef­
fect nullified the Supreme Court’s deci­
sions by stating that “preliminary” and
“postliminary” activities such as “walk­
ing, riding, or traveling to and from the
actual place o f the performance o f the
principal activity” were not compensable

Monthly Labor Review

April 2003

31

Book Reviews

(unless made so by contract or by cus­
tom or practice). But Congress did more
than establish this narrower definition
o f compensable activities. It made two
additional important changes to the FLSA
that affected not only these activities,
but all other situations as well. First,
Congress added a statute o f limitations
o f 2 years, or 3 years in the case o f will­
ful violations, thereby greatly reducing
the amount o f back wages that workers
could recover, even for those activities
that were clearly compensable. Second,
Congress eliminated class actions and
representative actions in court, making
it more difficult for workers to be in­
cluded in a lawsuit.
The chapter on the exemption for
small businesses is a complex but deftly
told chronicle o f how there actually
never was a small business exemption
to the FLSA, and the attempt by smallbusiness lobby groups to claim that
there had always been one. Am end­
ments in 1989 stripped from the protec­
tions o f the FLSA numerous employees
who had previously enjoyed its ben­
efits. The adverse effect o f this legisla­
tion fell most heavily on construction
workers, but also on workers in retail
and service businesses.
Originally, the FLSA applied to indi­
vidual employees, based on the links that
each one had to interstate commerce,
without regard to the size o f the em­
ployer. Thus, an employee who regu­
larly crossed State lines was covered, as
was an employee who regularly worked
on items that were shipped out o f State,
regardless o f whether the employer was
a large or small business. Few construc­
tion workers or employees in retail or
service establishm ents were covered
originally, except those who regularly
crossed over into a neighboring State in
connection with their work, or worked


32
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

April 2003

on goods that were sent out o f State.
This so-called individual coverage
under the f l s a resulted in many anoma­
lous situations in which workers doing
essentially the same work were covered
by the law, or not covered, depending
upon whether or not they crossed State
lines or produced goods for interstate
commerce. Indeed, employers could
segregate work so that, for example, a
mailroom clerk who packaged and sent
goods only within the same State would
not be covered, whereas another em­
ployee in the same mailroom who did the
same job with respect to goods shipped
out o f State would be covered.
In 1961, Congress greatly expanded
f l s a protections by extending coverage
to all employees in an entire enterprise if
that enterprise had at least two employ­
ees who were individually covered (that
is, “engaged in,” or “producing goods
for,” interstate commerce) or who were
“handling, selling or otherwise working
on” goods or materials that had been
shipped in from out o f State. Under this
expanded coverage, if an enterprise had
two mailroom clerks who were shipping
goods out o f state, then all employees
o f the enterprise would be covered, even
though none o f those other employees
were engaged in, or producing goods
for, interstate commerce. Equally impor­
tant was the “handling” coverage, as it
came to be called. For example, construc­
tion workers who handled nails or lum­
ber or roofing shingles that had been
shipped in from out o f State were cov­
ered for the first time, as were restaurant
workers and other retail or service busi­
ness w orkers who handled utensils,
plates, apparel, and myriad other goods
and materials that had been shipped in
from out o f State.
Some enterprises were covered only
if they did a specified dollar volume of

business in a year. However, these an­
nual dollar amounts were lowered for
retail and service enterprises to $250,000
and were eliminated altogether for con­
struction enterprises. Thus, the trend
from 1961 until the 1989 amendments was
to expand enterprise coverage to pro­
tect more workers. In explaining these
intricacies, Linder lays bare the distor­
tion o f earlier legislative history that
underlay the attempts by certain busi­
ness interests and legislators in 1989 to
claim that these dollar volum e tests
amounted to a small business exemption
that had always been a part o f the FLSA.
When Congress raised the annual dol­
lar volume threshold for enterprise cov­
erage to $500,000 in 1989, it removed from
coverage almost all construction work­
ers and many retail and service workers
in these small businesses— one o f the
first major rollbacks in the protections
o f the FLSA.
Many books written about the FLSA
are mainly for practitioners, and hence
tend to focus on the innumerable details
o f the current state o f the law. Linder4s
goal is much different. He approaches
the FLSA from a historical view, and his
writing has a definite edge. The narra­
tive power, the striking insights, and the
mordant eloquence— all make this a book
that will appeal to an audience far be­
yond those interested in the overtime
law to all those who seek to understand
an important and ongoing aspect o f the
struggle between labor and capital in
modem America. In short, Linder’s book
shows how politics and the conflict o f
values have shaped an important part o f
the legal landscape for working men and
women in the last 60 years.
— James B. Leonard
formerly with the
U.S. Department of Labor

C urrent Labor Statistics

Notes on labor statistics

..................... 34

Labor com pensation and collective
bargaining data—continued

Com parative indicators
1. Labor market in d ic a to rs.........................................................
2. Annual and quarterly percent changes in
compensation, prices, and p ro d u ctiv ity ..........................
3. Alternative measures o f wages and
compensation changes........................................................

46
47
47

Labor force d ata
4. Employment status o f the population,
seasonally a d ju s te d .............................................................
5. Selected employment indicators,
seasonally a d ju s te d .............................................................
6. Selected unemployment indicators,
seasonally a d ju s te d .............................................................
7. Duration o f unemployment,
seasonally a d ju ste d .............................................................
8. Unemployed persons by reason for unemployment,
seasonally a d ju s te d .............................................................
9. Unemployment rates by sex and age,
seasonally a d ju s te d .............................................................
10. Unemployment rates by States,
seasonally ad ju ste d .............................................................
11. Employment o f workers by States,
seasonally a d ju s te d .............................................................
12. Employment o f workers by industry,
seasonally a d ju ste d .............................................................
13. Average weekly hours by industry,
seasonally a d ju ste d .............................................................
14. Average hourly earnings by industry,
seasonally ad ju sted ..............................................................
15. Average hourly earnings by in d u stry ...................................
16. Average weekly earnings by in d u stry ................................
17. Diffusion indexes o f employment change,
seasonally a d ju ste d .............................................................
18. Establishment size and employment covered under ui,
private ownership, by n a ic s supersector......................
19. Annual data establishment, employment, and wages,
covered under ui and UCFE, by o w nership.....................
20. Annual data: Establishments, employment,
and wages covered under ui and u c f e , by S ta te ...........
21. Annual data: Employment and average annual pay o f
ui- and uCFE-covered workers, by largest co u n ties.......
22. Annual data: Employment status o f the p o p u latio n ........
23. Annual data: Employment levels by in d u stry ................
24. Annual data: Average hours and earnings level,
by in d u s try .........................................................................


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

72
73
74
75

Price d ata
48
49
50
50
51
51
52
52
53
55
56
57
58
59
60
61

32. Consumer Price Index: U.S. city average, by expenditure
category and commodity and service g ro u p s.................
33. Consumer Price Index: U.S. city average and
local data, all ite m s..............................................................
34. Annual data: Consumer Price Index, all items
and major g ro u p s.................................................................
35. Producer Price Indexes by stage o f p ro cessin g ..................
36. Producer Price Indexes for the net output o f major
industiy g ro u p s...................................................................
37. Annual data: Producer Price Indexes
by stage o f processing........................................................
38. U.S. export price indexes by Standard International
Trade C lassification............................................................
39. U.S. import price indexes by Standard International
Trade C lassification............................................................
40. U.S. export price indexes by end-use categ o ry..................
41. U.S. import price indexes by end-use c a te g o iy .................
42. U.S.international price indexes for selected
categories o f services..........................................................

76
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
86
86

Productivity d ata
43. Indexes o f productivity, hourly compensation,
and unit costs, data seasonally a d ju ste d .........................
44. Annual indexes o f multifactor productivity........................
45. Annual indexes o f productivity, hourly compensation,
unit costs, and p ric e s .........................................................
46. Annual indexes o f output per hour for selected
industries...............................................................................

87
88
89
90

62
63
66
67
67

Labor com pensation and collective
bargaining data
25. Employment Cost Index, compensation,
by occupation and industry g ro u p ...................................
26. Employment Cost Index, wages and salaries,
by occupation and industry g ro u p ...................................
27. Employment Cost Index, benefits, private in d u stry........

28. Employment Cost Index, private nonfarm workers,
by bargaining status, region, and area s i z e .....................
29. Participants in benefit plans, medium and large firm s......
30. Participants in benefits plans, small firms
and governm ent........................................................................
31. Work stoppages involving 1,000 workers or m o r e ...........

International comparisons data
47. Unemployment rates in nine countries,
data seasonally adjusted.....................................................
48. Annual data: Employment status o f the civilian
working-age population, 10 countries.............................
49. Annual indexes o f productivity and related measures,
12 co u n trie s..........................................................................

93
94
95

Injury and illness d ata
68
70
71

50. Annual data: Occupational injury and illness
incidence ra te s ......................................................................
51. Fatal occupational injuries by event
or exposure................................................................................

Monthly Labor Review

April 2003

96
98

33

Notes on Current Labor Statistics

This section o f the Review presents the prin­
cipal statistical series collected and calcu­
lated by the B ureau o f L abor S tatistics:
series on labor force; employment; unem ­
ployment; labor com pensation; consumer,
producer, and international prices; produc­
tivity; international comparisons; and injury
and illness statistics. In the notes that fol­
low, the data in each group o f tables are
briefly described; key definitions are given;
notes on the data are set forth; and sources
o f additional information are cited.

General notes
The follow ing notes apply to several tables
in this section:
Seasonal adjustment. Certain m onthly
and quarterly data are adjusted to eliminate
the effect on the data o f such factors as cli­
m atic c o n d itio n s , in d u s try p ro d u c tio n
schedules, opening and closing o f schools,
holiday buying periods, and vacation prac­
tices, which might prevent short-term evalu­
ation o f the statistical series. Tables con­
taining data that have been adjusted are iden­
tified as “seasonally adjusted.” (All other
data are not seasonally adjusted.) Seasonal
effects are estim ated on the basis o f past
experience. W hen new seasonal factors are
com puted each year, revisions may affect
seasonally adjusted data for several preced­
ing years.
Seasonally adjusted data appear in tables
1-14, 16-17, 43, and 47. Seasonally ad­
justed labor force data in tables 1 and 4 -9
were revised in the February 2002 issue o f
the Review. Seasonally adjusted establish­
m ent survey data shown in tables 1, 12-14
and 16-17 were revised in the July 2002
Review and reflect the experience through
M arch 2002. A brief explanation o f the sea­
sonal adjustm ent m ethodology appears in
“N otes on the data.”
R evisions in the p roductivity d ata in
table 49 are usually introduced in the Sep­
tem ber issue. Seasonally adjusted indexes
and percent changes from month-to-month
and quarter-to-quarter are published for nu­
merous Consumer and Producer Price Index
series. H ow ever, seasonally adjusted in­
dexes are not published for the U.S. average
A ll-Item s CPI. Only seasonally adjusted per­
cent changes are available for this series.
Adjustments for price changes. Some
data— such as the “real” earnings shown in
table 14— are adjusted to eliminate the ef­
fect o f changes in price. These adjustm ents
are made by dividing current-dollar values
by the Consum er Price Index or the appro­
priate com ponent o f the index, then m ulti­
plying by 100. For example, given a current

34
Monthly Labor Review

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

hourly wage rate o f $3 and a current price
index number o f 150, where 1982 = 100, the
hourly rate expressed in 1982 dollars is $2
($3/150 x 100 = $2). The $2 (or any other
resulting values) are described as “real,”
“constant,” or “ 1982” dollars.

Sources of information
D ata that supplement the tables in this sec­
tion are published by the Bureau in a variety
o f sources. Definitions o f each series and
notes on the data are contained in later sec­
tions o f these N otes describing each set o f
data. For detailed descriptions o f each data
series, see BLS H andbook o f Methods, Bul­
letin 2490. Users also may wish to consult
Major Programs o f the Bureau o f Labor Sta­
tistics, R eport 919. News releases provide
the latest statistical information published
by the Bureau; the m ajor recurring releases
are published according to the schedule ap­
pearing on the back cover o f this issue.
More information about labor force, em­
ployment, and unemployment data and the
household and establishment surveys under­
lying the data are available in the B ureau’s
m o n th ly p u b lic a tio n , E m p lo y m e n t a n d
Earnings. Historical unadjusted and season­
ally adjusted data from the household sur­
vey are available on the Internet:

http://www.bls.gov/cps/
Historically comparable unadjusted and sea­
sonally adjusted data from the establishment
survey also are available on the Internet:

http://www.bls.gov/ces/
A dditional information on labor force data
for areas below the national level are pro­
vided in the BLS annual report, Geographic
Profile o f Employment and Unemployment.
For a comprehensive discussion o f the
Employment C ost Index, see Employment
Cost Indexes a n d Levels, 1975-95, BLSB ul­
letin 2466. The most recent data from the
Employee Benefits Survey appear in the fol­
lowing Bureau o f Labor Statistics bulletins:
Em ployee Benefits in M edium and Large
Firms; Employee Benefits in Sm all Private
Establishments; and Employee Benefits in
State and Local Governments.
More detailed data on consumer and pro­
ducer prices are published in the monthly
periodicals, The CPI D etailed Report and
Producer Price Indexes. For an overview o f
the 1998 revision o f the CPI, see the Decem­
ber 1996 issue o f the M onthly Labor Re­
view. Additional data on international prices
appear in m onthly news releases.
Listings o f industries for which produc­
tivity indexes are available may be found on
the Internet:

April 2003

http://www.bls.gov/lpc/

For additional information on interna­
tional comparisons data, see International
Comparisons o f Unemployment, BLS B ulle­
tin 1979.
Detailed data on the occupational injury
and illness series are published in O ccupa­
tional Injuries and Illnesses in the United
States, by Industry, a BLS annual bulletin.
Finally, the M onthly Labor Review car­
ries analytical articles on annual and longer
term developm ents in labor force, em ploy­
ment, and unemployment; employee com ­
pensation and collective bargaining; prices;
p ro ductivity; intern atio n al com parisons;
and injury and illness data.

Symbols
n.e.c. = not elsewhere classified,
n.e.s. = not elsewhere specified.
p = preliminary. To increase the tim e­
liness o f some series, prelim inary
figures are issued based on repre­
sentative but incom plete returns,
r = revised. Generally, this revision
reflects the availability o f later
data, but also may reflect other ad­
justm ents.

Comparative Indicators
(Tables 1-3)
C om parative indicators tables provide an
overview and comparison o f m ajor bls sta­
tistical series. Consequently, although many
o f the included series are available monthly,
all measures in these comparative tables are
presented quarterly and annually.
Labor market indicators include em­
ploym ent m easures from two m ajor surveys
and information on rates o f change in com ­
p en satio n pro v id ed by th e E m ploym ent
Cost Index (ECl) program. The labor force
p a rtic ip a tio n ra te , th e e m p lo y m en t-to population ratio, and unem ploym ent rates
for major demographic groups based on the
C urrent Population (“household”) Survey
are presented, while measures o f employ­
ment and average weekly hours by m ajor
industry sector are given using nonfarm payro ll d ata. T he E m p lo y m en t C ost Index
(compensation), by major sector and by bar­
gaining status, is chosen from a variety o f
bls compensation and wage m easures be­
cause it provides a com prehensive measure
o f employer costs for hiring labor, not ju st
outlays for wages, and it is not affected by
em ployment shifts among occupations and
industries.

D ata on changes in com pensation,
prices, and productivity are presented in
table 2. M easures o f rates o f change o f com ­
pensation and wages from the Employment
C ost Index program are provided for all ci­
vilian nonfarm workers (excluding Federal
and household workers) and for all private
nonfarm workers. M easures o f changes in
consum er prices for all urban consum ers;
producer prices by stage o f processing; over­
all prices by stage o f processing; and overall
export and im port price indexes are given.
M easures o f productivity (output per hour
o f all persons) are provided for major sec­
tors.

A lternative measures of wage and
compensation rates of change, which re­
flect the overall trend in labor costs, are sum­
marized in table 3. Differences in concepts
and scope, related to the specific purposes
o f the series,
contribute to the variation in changes among
the individual measures.

Notes on the data
D efinitions o f each series and notes on the
data are contained in later sections o f these
notes describing each set o f data._________

Employment and
Unemployment Data
(Tables l; 4 - 2 4 )

Household survey data
Description of the series

Employment data in this section are ob­
tained from the C urrent Population Survey,
a program o f personal interviews conducted
m onthly by the Bureau o f the Census for
the Bureau o f Labor Statistics. The sample
consists o f about 60,000 households selected
to represent the U.S. population 16 years o f
age and older. H ouseholds are interviewed
on a rotating basis, so that three-fourths o f
the sample is the same for any 2 consecutive
m onths.
Definitions
Employed persons include (1) all those
who w orked for pay any tim e during the
week w hich includes the 12th day o f the
month or who worked unpaid for 15 hours
or more in a fam ily-operated enterprise and
(2) those who were tem porarily absent from
their regular jo b s because o f illness, vaca­
tion, industrial dispute, or similar reasons. A
person w orking at m ore than one jo b is
counted only in the jo b at which he or she
worked the greatest num ber o f hours.
Unemployed persons are those who did


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

not work during the survey week, but were
available for work except for tem porary ill­
ness and had looked for jobs within the pre­
ceding 4 weeks. Persons who did not look
for work because they were on layoff are
also counted among the unemployed. The
unemployment rate represents the num ­
ber unemployed as a percent o f the civilian
labor force.
The civilian labor force consists o f all
em ployed or unem ployed persons in the
civilian noninstitutional population. Persons
not in the labor force are th o s e n o t
classified as employed or unemployed. This
group includes discouraged workers, defined
as persons who want and are available for a
jo b and who have looked for work sometime
in the past 12 months (or since the end o f
their last jo b if they held one within the past
12 months), but are not currently looking,
because they b eliev e th ere are no jo b s
available or there are none for which they
w ould qualify. The civilian noninstitu­
tional population comprises all persons 16
years o f age and older who are not inmates
o f penal or mental institutions, sanitariums,
or homes for the aged, infirm, or needy. The
civilian labor force participation rate is
th e
p ro p o rtio n
of
th e
c iv ilia n
noninstitutional population that is in the
labor force. The employment-population
ratio is employ-m ent as a percent o f the
civilian nonin-stitutional population.

Notes on the data
From time to time, and especially after a
decennial census, adjustments are made in
the Current Population Survey figures to
co rrect for estim ating errors during the
intercensal years. These adjustm ents affect
the comparability o f historical data. A de­
scription o f these adjustments and their ef­
fect on the various data series appears in the
E x p lan ato ry N o tes o f E m p lo ym en t a n d
Earnings.
Labor force data in tables 1 and 4 -9 are
seasonally adjusted. Since January 1980,
national labor force data have been season­
ally adjusted with a procedure called X -l 1
arima which was developed at Statistics
Canada as an extension o f the standard X -11
method previously used by bls. A detailed
description o f the procedure appears in the
X - ll ARIMA Seasonal Adjustm ent Method,
by E stela Bee Dagum (Statistics Canada,
Catalogue No. 12-564E, January 1983).
At the beginning o f each calendar year,
historical seasonally adjusted data usually
are revised, and projected seasonal adjust­
ment factors are calculated for use during
the January-June period. The historical sea­
sonally adjusted data usually are revised for
only the most recent 5 years. In July, new
seasonal adjustment factors, which incorpo­

rate the experience through June, are pro­
duced for the July-D ecem ber period, but no
revisions are made in the historical data.
For additional information on n a­
tional household survey data, contact the
D ivision o f Labor Force Statistics: (202)
691-6378.

Establishment survey data
Description of the series

Employment, hours, and earnings data
in this section are com piled from payroll
records reported monthly on a voluntary ba­
sis to the Bureau o f Labor Statistics and its
cooperating State agencies by about 300,000
establishm ents representing all industries
except agriculture. Industries are classified
in accordance with the 1987 Standard In­
dustrial Classification (SIC) Manual. In most
industries, the sam pling probabilities are
based on the size o f the establishm ent; most
large establishm ents are therefore in the
sample. (An establishm ent is not necessar­
ily a firm; it may be a branch plant, for ex­
ample, or w arehouse.) Self-employed per­
sons and others not on a regular civilian pay­
roll are outside the scope o f the survey
because they are excluded from establish­
ment records. This largely accounts for the
difference in employment figures between
the household and establishm ent surveys.

Definitions
An establishm ent is an econom ic u n it
which produces goods or services (such as a
factory or store) at a single location and is
engaged in one type o f econom ic activity.
Employed persons are all persons who
received pay (including holiday and sick
pay) for any part o f the payroll period in­
cluding the 12th day o f the month. Persons
holding more than one jo b (about 5 percent
o f all persons in the labor force) are counted
in each establishm ent which reports them.
Production workers in m anufacturing
include working supervisors and nonsupervisory workers closely associated w ith pro­
duction operations. T hose w orkers m en­
tioned in tables 11-16 include production
workers in manufacturing and mining; con­
stru c tio n w o rk ers in c o n stru c tio n ; and
nonsupervisory workers in the following in­
dustries: transportation and public utilities;
wholesale and retail trade; finance, insur­
ance, and real estate; and services. These
groups account for about four-fifths o f the
total em ploym ent on private nonagricultural payrolls.
Earnings are the payments production
or nonsupervisory workers receive during
the survey period, including prem ium pay

Monthly Labor Review

April 2003

35

Current Labor Statistics
for overtim e or late-shift w ork but exclud­
ing irreg u lar bonu ses and o th er special
pay m en ts. R eal earnings are e a rn in g s
adjusted to reflect the effects o f changes in
consum er prices. The deflator for this series
is derived from the Consum er Price Index
for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers

(CPI-W).
Hours rep resen t th e average w eekly
h o u rs o f p ro d u ctio n o r n o n su p erv iso ry
w orkers for which pay was received, and
are different from standard or scheduled
hours. Overtime hours represent the por­
tion o f average weekly hours which was in
excess o f regular hours and for which over­
time prem ium s were paid.
T he Diffusion Index rep re se n ts the
percent o f industries in which employment
was rising over the indicated period, plus
one-half o f the industries with unchanged
employment; 50 percent indicates an equal
balance between industries with increasing
and decreasing employment. In line with Bu­
reau practice, data for the 1-, 3-, and 6-month
spans are seasonally adjusted, while those
for the 12-month span are unadjusted. Data
are centered within the span. Table 17 pro­
vides an index on private nonfarm employ­
ment based on 356 industries, and a manu­
facturing index based on 139 industries.
These indexes are useful for m easuring the
dispersion o f economic gains or losses and
are also economic indicators.

Notes on the data
Establishm ent survey data are annually ad­
justed to com prehensive counts o f employ­
m ent (called “benchm arks”). The latest ad­
justm ent, which incorporated M arch 2001
benchmarks, was made with the release o f
May 2002 data, published in the July issue
o f the Review. Coincident with the bench­
mark adjustm ent, historical seasonally ad­
justed data were revised to reflect updated
seasonal factors. Unadjusted data from April
2000 forward and seasonally adjusted data
from January 1997 forw ard were revised
with the release o f the M ay 2002 data.
In addition to the routine benchmark re­
visions and updated seasonal factors intro­
duced w ith the release o f the M ay 2002
data, the first estimates for the transporta­
tion and public utilities; retail trade; and fi­
nance, insurance, and real estate industries
w ere published from a new probabilitybased sample design. These industries are
the third group to convert to a probabilitybased sample under a 4-year phase-in plan
o f a sample redesign project. The comple­
tion o f the phase-in for the redesign, in June
2003 for the services industry, will coincide
with the conversion o f national establish­
m ent survey series from industry coding
based on the 1987 Standard Industrial Clas­
sification (SIC) system to the N orth A m eri­

36
Monthly Labor Review

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

can Industry Classification System (NAICS).
For additional information, see the the June
2002 issue o f Employment and Earnings.
R evisions in State data (table 11) oc­
curred with the publication o f January 2002
data.
Beginning in June 1996, the BLS uses the
X-12-arima methodology to seasonally ad­
ju st establishm ent survey data. This proce­
dure, developed by the Bureau o f the C en­
sus, controls for the effect o f varying sur­
vey intervals (also known as the 4- versus
5-week effect), thereby providing improved
measurement o f over-the-month changes and
underlying economic trends. Revisions o f
data, usually for the most recent 5-year pe­
riod, are made once a year coincident with
the benchmark revisions.
In the establishm ent survey, estim ates
for the most recent 2 months are based on
incomplete returns and are published as pre­
liminary in the tables ( 12-17 in the Review).
W hen all returns have been received, the es­
timates are revised and published as “final”
(prior to any benchmark revisions) in the
third month o f their appearance. Thus, D e­
cember data are published as prelim inary in
January and February and as final in March.
For the same reasons, quarterly establish­
ment data (table 1) are prelim inary for the
first 2 months o f publication and final in the
third month. Thus, fourth-quarter data are
published as prelim inary in January and
February and as final in March.
Foradditional information on estab­
lishment survey data, contact the Division
o f C urrent E m ploym ent Statistics: (202)
691-6555.

d a ta fo r all S ta te s and th e D is tric t o f
C olum bia are derived using standardized
procedures established by BLS. Once a year,
estim ates are revised to new population
controls, usually with publication o f January
estim a te s, and b en ch m a rk ed to an n u al
average cps levels.
For additional information on data
in this series, call (202) 691-6392 (table 10)
or (202) 691-6559 (table 11).

Unemployment data by
State

Definitions

Description of the series
D ata presented in this section are obtained
from the Focal A rea U nemploym ent Statis­
tics (LAUS) program, which is conducted in
cooperation with State employment secu­
rity agencies.
M onthly estim ates o f the labor force,
employment, and unem ploym ent for States
and sub-State areas are a key indicator o f
local economic conditions, and form the ba­
sis for determining the eligibility o f an area
for benefits under Federal economic assis­
tance program s such as the Job Training
Partnership Act. Seasonally adjusted unem ­
ploym ent rates are presented in table 10.
Insofar as possible, the concepts and defini­
tions underlying these data are those used in
the national estimates obtained from the CPS.

Notes on the data
D ata refer to State o f residence. M onthly

April 2003

Covered em ploym ent and
wage data (ES-202)
Description of the series
E

m p l o y m e n t , w a g e , a n d e s t a b l is h m e n t d a ta

in this section are derived from the quarterly
tax reports subm itted to State employment
security agencies by private and State and
local governm ent employers subject to State
unemployment insurance (ui) laws and from
Federal, agencies subject to the U nem ploy­
m ent Com pensation for Federal Employees
( u c f e ) program. Each quarter, State agencies
edit and process the data and send the infor­
mation to the Bureau o f Labor Statistics.
The Covered Em ploym ent and Wages
data, also referred as ES-202 data, are the
most complete enum eration o f employment
and wage information by industry at the na­
tional, State, m etropolitan area, and county
levels. They have broad econom ic signifi­
cance in evaluating labor market trends and
m ajor industry developments.

In general, e s -2 0 2 monthly em ployment data
represent the number o f covered workers
who worked during, or received pay for, the
pay period that included the 12th day o f the
month. Covered private industry employ­
ment includes most corporate officials, ex­
ecutives, supervisory personnel, profession­
als, clerical workers, wage earners, piece
workers, and part-time workers. It excludes
p roprietors, the u n incorporated self-em ­
ployed, unpaid family members, and certain
farm and domestic workers. Certain types
o f nonprofit employers, such as religious
organizations, are given a choice o f coverage
or exclusion in a num ber o f States. Workers
in these organizations are, therefore, reported
to a limited degree.
Persons on paid sick leave, paid holiday,
paid vacation, and the like, are included. Per­
sons on the payroll o f more than one firm
during the period are counted by each uisubject employer if they meet the em ploy­
ment definition noted earlier. The employ-

ment count excludes workers who earned no
wages during the entire applicable pay period
because o f work stoppages, temporary lay­
offs, illness, or unpaid vacations.
Federal employment data are based on
reports o f monthly employment and quarterly
wages submitted each quarter to State agencies
for all Federal installations with employees
covered by the U nemploym ent C o m p en sa­
tion for Federal E m ployees (ucee) program ,
ex cep t fo r certain n atio n al secu rity agen­
cies, w hich are om itted fo r secu rity re a ­
sons. Employment for all Federal agencies for
any given month is based on the number o f
persons who worked during or received pay
for the pay period that included the 12th of
the month.
An establishment is an economic unit,
such as a farm, mine, factory, or store, that
produces goods or provides services. It is typi­
cally at a single physical location and engaged
in one, or predominantly one, type o f eco­
nomic activity for which a single industrial clas­
sification may be applied. Occasionally, a single
physical location encompasses two or more
distinct and significant activities. Each activity
should be reported as a separate establishment
if separate records are kept and the various
activities are classified under different four­
digit sic codes.
Most employers have only one establish­
ment; thus, the establishment is the predomi­
nant reporting unit or statistical entity for re­
porting employment and wages data. Most
employers, including State and local govern­
ments who operate more than one establish­
ment in a State, file a Multiple Worksite Re­
port each quarter, in addition to their quarterly
ui report. The M ultiple Worksite Report is
used to collect separate employment and wage
data for each o f the employer’s establishments,
which are not detailed on the ui report. Some
veiy small multi-establishment employers do
not file a Multiple Worksite Report. When the
total employment in an employer’s secondary
establishments (all establishments other than
the largest) is 10 or fewer, the employer gener­
ally will file a consolidated report for all estab­
lishments. Also, some employers either can­
not or will not report at the establishment level
and thus aggregate establishments into one con­
solidated unit, or possibly several units, though
not at the establishment level.
For the Federal Government, the reporting
unit is the installation: a single location at
which a department, agency, or other govern­
ment body has civilian employees. Federal agen­
cies follow slightly different criteria than do
private employers when breaking down their
reports by installation. They are permitted to
combine as a single statewide unit: 1) all instal­
lations with 10 or fewer workers, and 2) all


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

installations that have a combined total in the
State o f fewer than 50 workers. Also, when
there are fewer than 25 workers in all second­
ary installations in a State, the secondary in­
stallations may be combined and reported with
the major installation. Last, if a Federal agency
has fewer than five employees in a State, the
agency headquarters office (regional office,
district office) serving each State may consoli­
date the employment and wages data for that
State with the data reported to the State in
which the headquarters is located. As a result
o f these reporting rules, the number o f report­
ing units is always larger than the number of
em ployers (or governm ent agencies) but
smaller than the number o f actual establish­
ments (or installations).
Data reported for the first quarter are tabu­
lated into size categories ranging from worksites
o f very small size to those with 1,000 em­
ployees or more. The size category is deter­
mined by the establishment’s March employ­
ment level. It is important to note that each
establishment o f a multi-establishment firm is
tabulated separately into the appropriate size
category. The total employment level o f the
reporting multi-establishment firm is not used
in the size tabulation.
Covered employers in most States report
total wages paid during the calendar quarter,
regardless o f when the services were per­
formed. A few State laws, however, specify
that wages be reported for, or based on the
period during which services are performed
rather than the period during which compen­
sation is paid. Under most State laws or regu­
lations, wages include bonuses, stock options,
the cash value o f meals and lodging, tips and
other gratuities, and, in some States, employer
contributions to certain deferred compensa­
tion plans such as 401(k) plans.
Covered employer contributions for oldage, survivors, and disability insurance ( o a s d i ),
health insurance, unemployment insurance,
workers’ compensation, and private pension
and welfare funds are not reported as wages.
Employee contributions for the same pur­
poses, however, as well as money withheld
for income taxes, union dues, and so forth, are
reported even though they are deducted from
the worker’s gross pay.
Wages of covered Federal workers rep­
resent the gross amount o f all payrolls for all
pay periods ending within the quarter. This
includes cash allowances, the cash equivalent
o f any type o f remuneration, severance pay,
withholding taxes, and retirement deductions.
Federal employee remuneration generally cov­
ers the same types o f services as for workers
in private industry.
Average annual wages per employee for
any given industry are computed by dividing

total annual wages by annual average employ­
ment. A further division by 52 yields average
weekly wages per employee. Annual pay data
only approximate annual earnings because an
individual may not be employed by the same
employer all year or may work for more than
one employer at a time.
Average weekly or annual pay is affected
by the ratio o f full-time to part-time workers
as well as the number o f individuals in highpaying and low-paying occupations. When
average pay levels between States and indus­
tries are compared, these factors should be
taken into consideration. For example, indus­
tries characterized by high proportions o f parttime workers will show average wage levels
appreciably less than the weekly pay levels o f
regular full-time employees in these industries.
The opposite effect characterizes industries
with low proportions o f part-time workers, or
industries that typically schedule heavy week­
end and overtime work. Average wage data also
may be influenced by work stoppages, labor
turnover rates, retroactive payments, seasonal
factors, bonus payments, and so on.

Notes on the data
Beginning with the release o f data for 2001,
publications presenting data from the Covered
Employment and Wages (CEW) program have
switched to the 2002 version o f the North
A merican Industry Classificatiion System
(NAICS) as the basis for the assignment and
tabulation o f economic data by industry, naics
is the product o f a cooperative effort on the
part o f the statistical agencies o f the United
States, Canada, and Mexico. Due to difference
in naics and Standard Industrial Classifica­
tion (SIC) structures, industry data for 2001 is
not comparable to the sic-based data for ear­
lier years.
Effective January 2001, the CEWprogram
began assigning Indian Tribal Councils and re­
lated establishments to local government own­
ership. This bls action was in response to a
change in Federal law dealing with the way
Indian Tribes are treated under the Federal
Unemployment Tax Act. This law requires
federally recognized Indian Tribes to be treated
similarly to State and local governments. In
the past the CEWprogram coded Indian Tribal
Councils and related establishm ents in the
private sector. As a result o f the new law,
CEW data reflects significant shifts in em­
ployment and wages between the private sec­
tor and local government from 2000 to 2001.
Data also reflect industry changes. Those
accounts previously assigned to civic and
social organizations were assigned to tribal
governments. There were no required indus­
try changes for related establishments owned

Monthly Labor Review

April 2003

37

Current Labor Statistics

by these Tribal Councils. These tribal busi­
ness establishments continued to be coded ac­
cording to the economic activity o f that entity.
To insure the highest possible quality o f
data, State em ploym ent security agencies
verify with employers and update, if neces­
sary, the industry, location, and ownership clas­
sification o f all establishments on a 3-year cycle.
Changes in establishment classification codes
resulting from the verification process are in­
troduced with the data reported for the first
quarter o f the year. Changes resulting from
improved employer reporting also are intro­
duced in the first quarter. For these reasons,
some data, especially at more detailed geo­
graphic levels, may not be strictly comparable
with earlier years.
The2000 county data used to calculate the
2000-2001 changes were adjusted for changes
in industry and county classification to make
them comparable to data for 2001. As a result,
the adjusted 2000 data differ to some extent
from the data available on the Internet at:

http://www.bls.gov/cew/home.htm.
County definitions are assigned according
to Federal Information Processing Standards
Publications as issued by the National Insti­
tute o f Standards and Technology. A reas
shown as counties include those designated
as independent cities in some jurisdictions
and, in Alaska, those areas designated by the
Census Bureau where counties have not been
created. County data also are presented for
the New England States for comparative pur­
poses, even though tow nships are the more
common designation used in New England
(and N ew Jersey).
For additional information on the covered
employment and wage data, contact the Divi­
sion o f Administrative Statistics and Labor
Turnover at (202) 691-6567.

Compensation and
Wage Data
(Tables 1-3; 25-31)

Compensation and wage data are gathered
by the Bureau from business establishments,
State and local governments, labor unions, col­
lective bargaining agreements on file with the
Bureau, and secondary sources.

pensation per hour w orked and includes
wages, salaries, and employer costs o f em­
p lo y ee b en efits. It uses a fixed m arket
basket o f labor— similar in concept to the Con­
sumer Price Index’s fixed market basket of
goods and services— to measure change over
time in employer costs o f employing labor.
Statistical series on total compensation
costs, on wages and salaries, and on benefit
costs are available for private nonfarm work­
ers excluding proprietors, the self-employed,
and household workers. The total compensa­
tion costs and wages and salaries series are
also available for State and local government
workers and for the civilian nonfarm economy,
which consists o f private industry and State
and local government workers combined. Fed­
eral workers are excluded.
The Employment Cost Index probability
sample consists o f about 4,400 private non­
farm establishments providing about 23,000
occupational observations and 1,000 State and
local government establishments providing
6,000 occupational observations selected to
represent total employment in each sector. On
average, each reporting unit provides wage and
compensation information on five well-speci­
fied occupations. Data are collected each quar­
ter for the pay period including the 12th day
o f March, June, September, and December.
Beginning with June 1986 data, fixed em­
ploym ent weights from the 1980 Census o f
P o p u la tio n a re u se d e a c h q u a rte r to
calculate the civilian and private indexes and
the index for State and local governments.
(P r io r to Ju n e 1986, th e e m p lo y m e n t
weights are from the 1970 Census o f Popu­
lation.) These fixed weights, also used to
derive all o f the industry and occupation
series indexes, ensure that changes in these
indexes reflect only changes in com pensa­
tion, not employment shifts among indus­
tries or occupations with different levels o f
wages and compensation. For the bargaining
status, region, and metropolitan/non-m etropolitan area series, however, employment
data by industry and occupation are not
available from the census. Instead, the 1980
employment weights are reallocated within
these series each quarter based on the cur­
rent sample. Therefore, these indexes are not
strictly comparable to those for the aggre­
gate, industry, and occupation series.

Definitions

Employment Cost Index

Total compensation costs include wages,

Description of the series
The Employment Cost Index (ECl) is a quar­
terly measure o f the rate o f change in com­

38
Monthly Labor Review

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

salaries, and the em ployer’s costs for em­
ployee benefits.
Wages and salaries consist o f earnings
before payroll deductions, including produc­

April 2003

tion bonuses, incentive earnings, comm is­
sions, and cost-of-living adjustments.
Benefits include the cost to employers
for paid leave, supplemental pay (includ­
ing nonproduction bonuses), insurance, retire­
ment and savings plans, and legally required
benefits (such as Social Security, workers’ com­
pensation, and unemployment insurance).
Excluded from wages and salaries and em­
ployee benefits are such items as payment-in­
kind, free room and board, and tips.

Notes on the data
The Employment Cost Index for changes in
wages and salaries in the private nonfarm
economy was published beginning in 1975.
Changes in total compensation cost— wages
and salaries and benefits combined— were
published beginning in 1980. The series o f
changes in wages and salaries and for total
compensation in the State and local govern­
m ent sector and in the civilian nonfarm
economy (excluding Federal employees) were
published beginning in 1981. Historical in­
dexes (June 1981=100) are available on the
Internet:

http://www.bls.gov/ect/

For additional information

on the
Employm ent Cost Index, contact the Office
o f Compensation Levels and Trends: (202)
691-6199.

Employee Benefits Survey
Description of the series
Employee benefits data are obtained from
the Employee B enefits Survey, an annual
survey o f the incidence and provisions o f
selected benefits provided by em ployers.
The survey collects data from a sam ple o f
ap p ro x im ately 9,000 p riv ate secto r and
State and local governm ent establishments.
The data are presented as a percentage o f em­
ployees who participate in a certain benefit, or
as an average benefit provision (for example,
the average number o f paid holidays provided
to employees per year). Selected data from the
survey are presented in table 25 for medium
and large private establishments and in table
26 for small private establishments and State
and local government.
The survey covers paid leave benefits
such as holidays and vacations, and personal,
funeral, ju ry duty, military, family, and sick
leave; short-term disability, long-term dis­
ability, and life insurance; medical, dental,
and vision care plans; defined benefit and
defined contribution plans; flexible benefits
plans; reim bursem ent accounts; and unpaid
family leave.
A lso, d ata are tab u la te d on the inci-

dence o f several oth er benefits, such as
severance pay, child-care assistance, well-ness
p ro g ram s, and em p lo y ee a ssista n c e
programs.

Definitions
Employer-provided benefits are benefits
that are financed either wholly or partly by
the employer. They may be sponsored by a
union or other third party, as long as there is
some em ployer financing. However, some
benefits that are fully paid for by the em­
ployee also are included. For example, long­
term care insurance and postretirem ent life
insurance paid entirely by the employee are
included because the guarantee o f insurabil­
ity and availability at group prem ium rates
are considered a benefit.
Participants are workers who are covered
by a benefit, whether or not they use that benefit.
I f the benefit plan is financed w holly by
employers and requires employees to complete
a minimum length o f service for eligibility, the
workers are considered participants whether or
not they have met the requirement. If workers
are required to contribute towards the cost o f a
plan, they are considered participants only if
they elect the plan and agree to make the required
contributions.
Defined benefit pension plans use pre­
determined formulas to calculate a retirement
benefit (if any), and obligate the employer to
provide those benefits. Benefits are generally
based on salary, years o f service, or both.
Defined contribution plans generally
specify the level o f employer and employee
contributions to a plan, but not the formula for
determining eventual benefits. Instead, indi­
vidual accounts are set up for participants, and
benefits are based on amounts credited to these
accounts.
Tax-deferred savings plans are a type o f
defined contribution plan that allow par­
ticipants to contribute a portion o f their sal­
ary to an employer-sponsored plan and defer
income taxes until withdrawal.
Flexible benefit plans allow employees
to choose among several benefits, such as life
insurance, medical care, and vacation days, and
among several levels o f coverage within a given
benefit.

Notes on the data
Surveys o f employees in medium and large
establishments conducted over the 1979-86
period included establishments that employed
at least 50,100, or 250 workers, depending on
the industry (m ost service industries were
excluded). The survey conducted in 1987


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

covered only State and local governments with
50 or more employees. The surveys conducted
in 1988 and 1989 included medium and large
establishments with 100 workers or more in
private industries. All surveys conducted over
the 1979-89 period excluded establishments
in Alaska and Hawaii, as well as part-time
employees.
Beginning in 1990, surveys o f State and
lo c a l g o v e rn m e n ts a n d sm all p riv a te
establishm ents w ere conducted in evennumbered years, and surveys o f medium and
large establishments were conducted in oddnum bered years. The small establishm ent
su rv e y in c lu d e s a ll p riv a te n o n fa rm
e s ta b lis h m e n ts w ith fe w e r th a n 100
w o rk e rs, w h ile th e S ta te an d lo c a l
government survey includes all governments,
regardless o f the num ber o f workers. All
three surveys include full- and part-tim e
workers, and workers in all 50 States and
the D istrict o f Columbia.
ForADDITIONALINFORMATIONon the Em­
ployee Benefits Survey, contact the Office o f
Com pensation Levels and Trends on the
Internet:

http://www.bls.gov/ebs/

Work stoppages
Description of the series
Data on work stoppages measure the number
and duration o f major strikes or lockouts (in­
volving 1,000 workers or more) occurring dur­
ing the month (or year), the number o f work­
ers involved, and the amount o f work time lost
because o f stoppage. These data are presented
in table 27.
D ata are largely from a variety o f pub­
lished sources and cover only establishments
directly involved in a stoppage. They do
not measure the indirect or secondary effect
o f stoppages on other establishments whose
employees are idle owing to material short­
ages or lack o f service.

Definitions
Number of stoppages:

The num ber o f
strikes and lockouts involving 1,000 workers
or more and lasting a full shift or longer.
Workers involved: The number o f work­
ers directly involved in the stoppage.
Number of days idle: The aggregate
number o f workdays lost by workers involved
in the stoppages.

Days of idleness as a percent of
estim ated working time: A g g reg ate
workdays lost as a percent o f the aggregate
number o f standard workdays in the period
multiplied by total employment in the period.

Notes on the data
This series is not comparable with the one
terminated in 1981 that covered strikes in­
volving six workers or more.
For additional information on work
stoppages data, contact the Office o f Com­
pensation and Working Conditions: (202)
691-6282, or the Internet:

http:/www.bls.gov/cba/

Price Data
(Tables 2; 32-42)

Price data

are g ath ered by the B ureau
o f L ab o r S tatistics from reta il and p ri­
mary markets in the United States. Price in­
dexes are given in relation to a base period—
1982 = 100 for many Producer Price Indexes,
1982-84 = 100 for many Consumer Price In­
dexes (unless otherwise noted), and 1990 =
100 for International Price Indexes.

Consumer Price Indexes
Description of the series
The Consumer Price Index (CPI) is a mea­
sure o f the average change in the prices paid
by urban consum ers for a fixed market bas­
ket o f goods and services. The CPI is calcu­
lated m onthly for two population groups,
one consisting only o f urban households
whose primary source o f income is derived
from the em ploym ent o f w age earners and
clerical workers, and the other consisting o f
all urban households. The wage earner index
(CPI-W) is a continuation o f the historic in­
dex that was introduced well over a halfcentury ago for use in wage negotiations. As
new uses were developed for the CPI in re­
cent years, the need for a broader and more
representative index becam e apparent. The
all-urban consumer index (CPi-U), introduced
in 1978, is representative o f the 1993-95
buying habits o f about 87 percent o f the
noninstitutional population o f the U nited
States at that time, compared with 32 per­
cent represented in the cpi-w. In addition to
wage earners and clerical workers, the cpi-u
covers professional, managerial, and techni­
cal workers, the self-employed, short-term
workers, the unemployed, retirees, and oth­
ers not in the labor force.
The CPI is based on prices o f food, cloth­
ing, shelter, fuel, drugs, transportation fares,
doctors’ and dentists’ fees, and other goods
and services that people buy for day-to-day
living. The quantity and quality o f these
items are kept essentially unchanged between
major revisions so that only price changes
will be measured. All taxes directly associ-

Monthly Labor Review

April 2003

39

Current Labor Statistics

ated with the purchase and use o f items are
included in the index.
D ata collected from more than 23,000 re­
tail establishments and 5,800 housing units
in 87 urban areas across the country are used
to develop the “U.S. city average.” Separate
estimates for 14 major urban centers are pre­
sented in table 33. The areas listed are as
indicated in footnote 1 to the table. The area
indexes measure only the average change in
prices for each area since the base period, and
do not indicate differences in the level o f
prices among cities.

Notes on the data
In January 1983, the Bureau changed the
w ay in w hich hom eow nership costs are
m eaured for the CPI-U. A rental equivalence
m ethod replaced the asset-price approach
to homeow nership costs for that series. In
January 1985, the same change was made in
the c p i -w . The central purpose o f the change
was to separate shelter costs from the in­
vestm ent com ponent o f home-ownership so
that the index would reflect only the cost o f
shelter services provided by ow ner-occu­
pied homes. An updated CPi-u and c p i -w
w ere introduced with release o f the January
1987 and January 1998 data.
F o r ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, contact
the D ivision o f Prices and Price Indexes:
(2 0 2 )6 9 1 -7 0 0 0 .

Producer Price Indexes
Description of the series
Producer Price Indexes (PPI) measure av­
erage changes in prices received by domestic
producers o f com m odities in all stages o f
processing. The sample used for calculating
these indexes currently contains about 3,200
comm odities and about 80,000 quotations
per month, selected to represent the move­
m ent o f prices o f all comm odities produced
in the m anufacturing; agriculture, forestry,
and fishing; m ining; and gas and electricity
and public utilities sectors. The stage-ofp ro c e s s in g s tru c tu re o f p p i o rg a n iz e s
products by class o f buyer and degree o f
fabrication (that is, finished goods, inter­
m ediate goods, and crude m aterials). The
trad itio n al com m odity structure o f p p i or­
ganizes products by sim ilarity o f end use
or m aterial com position. The industry and
product structure o f p p i organizes data in
accordance w ith the Standard Industrial
C lassification (Sic) and the product code
extension o f the sic developed by the U.S.
Bureau o f the Census.
To the extent possible, prices used in

40
Monthly Labor Review

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

calculating Producer Price Indexes apply to
the first significant commercial transaction
in the United States from the production or
central marketing point. Price data are gen­
erally collected monthly, prim arily by mail
questionnaire. M ost prices are obtained di­
rectly from producing companies on a vol­
untary and confidential basis. Prices gener­
ally are reported for the Tuesday o f the week
containing the 13 th day o f the month.
Since January 1992, price changes for the
various com m odities have been averaged
to g e th e r w ith im p licit q u an tity w eights
representing their importance in the total net
selling value o f all commodities as o f 1987.
The detailed data are aggregated to obtain
indexes for stage-of-processing groupings,
commodity groupings, durability-of-product
groupings, and a number o f special composite
groups. All Producer Price Index data are
subject to revision 4 months after original
publication.
F o r ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, contact
the D ivision o f Industrial Prices and Price
Indexes: (202) 6 9 1 -7 7 0 5 .

International Price Indexes
Description of the series
The International Price Program produces
m onthly and quarterly export and im port
price indexes for nonmilitary goods and ser­
vices traded between the United States and
the rest o f the world. The export price index
provides a measure o f price change for all
products sold by U.S. residents to foreign
buyers. (“Residents” is defined as in the na­
tional income accounts; it includes corpora­
tions, businesses, and individuals, but does
not require the organizations to be U.S.
owned nor the individuals to have U.S. citi­
zenship.) The import price index provides a
measure o f price change for goods purchased
from other countries by U.S. residents.
The product universe for both the import
and export indexes includes raw materials,
agricultural products, semifinished manufac­
tures, and finished manufactures, including
both capital and consumer goods. Price data
for these items are collected primarily by mail
questionnaire. In nearly all cases, the data are
collected directly from the exporter or im­
porter, although in a few cases, prices are
obtained from other sources.
To the extent possible, the data gathered
refer to prices at the U.S. border for exports
and at either the foreign border or the U.S.
border for imports. For nearly all products,
the prices refer to transactions completed dur­
ing the first week o f the month. Survey re­

April 2003

spondents are asked to indicate all discounts,
allowances, and rebates applicable to the re­
ported prices, so that the price used in the
calculation o f the indexes is the actual price for
which the product was bought or sold.
In addition to general indexes o f prices for
U.S. exports and imports, indexes are also
published for detailed product categories o f
exports and imports. These categories are
defined according to the five-digit level o f
detail for the Bureau o f Economic Analysis
End-use Classification, the three-digit level
for the Standard Industrial C lassification
(SITC), and the four-digit level o f detail for the
H arm o n ized System . A g g reg ate im p o rt
indexes by coun-try or region o f origin are
also available.
bls publishes indexes for selected catego­

ries of internationally traded services, calcu­
lated on an international basis and on a balance-of-payments basis.
Notes on the data
The export and im port price indexes are
weighted indexes o f the Laspeyres type. The
trade weights currently used to compute both
indexes relate to 2000.
Because a price index depends on the same
items being priced from period to period, it is
necessary to recognize w hen a p ro d u ct’s
specifications or terms o f transaction have
been modified. For this reason, the Bureau’s
questionnaire requests detailed descriptions o f
the physical and functional characteristics o f
the products being priced, as well as informa­
tion on the number o f units bought or sold,
discounts, credit terms, packaging, class o f
buyer or seller, and so forth. When there are
changes in either the specifications or terms o f
transaction o f a product, the dollar value o f
each change is deleted from the total price
change to obtain the “pure” change. Once this
value is determined, a linking procedure is em­
ployed which allows for the continued repric­
ing o f the item.
F o r a d d it i o n a l in f o r m a t io n , contact
the Division o f International Prices: (202)
691-7155.

Productivity Data
(Tables 2; 43^16)

Business and major sectors
Description of the series
The productivity measures relate real output
to real input. As such, they encompass a fam-

ily o f measures which include single-factor
input measures, such as output per hour, out­
put per unit o f labor input, or output per
unit o f capital input, as well as measures o f
multifactor productivity (output per unit o f
combined labor and capital inputs). The Bu­
reau indexes show the change in output rela­
tive to changes in the various inputs. The
measures cover the business, nonfarm busi­
ness, manufacturing, and nonfinancial corpo­
rate sectors.
Corresponding indexes o f hourly compen­
sation, unit labor costs, unit nonlabor pay­
ments, and prices are also provided.

Definitions
Output per hour of all persons (labor pro­
ductivity) is the quantity o f goods and ser­
vices produced per hour o f labor input. Out­
put per unit of capital services (capital
productivity) is the quantity o f goods and
services produced per unit o f capital ser­
vices input. Multifactor productivity is the
quantity o f goods and services produced per
combined inputs. For private business and pri­
vate nonfarm business, inputs include labor
and capital units. For manufacturing, inputs
include labor, capital, energy, non-energy ma­
terials, and purchased business ser-vices.
Compensation per hour is total com ­
pensation divided by hours at work. Total
com pensation equals the wages and salaries
o f employees plus em ployers’ contributions
for social insurance and private benefit plans,
plus an estim ate o f these payments for the
self-em ployed (except for nonfinancial cor­
porations in w hich there are no self-em ­
ployed). Real compensation per hour is
co m p en satio n p er h o u r d eflated by the
change in the Consum er Price Index for All
Urban Consumers.
Unit labor costs are the labor compen­
sation costs expended in the production o f a
unit o f output and are derived by dividing
com pensation by output. Unit nonlabor
payments include pro fits, depreciation,
interest, and indirect taxes per unit o f out­
put. They are computed by subtracting com­
pensation o f all persons from current-dollar
value o f output and dividing by output.
Unit nonlabor costs contain all the
com ponents o f u n it n o n la b o r paym ents
except unit profits.
Unit profits include corporate profits
w ith inventory valuation and capital con­
sum ption adjustm ents per u n it o f output.
H ours o f all persons are th e to ta l
h ours at w ork o f payro ll w orkers, selfem p lo y ed p e rs o n s, a n d u n p a id fam ily
w orkers.
Labor inputs are hours o f all persons
adjusted for the effects o f changes in the

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

education and experience o f the labor force.
Capital services are the flow o f ser­
vices from the capital stock used in p ro ­
duction. It is developed from m easures o f
the net stock o f physical assets— eq u ip ­
m ent, structures, land, and inventories—
w eighted by rental prices for each type o f
asset.

Combined units of labor and capital
inputs are derived by com bining changes
in lab o r and capital inp u t w ith w eights
w hich represent each com ponent’s share
o f total cost. C om bined units o f labor,
capital, energy, m aterials, and purchased
business services are sim ilarly derived by
c o m b in in g ch an g es in each in p u t w ith
w eights that represent each in p u t’s share
o f total costs. The indexes for each input
a n d fo r c o m b in e d u n its a re b a se d on
changing weights w hich are averages o f the
shares in the current and preceding year
(the T ornquist index-num ber form ula).

Notes on the data
B u sin e ss secto r o u tp u t is an an n u ally w eighted index constructed by excluding
from real gross dom estic product ( g d p ) the
fo llo w in g o utputs: general governm ent,
nonprofit institutions, paid em ployees o f
private households, and the rental value
o f ow ner-occupied dw ellings. N onfarm
business also excludes farm ing. Private
b u sin e ss and p riv ate no n farm b u sin ess
fu rth er exclude governm ent enterprises.
The m easures are supplied by the U.S. D e­
partm ent o f C om m erce’s B ureau o f E co­
nomic Analysis. A nnual estim ates o f manu­
facturing sectoral o u tput are produced by
the B ureau o f L abor Statistics. Q uarterly
m an u factu rin g o u tp u t indexes from the
Federal Reserve Board are adjusted to these
annual output m easures by the bls. Com ­
pensation data are developed from data o f
the B ureau o f E conom ic A nalysis and the
B ureau o f L abor Statistics. H ours data
are developed from data o f the B ureau o f
L abor Statistics.
The p roductivity and associated cost
m easures in tables 4 3 -4 6 describe the re­
latio n sh ip betw een o u tp u t in real term s
and the labor and capital inputs involved
in its production. They show the changes
from p eriod to p eriod in the am ount o f
goods and services produced per u n it o f
in p u t.
A lthough these m easures relate output
to hours and capital services, they do not
m easure the co ntributions o f labor, capi­
tal, or any other specific factor o f p ro d u c­
tion. R ather, they reflect the jo in t effect
o f m any influences, including changes in

technology; shifts in the com position o f
the labor force; capital investm ent; level
o f o u tput; changes in th e u tiliz a tio n o f
capacity, energy, m aterial, and research
and developm ent; the organization o f pro­
duction; m anagerial skill; and characteris­
tics and efforts o f th e w ork force.
FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION on this
p roductivity series, contact the D ivision
o f P ro d u c tiv ity R e se a rc h : (2 0 2 ) 6 9 1 5606.

Industry productivity
measures
Description of the series
T h e b l s in d u s tr y p r o d u c t iv i ty d a ta
supplem ent the m easures fo r the business
econom y and m ajor sectors w ith annual
m easures o f labor productivity for selected
industries at the three- and four-digit levels
o f the Standard Industrial C lassification
system. In addition to labor productivity,
th e in d u s try d a ta a lso in c lu d e an n u a l
m easures o f com pensation and u n it labor
c o s ts fo r t h r e e - d i g it in d u s tr i e s a n d
m easures o f m u ltifacto r pro d u ctivity for
th ree-d ig it m anufacturing industries and
ra ilro a d tr a n s p o r ta tio n . T h e in d u s try
m easures differ in m ethodology and data
sources from the p ro d u ctiv ity m easures
for the m ajor sectors because the industry
m easures are developed in dependently o f
the N ational Incom e and Product A ccounts
fra m e w o rk u se d fo r th e m a jo r s e c to r
m easures.

Definitions
Output per hour is derived by dividing
an index o f industry o u tp u t by an index o f
labor input. For m ost industries, output
indexes are derived from data on the value
o f in d u s try o u tp u t a d ju s te d fo r p ric e
change. F or the rem aining industries, o u t­
p u t indexes are derived from data on the
physical quantity o f production.
The labor input series consist o f the
hours o f all employees (production w orkers
and nonproduction workers), the hours o f all
persons (paid employees, partners, propri­
etors, and unpaid family w orkers), or the
number o f employees, depending upon the
industry.
Unit labor costs rep resen t the labor
c o m p e n sa tio n c o sts p e r u n it o f o u tp u t
produced, and are derived by dividing an
index o f labor com pensation by an index
o f output. Labor compensation includes
p a y ro ll as w e ll as s u p p le m e n ta l p ay -

Monthly Labor Review

April 2003

41

Current Labor Statistics

m ents, including both legally required ex­
p e n d itu re s and pay m en ts fo r v o lu n ta ry
program s.
M ultifactor productivity is derived
by dividing an index o f industry output
by an index o f the com bined inputs co n ­
sum ed in producing th a t output. Com­
bined inputs include capital, labor, and
interm ediate purchases. The m easure o f
capital input used represents the flow o f
services from the cap ital stock used in
production. It is developed from m easures
o f th e n e t s to c k o f p h y sic a l a s s e ts —
equipm ent, structures, land, and inven to ­
ries. The m easure o f intermediate pur­
chases is a com bination o f purchased m a­
terials, services, fuels, and electricity.

Definitions
For the principal U.S. definitions o f the labor
force, employment, and unemployment, see
the Notes section on Employment and Unem­
ployment Data: Household survey data.

Notes on the data

Notes on the data
The industry m easures are com piled from
data produced by the B ureau o f Labor Sta­
tistics and the B ureau o f the C ensus,w ith
additional data supplied by other govern­
m en t ag en cies, tra d e a sso c ia tio n s, and
other sources.
F o r m ost industries, the pro d u ctiv ity
indexes refer to the o u tp u t per h our o f all
em ployees. F or som e trade and services
industries, indexes o f o u tput per h our o f
all persons (including self-em ployed) are
constructed. For som e transp o rtatio n in­
dustries, only indexes o f o u tput per em ­
ployee are prepared.
FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION on this
series, co n tact the D iv isio n o f Industry
P roductivity Studies: (202) 6 9 1 -5 6 1 8 .

International
Comparisons
(Tables 4 7 -4 9 )

Labor force and
unem ploym ent
Description of the series
Tables 47 and 48 present comparative meas­
ures o f the labor force, employment, and un­
em p lo y m en t— a p p ro x im a tin g U .S. c o n ­
cepts— for the United States, Canada, Aus­
tralia, Japan, and several European countries.
The unem ploym en t statistics (and, to a
lesser extent, em ploym ent statistics) pub­
lished by other industrial countries are not,
in most cases, comparable to U.S. unemploy­
ment statistics. Therefore, the Bureau ad­
justs the figures for selected countries, where
necessary, for all known major definitional

42
Monthly Labor Review

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

differences. Although precise comparability
may not be achieved, these adjusted figures
provide a better basis for international com­
parisons than the figures regularly published
by each country. For further information on
adjustm ents and comparability issues, see
Constance Sorrentino, “International unem­
ployment rates: how comparable are they?”
M onthly Labor Review, June 2000, pp. 3-20.

The adjusted statistics have been adapted to
the age at which compulsory schooling ends
in each country, rather than to the U.S. stan­
dard o f 16 years o f age and older. Therefore,
the adjusted statistics relate to the popula­
tion aged 16 and older in France, Sweden, and
the United Kingdom; 15 and older in Austra­
lia, Japan, Germany, Italy from 1993 onward,
and the Netherlands; and 14 and older in Italy
prior to 1993. An exception to this rule is
that the Canadian statistics for 1976 onward
are adjusted to cover ages 16 and older,
whereas the age at which compulsory school­
ing ends rem ains at 15. The institutional
population is included in the denominator o f
the labor force participation rates and em­
ploym ent-population ratios for Japan and
Germany; it is excluded for the United States
and the other countries.
In the U.S. labor force survey, persons on
layoff who are awaiting recall to their jobs
are classified as unemployed. European and
Japanese layoff practices are quite different
in nature from those in the United States;
therefore, strict application o f the U.S. defi­
nition has not been made on this point. For
further information, see M onthly Labor Re­
view, December 1981, pp. 8-11.
The figures for one or more recent years
for France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands,
and the United Kingdom are calculated using
adjustment factors based on labor force sur­
veys for earlier years and are considered pre­
liminary. The recent-year measures for these
countries, therefore, are subject to revision
whenever data from more current labor force
surveys become available.
There are breaks in the data series for the
United States (1990,1994,1997,1998,1999,
2000), Canada (1976) France (1992), Ger­
many (1991), Italy (1991, 1993), the N eth­
erlands (1988), and Sweden (1987).
For the United States, the break in series

April 2003

reflects a major redesign o f the labor force
survey questionnaire and collection method­
ology introduced in January 1994. Revised
population estimates based on the 1990 cen­
sus, adjusted for the estimated undercount,
also were incorporated. In 1996, previously
published data for the 1990-93 period were
revised to reflect the 1990 census-based
population controls, adjusted for the un­
dercount. In 1997, revised population con­
trols were introduced into the household sur­
vey. T herefore, th e d ata are not strictly
conparable with prior years. In 1998, new
composite estimation procedures and minor
revisions in population controls were intro­
duced into the household survey. Therefore,
the data are not strictly comparable with data
for 1997 and earlier years. See the Notes sec­
tion on Em ploym ent and U nem ploym ent
Data o f this Review.
b l s recently introduced a new adjusted
series for Canada. Beginning with the data
for 1976, Canadian data are adjusted to more
closely approximate U.S. concepts. A djust­
ments are made to the unemployed and labor
force to exclude: (1) 15-year-olds; (2) pas­
sive jobseekers (persons only reading news­
paper ads as their method o f jo b search); (3)
persons waiting to start a new job who did
not seek work in the past 4 weeks; and (4)
persons unavailable for work due to personal
or family responsibilities. An adjustm ent is
made to include full-tine students looking for
full-tim e work. The im pact o f the adjust­
ments was to lower the annual average unem­
ployment rate by 0 .1-0.4 percentage point
in the 1980s and 0.4-1.0 percentage point in
the 1990s.
For France, the 1992 break reflects the
substitution o f standardized European Union
Statistical Office ( e u r o s t a t ) unemployment
statistics for the unem ploym ent data esti­
mated according to the International Labor
Office ( il o ) definition and published in the
Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development (OECD) annual yearbook and
quarterly update. This change was made be­
cause the e u r o s t a t data are more up-to-date
than the OECD figures. Also, since 1992, the
e u r o s t a t definitions are closer to the U.S.
definitions than they were in prior years. The
impact o f this revision was to lower the un­
employment rate by 0.1 percentage point in
1992 and 1993, by 0.4 percentage point in
1994, and 0.5 percentage point in 1995.
For Germany, the data for 1991 onward
refer to unified Germany. Data prior to 1991
relate to the former West Germany. The im­
pact o f including the former East Germany
was to increase the unemployment rate from
4.3 to 5.6 percent in 1991.
For Italy, the 1991 break reflects a revi­
sion in the method o f weighting sample data.

The impact was to increase the unemploy­
ment rate by approximately 0.3 percentage
point, from 6.6 to 6.9 percent in 1991.
In October 1992, the survey methodol­
ogy was revised and the definition o f unem­
ploym ent was changed to include only those
who were actively looking for a jo b within
the 30 days preceding the survey and who
were available for work. In addition, the
lower age limit for the labor force was raised
from 14 to 15 years. (Prior to these changes,
b l s adjusted Italy’s published unem ploy­
ment rate downward by excluding from the
unem ployed those persons w ho had not
actively sought work in the past 30 days.)
The break in the series also reflects the incor­
poration o f the 1991 population census re­
sults. The im pact o f these changes was to
raise Italy’s adjusted unemployment rate by
approximately 1.2 percentage points, from
8.3 to 9.5 percent in fourth-quarter 1992.
These changes did not affect employment
significantly, except in 1993. Estimates by
the Italian Statistical Office indicate that em­
ploym ent declined by about 3 percent in
1993, rather than the nearly 4 percent indi­
cated by the data shown in table 44. This
difference is attributable mainly to the incor­
poration o f the 1991 population benchmarks
in the 1993 data. D ata for earlier years have
not been adjusted to incorporate the 1991
census results.
For the Netherlands, a new survey ques­
tionnaire was introduced in 1992 that allowed
for a closer application o f ILO guidelines.
EUROSTAT has revised the Dutch series back
to 1988 based on the 1992 changes. The 1988
revised unemployment rate is 7.6 percent;
the previous estimate for the same year was
9.3 percent.
There have been two breaks in series in
the Swedish labor force survey, in 1987 and
1993. A djustm ents have been made for the
1993 break back to 1987. In 1987, a new
questionnaire w as introduced. Q uestions
regarding current availability w ere added
and the period o f active w orkseeking was
reduced from 60 days to 4 w eeks. These
changes low ered S w ed en ’s 1987 u nem ­
plo y m en t rate by 0.4 p ercen tag e point,
from 2.3 to 1.9 percent. In 1993, the m ea­
surem ent period for the labor force su r­
vey was changed to represent all 52 weeks
o f th e y ear ra th e r th a n one w eek each
m onth and a new adjustm ent for p o p u la­
tio n to ta ls w as in tro d u ced . T he im pact
w as to raise the unem p lo y m en t rate by
approxim ately 0.5 percentage point, from
7.6 to 8.1 percent. S tatistics Sw eden re ­
vised its labor force survey d ata for 1987—
92 to take into account the break in 1993.
The adjustm ent raised the Sw edish unem ­


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

ploym ent rate by 0.2 percentage poin t in
1987 and gradually rose to 0.5 percentage
point in 1992.
Beginning with 1987, BLS has adjusted the
Swedish data to classify students who also
sought work as unemployed. The impact o f
this change was to increase the adjusted un­
employment rate by 0.1 percentage point in
1987 and by 1.8 percentage points in 1994,
when unemployment was higher. In 1998,
the adjusted unemployment rate had risen
from 6.5 to 8.4 percent due to the adjustment
to include students.
The net effect o f the 1987 and 1993
changes and the b l s adjustm ent for stu­
d e n ts seek in g w o rk lo w ered S w e d e n ’s
1987 unem ploym ent rate from 2.3 to 2.2
percent.
FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION on this se­
ries, contact the Division o f Foreign Labor
Statistics: (202) 691-5654.

Manufacturing productivity
and labor costs
Description of the series
Table 49 presents comparative indexes o f
manufacturing labor productivity (output per
hour), output, total hours, compensation per
hour, and unit labor costs for the U nited
States, Canada, Japan, and nine European
countries. These measures are trend compari­
sons— that is, series that measure changes
over time— rather than level comparisons.
There are greater technical problems in com­
paring the levels o f m anufacturing output
among countries.
b l s constructs the comparative indexes
from three basic aggregate measures— output,
total labor hours, and total compensation.
The hours and compensation measures refer
to all employed persons (wage and salary
earners plus self-employed persons and un­
paid family workers) in the United States,
Canada, Japan, France, Germany, Norway,
and Sweden, and to all employees (wage and
salary earners) in the other countries.

Definitions
Output, in general, refers to value added
in m anufacturing from the n ational ac­
co u n ts o f each country. H ow ever, the
o u tput series for Japan p rior to 1970 is
an index o f industrial production, and the
national accounts m easures for the U nited
K ingdom are essentially identical to their
indexes o f industrial production.
T h e 1 9 7 7 -9 7 o u tp u t d a ta fo r th e
U nited States are the gross product o rigi­

nating (value added) m easures prepared
by the B ureau o f E conom ic A nalysis o f
the U .S. D epartm ent o f Com m erce. C om ­
parable m anufacturing o u tp u t data cu r­
rently are not available p rio r to 1977.
U.S. gross product originating is a chaintype annual-w eighted series. (F or m ore in­
form ation on the U.S. m easure, see R obert
E. Y uskavage, “Im p ro v ed E stim ates o f
G ro ss P ro d u c t by In d u stry , 1 9 5 9 -9 4 ,”
Survey o f C urrent B usiness, A ugust 1996,
pp. 1 3 3 -5 5 .) The Japanese value added
series is based upon one set o f fixed price
w eights for the years 1970 th rough 1997.
O utput series for the oth er foreign econo­
m ies also em ploy fixed price w eights, but
the w eights are updated perio d ically (for
exam ple, every 5 or 10 years).
To preserve the comparability o f the U.S.
measures with those for other economies, BLS
uses gross product originating in manufac­
turing for the United States for these com­
parative measures. The gross product origi­
nating series differs from the manufacturing
output series that b l s publishes in its news
releases on quarterly measures o f U.S. pro­
ductivity and costs (and that underlies the
measures that appear in tables 43 and 45 in
this section). The quarterly measures are on
a “sectoral output” basis, rather than a valueadded basis. Sectoral output is gross output
less intrasector transactions.
Total labor hours refers to hours worked
in all countries. The measures are developed
from statistics o f manufacturing employment
and average hours. The series used for France
(from 1970 forward), Norway, and Sweden
are official series published with the national
accounts. Where official total hours series are
not available, the measures are developed by
BLS using employment figures published with
the national accounts, or other comprehen­
sive employment series, and estimates o f an­
nual hours worked. For Germany, b l s uses
estimates o f average hours worked developed
by a research institute connected to the M in­
istry o f Labor for use with the national ac­
counts employment figures. For the other
countries, b l s constructs its own estimates
o f average hours.
Denmark has not published estimates o f
average hours for 1994—97; therefore, the b l s
measure o f labor input for Denmark ends in
1993.
Total compensation (labor cost) includes
all payments in cash or in-kind made directly
to employees plus employer expenditures for
legally required insurance programs and con­
tractual and private benefit plans. The mea­
sures are from the national accounts o f each
country, except those for Belgium, which are
developed by b l s using statistics on employ-

Monthly Labor Review

April 2003

43

Current Labor Statistics
ment, average hours, and hourly compensa­
tion. For Canada, France, and Sweden, com­
pensation is increased to account for other sig­
nificant taxes on payroll or employment. For
the United Kingdom, compensation is reduced
between 1967 and 1991 to account for em­
ploym ent-related subsidies. Self-employed
workers are included in the all-employed-per­
sons measures by assuming that their hourly
compensation is equal to the average for wage
and salary employees.

Notes on the data
In general, the measures relate to total manu­
facturing as defined by the International Stan­
dard Industrial Classification. However, the
measures for France (for all years) and Italy
(beginning 1970) refer to mining and manu­
facturing less energy-related products, and
the measures for Denmark include mining and
exclude manufacturing handicrafts from 1960
to 1966.
The measures for recent years may be
based on current indicators o f manufacturing
output (such as industrial production in­
dexes), em ploym ent, average hours, and
hourly compensation until national accounts
and other statistics used for the long-term
measures become available.
F o r a d d it io n a l in f o r m a t io n on this se­
ries, contact the D ivision o f Foreign Labor
Statistics: (202) 691-5654.

Occupational Injury
and Illness Data
(Tables 50-51)

Survey of Occupational
Injuries and Illnesses
Description of the series
The Survey o f Occupational Injuries and Ill­
nesses collects data from employers about their
workers’ job-related nonfatal injuries and ill­
nesses. The information that employers pro­
vide is based on records that they maintain un­
der the Occupational Safety and Health Act o f
1970. Self-employed individuals, farms with
fewer than 11 employees, employers regulated
by other Federal safety and health laws, and
Federal, State, and local government agencies
are excluded from the survey.
The survey is a Federal-State coopera­
tive program with an independent sample


44
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

selected for each participating State. A strati­
fied random sample with a Neyman alloca­
tion is selected to represent all private in­
dustries in the State. The survey is strati­
fied by Standard Industrial Classification
and size o f employment.

Definitions
Under the Occupational Safety and Health
Act, employers maintain records o f nonfatal
work-related injuries and illnesses that in­
volve one or more o f the following: loss o f
consciousness, restriction o f work or motion,
transfer to another job, or medical treatment
other than first aid.
Occupational injury is any injury such as
a cut, fracture, sprain, or amputation that re­
sults from a work-related event or a single, in­
stantaneous exposure in the work environment.
Occupational illness is an abnormal con­
dition or disorder, other than one resulting
from an occupational injury, caused by expo­
sure to factors associated with employment.
It includes acute and chronic illnesses or dis­
ease which may be caused by inhalation, ab­
sorption, ingestion, or direct contact.

Lost workday injuries and illnesses
are cases that involve days away from work,
or days o f restricted work activity, or both.
Lost workdays include the num ber o f
w orkdays (consecutive or not) on which
the em ployee was either away from w ork
or at w ork in some restricted capacity, or
both, because o f an occupational injury or
illness. BLS measures o f the num ber and
incidence rate o f lost w orkdays w ere dis­
c o n tin u ed b eg in n in g w ith th e 1993 su r­
vey. T h e n u m b e r o f d a y s aw ay fro m
w ork or days o f re stric te d w ork a ctiv ity
d o es n o t in c lu d e th e day o f in ju ry or
o n se t o f illn e ss o r any days on w h ich
th e em ployee w o u ld n o t have w orked,
such as a F ed eral holiday, even th o u g h
ab le to w ork.
Incidence rates are computed as the num­
ber o f injuries and/or illnesses or lost work
days per 100 full-time workers.

Notes on the data
The definitions o f occupational injuries and
illnesses are from Recordkeeping Guidelines
fo r Occupational Injuries and Illnesses (U.S.
Department o f Labor, Bureau o f Labor Sta­
tistics, September 1986).
Estimates are made for industries and em­
ployment size classes for total recordable cases,
lost workday cases, days away from work
cases, and nonfatal cases without lost work­
days. These data also are shown separately for

April 2003

injuries. Illness data are available for seven cat­
egories: occupational skin diseases or disorders,
dust diseases o f the lungs, respiratory condi­
tions due to toxic agents, poisoning (systemic
effects o f toxic agents), disorders due to physi­
cal agents (other than toxic materials), disorders
associated with repeated trauma, and all other
occupational illnesses.
The survey continues to measure the num­
ber o f new work-related illness cases which
are recognized, diagnosed, and reported during
the year. Some conditions, for example, long­
term latent illnesses caused by exposure to car­
cinogens, often are difficult to relate to the
workplace and are not adequately recognized
and reported. These long-term latent illnesses
are believed to be understated in the survey’s
illness measure. In contrast, the overwhelming
majority o f the reported new illnesses are those
which are easier to directly relate to workplace
activity (for example, contact dermatitis and
carpal tunnel syndrome).
M ost o f the estimates are in the form o f
incidence rates, defined as the number o f inju­
ries and illnesses per 100 equivalent full-time
workers. For this purpose, 200,000 employee
hours represent 100 employee years (2,000
hours per employee). Full detail on the avail­
able measures is presented in the annual bulle­
tin, O ccupational In ju ries a n d Illnesses:
Counts, Rates, and Characteristics.
Comparable data for more than 40 States
and territories are available from the BLS Of­
fice o f Safety, Health and Working Condi­
tions. Many o f these States publish data on
State and local government employees in ad­
dition to private industry data.
M ining and railroad data are furnished to
b l s by the M ine Safety and Health A dminis­
tration and the Federal Railroad A dministra­
tion. D ata from these organizations are in­
cluded in both the national and State data
published annually.
With the 1992 survey, b l s began publish­
ing details on serious, nonfatal incidents re­
sulting in days away from work. Included are
some major characteristics o f the injured and
ill workers, such as occupation, age, gender,
race, and length o f service, as well as the cir­
cumstances o f their injuries and illnesses (na­
ture o f the disabling condition, part o f body
affected, event and exposure, and the source
directly producing the condition). In general,
these data are available nationwide for de­
tailed industries and for individual States at
more aggregated industry levels.
F o r a d d it io n a l in f o r m a t io n on occu­
pational injuries and illnesses, contact the Of­
fice o f Occupational Safety, Health and Work­
ing Conditions at (202) 691-6180, or access
the Internet at: http://www.bls.gov/iif/

Census of Fatal
Occupational Injuries
The Census o f Fatal Occupational Injuries
compiles a complete roster o f fatal job-re­
lated injuries, including detailed data about
the fatally injured w orkers and the fatal
events. T he program c o llects and cross
checks fatality inform ation from m ultiple
sources, including death certificates, State
and Federal w orkers’ compensation reports,
Occupational Safety and Health Administra­
tion and M ine Safety and Health Adminis­
tration records, medical examiner and au­
topsy reports, m edia accounts, State motor
vehicle fatality records, and follow-up ques­
tionnaires to employers.
In addition to private wage and salary
workers, the self-employed, family members,
and Federal, State, and local governm ent
workers are covered by the program. To be
included in the fatality census, the decedent


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

must have been employed (that is working
for pay, compensation, or profit) at the time
o f the event, engaged in a legal work activity,
or present at the site o f the incident as a re­
quirement o f his or her job.

Definition
A fatal work injury is any intentional or
u n in te n tio n a l w o u n d or d am age to th e
body resulting in death from acute expo­
sure to energy, such as heat or electricity,
or kinetic energy from a crash, or from the
absence o f such essentials as heat or oxy­
gen caused by a specific event or incident
or series o f events w ithin a single w ork­
day or shift. F atalities th at occur during a
p erso n ’s com m ute to or from w ork are ex­
cluded from the census, as w ell as w orkrelated illnesses, w hich can be d ifficu lt
to identify due to long latency periods.

Notes on the data
T w enty-eight data elem ents are collected,
coded, and tabulated in the fatality p ro ­
gram , including inform ation about the fa­
tally injured worker, the fatal incident, and
th e m a ch in ery o r e q u ip m e n t in v o lv ed .
Sum m ary w orker dem ographic data and
event ch aracteristics are included in a n a­
tional new s release th at is available about
8 m onths after the end o f th e reference
year. The C ensus o f F atal O ccupational
Injuries w as initiated in 1992 as a jo in t
F e d e ra l-S ta te effo rt. M o st S tates issue
sum m ary inform ation at the tim e o f the
national new s release.
F o r a d d it i o n a l in f o r m a t io n on the
Census o f Fatal Occupational Injuries con­
tact the b l s Office o f Safety, Health, and
Working Conditions at (202) 691-6175, or
the Internet at:

http://www.bls.gov/iif/

Where to find additional data
Current and historical statistics from Bureau o f Labor Statistics surveys are
available at the addresses listed on the inside back cover o f this Review, or on
the Internet at
http://www.bls.gov

Monthly Labor Review

April 2003

45

Current Labor Statistics: Comparative Indicators

1. Labor market indicators
Selected indicators

2001

2000

2002

2001

IV

I

II

2002
III

IV

1

II

III

IV

Employment data
Employment status of the civilian noninstitutionalized
population (household survey):1
Labor force participation rate..............................................
Employment-population ratio..............................................
Unemployment rate.....................................................
Men........................................................
16 to 24 years...............................................................
25 years and over.....................................................
Women.........................................................
16 to 24 years...................................................
25 years and over..........................................................
Employment, nonfarm (payroll data), inthousands:1
Total.....................................................................
Private sector................................................
Goods-producing....................................................
Manufacturing........................................................
Service-producing..........................................................
Average hours:
Private sector........................................................
Manufacturing............................................
Overtime......................................................

66.8
63 7
4.7
4.8
11.4
3.6
4.7
9.6
3.7

66.6
62 7
5.8
5.9
12.8
4.7
5.6
11.1
4.6

66.9
64 a
3.9
4.0
9.6
2.9
3.9
8.5
3.0

67.2

66.8

66.7

66.8

66.6

66.7

66.6
«« «

66.5
«« -

4.2
4.2
10.5
3.1
4.1
8.6
3.3

4.4
4.5
11.2
3.4
4.3
9.2
3.4

4.8
4.9
11.4
3.7
4.8
10.1
3.8

5.6
5.7
12.7
4.4
5.5
10.7
4.4

5.6
5.7
12.9
4.5
5.5
11.0
4.4

5.9
6.0
12.8
4.8
5.7
11.2
4.8

5.8
5.9
13.1
4.7
5.6
10.9
4.6

5.9
6.1
12.5
4.9
5.7
11.4
4.6

131,922
110,989
24,944
17,695
106,978

130,791
109,531
23,836
16,724
106,955

132,185
111,551
25,626
18,400
106,559

132,433
111,687
25,493
18,196
106,941

132,193
111,332
25,136
17,872
107,057

131,943
110,939
24,786
17,538
107,157

131,130
110,035
24,375
17,174
106,755

130,759
109,594
24,049
16,883
106,711

130,706
109,505
23,879
16,776
106,827

130,844
109,574
23,787
16,691
107,057

130,795
109,438
23,623
16,528
107,179

34.2
40.7
3.9

34.2
40.9
4.1

34.3
41.1
4.4

34.2
41.0
4.1

34.2
40.8
3.9

34.1
40.7
3.9

34.1
40.5
3.8

34.2
40.8
4.0

34.2
41.0
4.2

34.1
40.8
4.1

34.2
40.7
4.1

.7
.7
.6
.7
.7

1.3
1.4
1.3
1.4
.9

.9
1.0
.9
1.0
.6

1.2
.9
.7
1.0
2.1

.8
.8
.8
.8
.6

1.0
1.1
1.2
1.1
.6

.9
1.1
.9
1.2
.4

.9
.6
.6
.6
2.2

.6
.4
.9
.2
.9

1.1
1.1

1.0
1.1

1.2

.9

.5

.4

Employment Cost Index2
Percent change in the ECI, compensation:
All workers (excluding farm, household and Federal workers)....
Private industry workers..............................................
Goods-producing3.........................................
Service-producing3.......................................................
State and local government workers

-

-

-

-

-

-

_
-

_
-

Workers by bargaining status (private industry):
Union....................................................................
.5
.7
1.1
1.0
1.4
Nonunion..........................................................
.7
1.5
1.0
.9
.7
1 Quarterly data seasonally adjusted.
2 Annual changes are December-to-December changes. Quarterly changes are calculated using the last month ot each quarter.
3 Goods-producing industries include mining, construction, and manufacturing. Service-producing industries include all other private sector industries.


46
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

April 2003

2. Annual and quarterly percent changes in compensation, prices, and productivity
Sëlëctëd measures

2001

2002

2001

2000

2002

I

IV

II

1

IV

III

II

III

IV

Compensation data1’2
Employment Cost Index—compensation (wages,
salaries, benefits):
4.1
4.2
Employment Cost Index—wages and salaries:
Civilian nonfarm.........................................................

_

0.7
.7

1.3
1.4

0.9
1.0

1.2
.9

0.8
.8

1.0
1.1

0.9
1.1

0.9
.6

0.6
.4

.6
.6

1.1
1,2

.9
1.0

1.0
.8

.7
.8

.9
.9

.8
1.0

.7
.4

.4
.3

3.7
3.8

Price data1
3.4

1.2

.2

1.3

1.0

.2

-.9

.7

.5

.6

-.2

-1.8
-2.4
1.0
-.2
-8.8

-1.2
-1.6
-.4
-1.2
-10.6

.4
.1
1.1
-.3
9.4

.9
1.2
-.1
.2
-3.5

.8
1.0
-7.1
.6
-6.6

-.3
-.3
-.1
-1.0
-12.0

-3.2
-4.3
.1
-3.6
-12.2

1.1
1.5
2.9
.9
8.0

.2
.4
-.3
1.1
37.1

.2
.0
-.7
1.1
1.9

-.5
-.3
-.5
-.3
1.9

-1.5
-1.5
-2.6

-.2
-.1
2.2

1.8
2.1
3.2

7.6
7.3
10.8

8.3
8.6
4.6

1.8
1.7
5.0

5.4
5.1
5.7

_

-

2.1
1.7
-.7

Producer Price Index:

Productivity data3
Output per hour of all persons:

Nonfinancial corporations4...................................

1.1
1.1
1.4

1 Annual changes are December-to-December changes. Quarterly changes are
calculated using the last month of each quarter. Compensation and price data are not
seasonally adjusted, and the price data are not compounded.
2 Excludes Federal and private household workers.

-

3 Annual rates of change are computed by comparing annual averages.
Quarterly percent changes reflect annual rates of change in quarterly indexes.
The data are seasonally adjusted.
4 Output per hour of all employees.
NOTE: Dash indicates data not available.

3. Alternative measures of wage and compensation changes
Four quarters ending

Quarterly average
Components

IV

Average hourly compensation:1
All persons, business sector..................................................
All persons, nonfarm business sector.....................................
Employment Cost Index—compensation:
Civilian nonfarm2...................................................................
Union...............................................................................
Nonunion.........................................................................
State and local governments...............................................

2002

2001
I

III

II

2002

2001
IV

IV

I

III

II

IV

1.4
1.5

3.0
2.9

4.2
3.9

5.3
4.9

-

1.5
1.4

1.4
1.4

2.4
2.3

3.5
3.3

-

.8
.8
1.4
.7
.6

1.0
1.1
1.1
1.1
.6

.9
1.1
1.0
1.1
.4

.9
.6
1.2
.5
2.2

.6
.4
.9
.4
.9

4.1
4.2
4.2
4.1
4.2

3.9
3.9
4.7
3.8
3.9

4.0
4.0
4.5
3.9
3.6

3.7
3.7
4.7
3.5
3.8

3.4
3.2
4.2
3.2
4.1

.7
.4
1.0
.4
1.8

.4
.3
.8
.3
.6

3.7
3.8
4.4
3.6
3.6

3.5
3.5
4.4
3.4
3.4

3.5
3.6
4.2
3.5
3.2

3.2
3.2
4.3
3.1
3.1

2.9
2.7
3.5
2.7
3.2

Employment Cost Index—wages and salaries:
.7
.9
.8
.8
.9
1.0
.7
.9
1.6
Union...............................................................................
.7
1.0
1.0
Nonunion.........................................................................
.3
.5
.5
State and local governments...............................................
' Seasonally adjusted. "Quarterly average" is percent change from a quarter ago, at an annual rate.
2 Excludes Federal and household workers.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Monthly Labor Review

April 2003

47

Current Labor Statistics:

Labor Force Data

4. Employment status of the population, by sex, age, race, and Hispanic origin, monthly data seasonally adjusted
[Numbers in thousands]
Employment status

Annual average
2001

2002

2002
Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

July

200 3

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

TOTAL

Civilian noninstitutional
population1.................... 215,092 217,570 216,663 216,823 217,006 217,198 217,407 217,630 217,866 218,107 218,340 218,548 218,741 219,897 220,114
Civilian labor force........... 143,734 144,863 144,510 144,367 144,763 144,911 144,852 144,786 145,123 145,634 145,393 145,180 145,150 145,838 145,857
Participation rate.......
66.8
66.6
66.7
66.6
66.7
66.7
66.6
66.5
66.6
66.8
66.6
66.4
66.4
66.3
66.3
Employed................... 136,933 136,485 136,450 136,143 136,196 136,487 136,383 136,343 136,757 137,312 136,988 136,542 136,439 137,536 137,408
Employment-pop63.7
62.7
ulation ratio2..........
63.0
62.8
62.8
62.8
62.7
62.6
62.8
63.0
62.7
62.5
62.4
62.5
62.4
Unemployed................
6,801
8,378
8,060
8,224
8,567
8,424
8,469
8,443
8,366
8,321
8,405
8,637
8,711
8,302
8,450
Unemployment rate...
4.7
5.8
5.6
5.7
5.9
5.8
5.8
5.8
5.8
5.7
5.8
5.9
6.0
5.7
5.8
Not in the labor force..... 71,359 72,707 72,153 72,456 72,243 72,287 72,556 72,844 72,743 72,473 72,947 73,369 73,591 74,059 74,257
M en , 20 y ea rs a n d o v er

Civilian noninstitutional
population1.....................
Civilian labor force..........
Participation rate.......
Employed...................
Employment-population ratio2..........
Unemployed................
Unemployment rate...
Not in the labor force......

95,181
72,816
76.5
69,776

96,439
73,630
76.3
69,734

95,929
73,269
76.4
69,591

95,999
73,307
76.4
69,517

96,116
73,525
76.5
69,627

96,205
73,766
76.7
69,918

96,375
73,689
76.5
69,739

96,468
73,670
76.4
69,792

96,552
73,802
76.4
69,895

96,732
74,108
76.6
70,213

96,860
73,883
76.3
69,921

97,022
73,770
76.0
69,617

97,139
73,744
75.9
69,600

97,635
73,993
75.8
69,967

97,762
74,254
76.0
70,293

73.3
3,040
4.2
22,365

72.3
3,896
5.3
22,809

72.5
3,678
5.0
22,660

72.4
3,789
5.2
22,692

72.4
3,898
5.3
22,591

72.7
3,848
5.2
22,439

72.4
3,950
5.4
22,686

72.3
3,879
5.3
22,797

72.4
3,906
5.3
22,750

72.6
3,895
5.3
22,623

72.2
3,962
5.4
22,977

71.8
4,153
5.6
23,252

71.6
4,145
5.6
23,394

71.7
4,026
5.4
23,642

71.9
3,962
5.3
23,508

W o m e n , 20 y ea rs a n d o v er

Civilian noninstitutional
population1..................... 103,983 105,136 104,668 104,752 104,871 104,977 105,089 105,190 105,334 105,421 105,509 105,594 105,678 106,235 106,322
Civilian labor force........... 63,016 63,648 63,603 63,314 63,616 63,551 63,556 63,534 63,760 63,858 63,975 63,921 64,036 64,479 64,310
Participation rate.......
60.6
60.5
60.8
60.4
60.7
60.5
60.5
60.4
60.5
60.6
60.6
60.5
60.6
60.7
60.5
Employed................... 60,417 60,420 60,441 60,161 60,237 60,262 60,320 60,262 60,581 60,675 60,668 60,697 60,676 61,443 61,073
Employment-pop58.1
ulation ratio2..........
57.5
57.7
57.4
57.4
57.4
57.4
57.3
57.5
57.6
57.5
57.5
57.4
57.8
57.4
Unemployed................
2,599
3,228
3,163
3,153
3,379
3,289
3,236
3,272
3,180
3,184
3,308
3,224
3,360
3,035
3,237
Unemployment rate....
4.1
5.1
5.0
5.0
5.3
5.2
5.1
5.1
5.0
5.0
5.2
5.0
5.2
4.7
5.0
Not in the labor force...... 40,967 41,488 41,065 41,438 41,255 41,426 41,533 41,656 41,574 41,563 41,533 41,673 41,642 41,757 42,013
B o th s e x e s , 1 6 t o 1 9 y e a r s

Civilian noninstitutional
population1.....................
Civilian labor force...........
Participation rate.......
Employed...................
Employment-population ratio2..........
Unemployed................
Unemployment rate....
Not in the labor force......

15,929
7,902
49.6
6,740

15,994
7,585
47.4
6,332

16,065
7,637
47.5
6,418

16,073
7,746
48.2
6,464

16,019
7,622
47.6
6,331

16,017
7,594
47.4
6,307

15,943
7,607
47.7
6,324

15,972
7,581
47.5
6,289

15,980
7,561
47.3
6,280

15,954
7,667
48.1
6,425

15,971
7,535
47.2
6,400

15,933
7,489
47.0
6,228

15,925
7,369
46.3
6,164

16,027
7,366
46.0
6,125

16,030
7,293
45.5
6,042

42.3
1,162
14.7
8,027

39.6
1,253
16.5
8,409

40.0
1,219
16.0
8,428

40.2
1,282
16.6
8,327

39.5
1,290
16.9
8,397

39.4
1,287
17.0
8,422

39.7
1,283
16.9
8,337

39.4
1,292
17.0
8,391

39.3
1,280
16.9
8,419

40.3
1,243
16.2
8,287

40.1
1,135
15.1
8,436

39.1
1,261
16.8
8,444

38.7
1,206
16.4
8,555

38.2
1,241
16.8
8,661

37.7
1,251
17.1
8,736

W h it e 3

Civilian noninstitutional
population1.....................
Civilian labor force...........
Participation rate.......
Employed...................
Employment-population ratio2...........
Unemployed................
Unemployment rate....
Not inthe labor force...... .

178,111 179,783 179,178 179,279 179,398 179,524 179,665 179,816 179,979 180,146 180,306 180,450 180,580 180,460 180,599
119,399 120,150 120,020 119,863 120,059 120,197 120,152 120,272 120,449 120,502 120,479 120,345 120,093 120,084 120,166
67.0
66.8
67.0
66.9
66.9
67.0
66.9
66.9
66.9
66.9
66.8
66.7
66.5
66.5
66.5
114,430 114,013 114,092 113,871 113,834 114,003 113,951 114,008 114,250 114,373 114,294 114,128 113,910 113,995 114,135
64.2
4,969
4.2
58,713

63.4
6,137
5.1
59,633

63.7
5,928
4.9
59,157

63.5
5,992
5.0
59,416

63.5
6,225
5.2
59,339

63.5
6,195
5.2
59,327

63.4
6,201
5.2
59,513

63.4
6,264
5.2
59,545

63.5
6,199
5.1
59,530

63.5
6,129
5.1
59,644

63.4
6,184
5.1
59,828

63.2
6,218
5.2
60,104

63.1
6,184
5.1
60,487

63.2
6,089
5.1
60,376

63.2
6,031
5.0
60,432

25,138
16,421
65.3
15,006

25,578
16,565
64.8
14,872

25,414
16,473
64.8
14,876

25,444
16,454
64.7
14,746

25,478
16,638
65.3
14,843

25,514
16,610
65.1
14,928

25,552
16,570
64.8
14,816

25,591
16,390
64.0
14,763

25,633
16,541
64.5
14,907

25,675
16,789
65.4
15,148

25,717
16,682
64.9
15,027

25,751
16,540
64.2
14,754

25,784
16,706
64.8
14,827

25,484
16,374
64.3
14,684

25,519
16,395
64.2
14,669

59.7
1,416
8.6
8,717

58.1
1,693
10.2
9,013

58.5
1,597
9.7
8,940

58.0
1,708
10.4
8,990

58.3
1,795
10.8
8,840

58.5
1,682
10.1
8,903

58.0
1,754
10.6
8,982

57.7
1,627
9.9
9,201

58.2
1,634
9.9
9,092

59.0
1,641
9.8
8,886

58.4
1,656
9.9
9,034

57.3
1,786
10.8
9,211

57.5
1,879
11.2
9,078

57.6
1,690
10.3
9,110

57.5
1,726
10.5
9,124

B la c k o r A f ric a n A m e r ic a n 3

Civilian noninstitutional
population1.....................
Civilian labor force...........
Participation rate.......
Employed...................
Employment-population ratio2..........
Unemployed................
Unemployment rate....
Not in the labor force...... .
See footnotes at end of table.

Digitized for
48FRASER
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

April 2003

4. Continued—Employment status of the population, by sex, age, race, and Hispanic origin, monthly data seasonally adjusted
[Numbers in thousands]
Employment status

2003

2002

Annual average

Nov

Dec.

Jan.

Feb

2001

2002

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

24,942
17,328
69.5
16,190

25,963
17,943
69.1
16,590

25,574
17,773
69.5
16,522

25,655
17,697
69.0
16,405

25,739
17,913
69.6
16,498

25,827
17,843
69.1
16,581

25,917
17,891
69.0
16,573

26,008
18,045
69.4
16,685

26,096
18,030
69.1
16,664

26,184
18,103
69.1
16,739

26,272
18,049
68.7
16,637

26,355
18,169
68.9
16,755

26,436
18,134
68.6
16,708

26,994
18,614
69.0
17,155

27,191
18,658
68.9
17,223

63.9
1,353
7.5
8,020

64.6
1,251
7.0
7.801

63.9
1,292
7.3
7,959

64.1
1,415
7.9
7.827

63.9
1,318
7.4
8,026

64.2
1,360
7.5
7,963

63.9
1,366
7.6
8,066

63.9
1,363
7.5
8,082

63.3
1,412
7.8
8,223

63.6
1,414
7.8
8,186

63.2
1,425
7.9
8,303

63.5
1,459
7.8
8,380

63.6
1,436
7.7
8,436

Hispanic or Latino
ethnicity

Civilian noninstitutional
Civilian labor force...........
Participation rate.......
Employment-population ratio2...........
Unemployed................
Unemployment rate....
Not in the labor force........

64.9
1,138
6.6
7,614

64.2
1,261
7.1
7,984

1 The population figures are not seasonally adjusted.
2 Civilian employment as a percent of the civilian noninstitutional population.
3 Beginning in 2003, persons who selected this race group only; persons who selected
more than one race group are not included. Prior to 2003, persons who reported more
than one race were included inthe group they identified as the main race.

5.

NOTE: Estimates for the above race groups (white and black or African American) do not sum
to totals because data are not presented for all races. In addition, persons whose ethnicity is
identified as Hispanic or Latino may be of any race and, therefore, are classified by ethnicity as
well as by race.

Selected employment indicators, monthly data seasonally adjusted

[In thousands]
Selected categories

2001

2002

2003

2002

Annual average
Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Jan.

Dec.

Feb.

C h a r a c te r is t ic

Employed, 16 years and over.. 136,933
Men................................ 73,196
Women........................... 63,737
Married men, spouse
present.......................... 44,007
Marriedwomen, spouse
present.......................... 34,153

136,485 136,450 136,143 136,196 136,487 136,383 136,343 136,757 137,312 136,988 136,542 136,439 137,536 137,408
72,903 72,821 72,719 72,780 73,093 72,893 72,931 73,023 73,402 73,151 72,773 72,690 72,994 73,249
63,582 63,629 63,423 63,416 63,394 63,490 63,412 63,734 63,910 63,837 63,769 63,749 64,542 64,159
44,116

44,210

44,190

44,021

44,306

44,037

44,150

44,235

44,129

44,245

44,093

44,005

44,401

44,587

34,153

34,291

34,074

34,052

34,015

34,050

34,035

34,278

34,479

34,322

34,264

34,189

34,525

34,620

4,213

4,289

4,132

4,210

4,097

3,982

4,139

4,308

4,356

4,343

4,329

4,273

4,643

4,807

2,814

2,888

2,855

2,893

3,027

3,152

P e r s o n s a t w o r k p a r t tim e 1

All industries:
Part time for economic
reasons.........................
Slack work or business
conditions..................
Could only find part-time

3,715
2,396

2,788

2,818

2,744

2,752

2,685

2,703

2,760

2,811

1,006

1,124

1,122

1,075

1,140

1,110

1,097

1,113

1,153

1,177

1,133

1,159

1,110

1,297

1,275

18,790

18,843

18,582

18,711

18,933

18,988

19,251

19,143

19,047

18,928

18,685

18,727

18,555

19,314

18,421

3,627

4,119

4,166

4,050

4,132

3,983

3,887

4,025

4,185

4,266

4,274

4,272

4,219

4,496

4,675

2,340

2,726

2,730

2,686

2,690

2,611

2,629

2,689

2,806

2,755

2,857

2,816

2,854

2,947

3,062

1,172
1,143
1,099
1,103
1,129
1,087
1,114
1,059
1,114
997
Part time for noneconomic
18,741
18.668
18.555
18,985
reasons........................ 18.415 18.487 18.181 18.359 18,560 18.636
1 Excludes persons "with a job but not at work" during the survey period for such reasons as vacation, illness, or industrial disputes.

1,122

1,158

1,097

1,267

1,257

18.347

18,361

18.197

18.984

18.134

Part time for noneconomic
Nonagricultural industries:
Part time for economic
Slack work or business
conditions...................
Could only find part-time


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Monthly Labor Review

April 2003

49

Current Labor Statistics:

6.

Labor Force Data

Selected unemployment indicators, monthly data seasonally adjusted

[Unemployment rates]
Annual average

Selected categories

2001

2002

2002

2003

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

C h a r a c t e r i s t ic

Total, 16 years and over.........................
Both sexes, 16 to 19 years.................
Men, 20 years and over......................
Women, 20 years and over.................

4.7
14.7
4.2
4.1

5.8
16.5
5.3
5.1

5.6
16.0
5.0
5.0

5.7
16.6
5.2
5.0

5.9
16.9
5.3
5.3

5.8
17.0
5.2
5.2

5.8
16.9
5.4
5.1

5.8
17.0
5.3
5.1

5.8
16.9
5.3
5.0

5.7
16.2
5.3
5.0

5.8
15.1
5.4
5.2

5.9
16.8
5.6
5.0

6.0
16.4
5.6
5.2

5.7
16.8
5.4
4.7

5.8
17.1
5.3
5.0

White, total1......................................
Both sexes, 16 to 19 years.............
Men, 16 to 19 years....................
Women, 16 to 19 years...............
Men, 20 years and over.................
Women, 20 years and over............

4.2
12.7
13.9
11.4
3.7
3.6

5.1
14.5
15.9
13.1
4.7
4.4

4.9
14.2
15.6
12.8
4.4
4.4

5.0
14.5
16.3
12.7
4.6
4.3

5.2
14.3
15.7
12.8
4.8
4.5

5.2
14.6
15.5
13.8
4.8
4.5

5.2
14.8
16.6
13.0
4.8
4.4

5.2
15.6
17.9
13.1
4.8
4.4

5.1
14.8
17.1
12.4
4.8
4.4

5.1
14.2
15.6
12.7
4.8
4.4

5.1
13.9
14.7
13.1
4.8
4.4

5.2
14.5
15.8
13.0
5.0
4.2

5.1
13.8
14.9
12.7
4.9
4.4

5.1
15.2
16.2
14.2
4.9
4.1

5.0
15.5
17.3
13.7
4.6
4.2

Black or African American, total1.........
Both sexes, 16 to 19 years.............
Men, 16 to 19 years....................
Women, 16 to 19 years...............
Men, 20 years and over.................
Women, 20 years and over.............

8.6
29.0
30.4
27.5
8.0
7.0

10.2
29.8
31.3
28.3
9.5
8.8

9.7
28.7
30.0
27.2
8.7
8.6

10.4
31.7
35.9
27.2
9.4
8.9

10.8
35.2
35.3
35.0
9.1
9.5

10.1
29.9
36.1
22.2
8.7
9.3

10.6
30.1
30.8
29.3
10.3
8.8

9.9
27.1
22.7
31.4
9.2
8.9

9.9
30.1
31.3
28.9
9.1
8.5

9.8
28.0
34.4
21.5
9.4
8.1

9.9
23.9
24.9
22.7
9.9
8.5

10.8
30.5
30.0
31.0
10.6
9.0

11.2
33.2
34.5
32.1
10.5
9.7

10.3
30.4
33.2
28.0
10.3
8.4

10.5
30.2
38.1
22.2
10.1
9.0

Hispanic or Latino ethnicity................
Married men, spouse present.............
Married women, spouse present.........
Full-time workers...............................
Part-time workers..............................

6.6
2.7
3.1
4.7
5.1

7.5
3.6
3.7
5.9
5.3

7.0
3.4
3.8
5.7
5.0

7.3
3.5
3.7
5.8
5.2

7.9
3.9
3.8
6.1
5.1

7.1
3.6
3.9
5.9
5.4

7.4
4.0
3.8
6.0
5.0

7.5
3.5
3.8
5.9
5.4

7.6
3.5
3.6
5.8
5.4

7.5
3.6
3.6
5.8
5.3

7.8
3.6
3.8
5.9
5.2

7.8
3.6
3.8
6.1
5.1

7.9
3.7
3.8
6.1
5.3

7.8
3.5
3.3
5.8
5.4

7.7
3.6
3.6
5.9
5.5

7.2
4.2
3.3
2.3

8.4
5.3
4.5
2.9

8.3
5.2
4.2
2.8

8.1
5.4
4.3
2.8

8.8
5.5
4.6
3.0

8.4
5.5
4.7
3.0

8.0
5.5
4.6
3.0

8.6
5.1
4.4
3.0

8.5
5.2
4.3
2.8

7.9
5.0
4.6
2.9

8.7
4.9
4.7
3.0

9.0
.5.3
4.8
2.9

9.0
5.3
5.0
2.9

8.5
5.1
4.8
3.0

8.8
5.4
4.7
3.0

E d u c a t io n a l a t t a i n m e n t 2

Less than a high school diploma.............
High school graduates, no college3..........
Some college or associate degree...........
Bachelor's degree and higher4................

1 Beginning in 2003, persons who selected this race group only; persons who
selected more than one race group are not included. Prior to 2003, persons who3 lncludes hi9h school diploma or equivalent.
reported more than one race were included in the group they identified as th* includes persons with bachelor's, master's, professional, and doctoral degrees
main race.
2 Data refer to persons 25 years and over.

7. Duration of unemployment, monthly data seasonally adjusted
[Numbers in thousands]
Weeks of
unemployment

Annual average
2001

2002

2002

2003

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Less than 5 weeks...........
5 to 14 weeks..............
15 weeks and over..........
15 to 26 weeks.............
27 weeks and over.......

2,853
2,196
1,752
951
801

2,893
2,580
2,904
1,369
1,535

2,932
2,540
2,609
1,403
1,206

3,041
2,489
3,685
1,366
1,319

2,934
2,851
2,810
1,364
1,446

2,900
2,566
2,911
1,328
1,583

2,786
2,803
3,045
1,419
1,626

2,903
2,520
2,955
1,381
1,573

2,895
2,505
2,891
1,361
1,530

2,782
2,558
3,019
1,359
1,660

2,797
2,515
3,099
1,374
1,724

2,912
2,532
3,143
1,317
1,826

2,860
2,547
3,296
1,392
1,904

2,772
2,577
3,140
1,457
1,683

2,749
2,565
3,155
1,281
1,874

Mean duration, in weeks....
Median duration, in weeks.

13.1
6.8

16.6
9.1

15.0
8.2

15.4
8.3

16.3
8.8

16.8
9.6

17.1
11.6

16.6
8.9

16.3
8.7

17.8
9.5

17.6
9.6

17.9
9.4

18.4
9.6

18.4
9.8

18.6
9.4

Digitized for
50FRASER
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

April 2003

8.

Unemployed persons by reason for unemployment, monthly data seasonally adjusted

[Numbers in thousands]
2001

Job losers1.................................
On temporary layoff..................
Not on temporary layoff............ .
Job leavers................................
New entrants..............................

2002

4,607
1,124
3,483
866
2,368
536

3,476
1,067
2,409
835
2,031
459

2003

2002

Annual average

Reason for
unemployment

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

4,425
1,133
3,293
880
2,294
499

4,339
1,102
3,237
876
2,438
539

4,599
1,121
3,478
1,002
2,412
530

4,634
1,114
3,520
892
2,400
503

4,650
1,101
3,550
844
2,379
544

4,613
1,236
3,377
840
2,390
547

4,607
1,158
3,449
844
2,326
587

4,608
1,044
3,565
808
2,321
542

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

4,828
1,098
3,729
850
2,386
494

4,833
1,069
3,764
834
2,394
586

4,863
1,110
3,753
862
2,462
534

4,583
1,080
3,503
825
2,331
616

4,756
1,142
3,614
772
2,395
579

Percent of unemployed

51.1
15.7
35.4
12.3
29.9
6.8

Job losers1................................
On temporary layoff..................
Not on temporary layoff............
Job leavers................................
New entrants..............................

55.0
13.4
41.6
10.3
28.3
6.4

54.6
14.0
40.7
10.9
28.3
6.2

53.0
13.5
39.5
10.7
29.8
6.6

53.8
13.1
40.7
11.7
28.2
6.2

55.0
13.2
41.8
10.6
28.5
6.0

55.2
13.1
42.2
10.0
28.3
6.5

55.0
14.7
40.2
10.0
28.5
6.5

55.1
13.8
41.2
10.1
27.8
7.0

55.7
12.6
42.1
9.8
28.0
6.5

56.4
12.8
43.6
9.9
27.9
5.8

55.9
12.4
43.5
9.6
27.7
6.8

55.8
12.7
43.0
9.9
28.2
6.1

54.9
12.9
41.9
9.9
27.9
7.4

55.9
13.4
42.5
9.1
28.2
6.8

3.2
.6
1.6
.4

3.1
.6
1.6
.3

3.0
.6
1.7
.4

3.2
.7
1.7
.4

3.2
.6
1.7
.3

3.2
.6
1.6
.4

3.2
.6
1.7
.4

3.2
.6
1.6
.4

3.2
.5
1.6
.4

3.3
.6
1.6
.3

3.3
.6
1.6
.4

3.4
.6
1.7
.4

3.1
.6
1.6
.4

3.3
.5
1.6
.4

Percent of civilian
labor force

2.4
.6
1.4
.3
New entrants.............................
1 Includes persons who completed temporary jobs.

Job leavers................................

9.

Unemployment rates by sex and age, monthly data seasonally adjusted

[Civilian workers]
Sex and age

2001

Total, 16 years and over...............
16 to 24 years..........................
16 to 19 years.......................
16 to 17 years.....................
18 to 19 years.....................
20 to 24 years.......................
25 years and over.....................
25 to 54 years.....................
55 years and over...............

Women, 16 years and over..........
16 to 17 years
18 tO24 years

55 years and over'.............


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

2002

2003

2002

Annual average
Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

4.7
10.6
14.7
17.2
13.1
8.3
3,7
3.8
3.0

5.8
12.0
16.5
18.8
15.1
9.7
4.6
4.8
3.8

5.6
11.7
16.0
17.1
14.7
9.5
4.5
4.6
3.7

5.7
12.3
16.6
18.1
15.2
10.1
4.5
4.7
3.5

5.9
12.3
16.9
19.5
15.5
9.9
4.8
4.9
4.0

5.8
11.8
17.0
20.4
15.3
9.1
4.8
4.9
4.1

5.8
12.0
16.9
19.6
15.3
9.4
4.8
4.9
4.1

5.8
12.1
17.0
19.7
15.5
9.6
4.7
4.8
3.8

5.8
12.1
16.9
19.3
16.2
9.6
4.6
4.7
4.0

5.7
11.9
16.2
19.4
14.0
9.6
4.6
4.7
3.9

5.8
11.8
15.1
16.2
14.3
10.1
4.7
4.9
3.9

5.9
12.2
16.8
19.4
15.3
9.8
4.8
5.1
3.7

6.0
11.9
16.4
17.6
15.5
9.7
4.8
5.0
4.2

5.7
11.8
16.8
18.3
15.9
9.3
4.6
4.7
4.1

5.8
11.9
17.1
17.9
15.9
9.3
4.7
4.9
3.8

4.8
11.4
16.0
19.1
14.0
9.0
3.6
3.7
3.2

5.9
12.8
18.1
21.1
16.4
10.2
4.7
4.8
4.1

5.6
12.6
17.3
20.3
15.3
10.1
4.4
4.5
4.0

5.9
13.5
18.6
20.9
16.6
10.9
4.5
4.7
3.6

6.0
13.0
18.4
20.2
17.2
10.3
4.7
4.8
4.2

5.9
12.7
18.8
23.1
16.4
9.6
4.8
4.8
4.4

6.0
12.6
18.6
22.0
16.6
9.6
4.9
5.0
4.4

5.9
12.8
18.9
22.2
16.6
9.7
4.7
4.9
4.0

6.0
13.3
19.3
23.1
18.1
10.3
4.7
4.8
4.1

5.9
13.1
18.3
21.5
16.3
10.5
4.6
4.7
4.1

5.9
12.3
16.0
17.2
15.2
10.4
4.8
4.9
4.0

6.2
12.8
18.0
21.2
16.1
10.2
5.1
5.3
4.0

6.2
12.6
17.5
18.5
16.7
10.2
5.0
5.2
4.4

6.0
12.4
18.2
19.3
17.6
9.7
4.9
5.0
4.4

6.0
12.5
19.5
19.1
19.3
9.2
4.9
5.0
4.2

4.7
9.6
13.4
15.2
12.2
7.5
3.7
3.9
2.7

5.6
11.1
14.9
16.6
13.8
9.1
4.6
4.8
3.6

5.5
10.8
14.6
13.9
13.9
8.8
4.5
4.7
3.3

5.5
11.0
14.4
15.4
13.6
9.2
4.5
4.7
3.6

5.9
11.5
15.5
18.7
13.7
9.4
4.9
4.9
3.4

5.7
10.8
15.0
17.4
14.1
8.6
4.8
5.0
3.1

5.6
11.2
15.0
17.2
14.0
9.2
4.6
4.8
3.9

5.7
11.4
15.1
17.1
14.3
9.4
4.6
4.8
3.8

5.5
10.7
14.4
15.5
14.1
8.8
4.5
4.6
4.3

5.5
10.5
14.0
17.4
11.5
8.7
4.5
4.7
3.6

5.7
11.3
14.1
15.2
13.3
9.8
4.6
4.8
3.5

5.6
11.5
15.6
17.4
14.4
9.4
4.5
4.8
3.2

5.8
11.3
15.2
16.6
14.2
9.3
4.6
4.8
3.8

5.3
11.1
15.5
17.3
14.1
8.8
4.2
4.4
4.1

5.6
11.3
14.8
16.8
12.3
9.5
4.5
4.8
3.3

Monthly Labor Review

April 2003

51

Current Labor Statistics:

Labor Force Data

10. Unemployment rates by State, seasonally adjusted
State

Feb.

Jan

Feb.

2002

2003p

2003p

Alabama..............................................
Alaska.................................................
Arizona...............................................
Arkansas.............................................
California.............................................

5.8
7.1
6.3
5.4
6.5

5.6
6.9
5.6
4.9
6.5

Colorado.............................................
Connecticut..........................................
Delaware.............................................
District of Columbia...............................
Florida.................................................

5.7
4.1
3.9
6.5
5.7

5.4
4.8
3.4
6.1
5.3

Georgia...............................................
Hawaii.................................................
Idaho..................................................
Illinois..................................................
Indiana................................................

5.0
4.7
5.9
6.2
5.3

4.6
3.6
5.7
6.3
4.8

Iowa...................................................
Kansas................................................
Kentucky..............................................
Louisiana.............................................
Maine..................................................

3.8
5.0
5.6
6.1
4.2

3.8
4.7
5.3
5.3
4.6

Maryland..............................................
Massachusetts.....................................
Michigan..............................................
Minnesota........................................
Mississippi...........................................

4.4
5.0
6.1
4.5
6.5

4.0
5.2
6.2
4.3
6.4

_

State

Feb.

Jan.

Feb.

2002

2003p

2003p

Missouri

5.4

5.1

Wyoming..........................................

4.1

4.0

-

p= preliminary
Dash indicates data not available.

11. Employment of workers on nonfarm payrolls by State, seasonally adjusted
[In thousands]
Jan.
2002

Dec.
2002

2003p

Alabama...............
Alaska..................
Arizona.................
Arkansas...............
California..............

1,887.9
292.0
2,253.8
1,145.1
14,434.8

1,883.2
299.5
2,264.6
1,148.4
14,464.9

1,880.3
297.6
2,273.1
1,149.7
14,493.4

Colorado...............
Connecticut...........
Delaware..............
District of Columbia.
Florida..................

2,183.3
1,674.6
413.0
659.0
7,149.0

2,173.5
1,660.2
411.5
662.0
7,238.8

Georgia................
Hawaii..................
Idaho....................
Illinois...................
Indiana.................

3,912.1
549.8
562.6
5,917.0
2,890.6

Iowa......................
Kansas.................
Kentucky................
Louisiana...............
Maine....................
Maryland...............
Massachusetts.......
Michigan...............
Minnesota..............
Mississippi.............

State

Jan.

Jan.
2002

Dec.
2002

Missouri..................................
Montana.................................
Nebraska.................................
Nevada...................................
New Hampshire.......................

2,707.5
393.6
905.6
1,035.0
618.7

2,660.1
395.0
904.0
1,056.5
616.7

2,629.8
396.5
899.4
1,056.9
616.6

2,168.8
1,662.1
411.2
666.0
7,250.7

New Jersey..............................
New Mexico.............................
New York.................................
North Carolina.........................
North Dakota...........................

4,003.6
761.5
8,460.3
3,856.5
329.8

3,984.6
772.0
8,412.9
3,820.0
330.4

3,986.9
773.0
8,414.7
3,828.3
329.7

39.5.2
562.2
569.3
5,919.4
2,880.4

3,897.1
565.6
563.5
5,903.0
2,883.3

Ohio.......................................
Oklahoma...............................
Oregon....................................
Pennsylvania...........................
Rhode Island............................

5,466.2
1,491.5
1,569.3
5,653.1
478.0

5,408.4
1,478.6
1,579.8
5,643.0
480.5

5,403.9
1,471.8
1,572.3
5,623.3
479.4

1,453.1
1,336.0
1,794.8
1,899.8
604.8

1,443.5
1,339.0
1,783.3
1,898.4
604.2

1,445.6 South Carolina.........................
1,333.6 South Dakota...........................
1,790.4 Tennessee...............................
1,905.1 Texas......................................
605.4 Utah........................................

1,798.0
375.0
2,662.9
9,432.2
1,082.0

1,817.3
381.3
2,661.7
9,420.2
1,066.4

1,804.1
375.1
2,664.5
9,428.4
1,076.1

2,475.4
3,270.4
4,477.2
26,557.3
1,124.7

2,478.2
3,220.9
4,451.1
2,647.1
1,126.5

2,470.0 Vermont..................................
3,214.0 Virginia...................................
4,445.7 Washington..............................
2,641.2 West Virginia............................
1,125.4 Wisconsin................................
Wyoming.................................

300.7
3,491.8
2,656.7
733.9
2,786.7
247.5

299.9
3,486.7
2,665.1
728.2
2,764.2
248.3

302.4
3,489.0
2,665.5
732.2
2,770.7
248.1

State

p= preliminary. Dash indicates data not available.
NOTE: Some data in this table may differ from data published elsewhere because of the continual updating of the data base.

52FRASER
Monthly Labor Review
Digitized for
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

April 2003

Jan.
2003p

12. Employment of workers on nonfarm payrolls by industry, monthly data seasonally adjusted
[In thousands]
Industry

Annual average
2001

2002

2003

2002

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.p

131,922 130,793 130,706 130,701 130,680 130,702 130,736 130,790 130,913 130,829 130,898 130,817 130,670 130,873 130,516
110,989 109,531 109,544 109,505 109,495 109,496 109,525 109,562 109,624 109,536 109,549 109,453 109,311 109,506 109,136
23,836 24,041 23,975 23,905 23,870 23,861 23,812 23,801 23,748 23,688 23,631 23,551 23,563 23,462
GOODS-PRODUCING................... 24,944
552
552
553
552
551
552
555
555
551
Mining'........................................
564
564
558
557
560
565
32
32
32
32
32
32
32
32
33
32
32
32
32
32
36
Metal mining.........................
335
336
332
335
330
331
329
333
334
333
339
334
339
336
338
Oil and gas extraction.............
Nonmetaliic minerals,
107
106
108
111
109
111
111
110
112
110
111
112
111
111
111
except fuels........................
6,564
6,522
6,544
6,544
6,543
6,556
6,556
6,541
6,549
6,519
6,541
6,597
6,593
6,685
6,555
Construction...............................
1,471
1,463
1,480
1,476
1,475
1,454
1,450
1,469
1,454
1,445
1,452
1,462
1,462
1,462
1,458
General building contractors....
Heavy construction, except
897
881
880
893
885
898
898
910
899
901
908
914
908
922
900
building.............................
4,196
4,178
4,188
4,176
4,178
4,198
4,189
4,175
4,179
4,185
4,188
4,194
4,225
4,223
4,300
Special trades contractors.......
16,725 16,880 16,822 16,800 16,758 16,757 16,742 16,690 16,640 16,592 16,537 16,454 16,447 16,388
Manufacturing............................. 17,695
Production workers........... 11,933 11,217 11,305 11,264 11,250 11,245 11,236 11,247 11,212 11,164 11,134 11,088 11,030 11,045 10,949
9,637
9,689
9,757
9,699
9,832
9,800
9,944
9,922
9,889
9,963
9,907 10,023
9,976
9,976
10,636
Durable goods.........................
6,401
6,487
6,445
6,456
6,522
6,539
6,603
6,609
6,591
6,619
6,625
6,620
6,587
6,653
7,126
Production workers...........
758
760
758
764
764
761
767
768
767
766
771
770
767
769
786
Lumber and wood products...
479
475
486
480
488
488
495
494
495
495
491
497
491
491
519
Furniture and fixtures............
Stone, clay, and glass
554
556
557
556
553
554
557
558
552
549
554
550
551
571
551
products..........................
582
579
581
576
582
586
589
589
597
593
596
598
656
592
601
Primary metal industries........
1,387
1,374
1,400
1,391
1,412
1,409
1,428
1,418
1,428
1,425
1,422
1,425
1,418
1,425
1,483
Fabricated metal products.....
Industrial machinery and
1,757
1,797
1,790
1,781
1,770
1,810
1,801
1,826
1,829
1,826
1,846
1,842
1,824
1,855
equipment........................ 2,010
Computer and office
287
283
293
291
295
304
296
296
301
313
308
304
315
315
343
equipment......................
Electronic and other electrical
1,343
2,368
1,360
1,355
1,392
1,381
1,408
1,437
1,428
1,426
1,443
1,419
1,445
1,459
equipment........................
1,631
Electronic components and
532
528
523
544
536
550
563
555
567
566
571
566
566
558
661
1,640
1,645
1,648
1,638
1,661
1,659
1,675
1,671
1,679
1,661
1,682
1,674
1,675
1,667
1,760
Transportation equipment......
Motor vehicles and
905
914
909
900
911
912
918
914
920
905
912
947
912
913
915
equipment.......................
392
392
389
388
396
407
400
411
409
416
427
419
416
410
461
Aircraft and parts...............
Instruments and related
792
790
792
788
793
798
803
799
807
805
804
813
811
816
830
products..........................
Miscellaneous manufacturing
367
374
369
369
374
372
370
371
370
371
372
372
372
370
380
industries.........................
6,751
6,792
6,780
6,755
6,758
6,808
6,820
6,801
6,824
6,808
6,813
6,857
6,846
7,059
6,818
Nondurable goods...................
4,584
4,585
4,589
4,612
4,601
4,621
4,625
4,626
4,633
4,638
4,652
4,630
4,639
4,808
4,630
Production workers...........
1,694
1,695
1,687
1,689
1,687
1,694
1,690
1,683
1,687
1,691
1,685
1,689
1,689
1,686
1,691
Food and kindred products....
34
34
37
37
36
36
34
38
34
34
35
33
34
35
33
Tobacco products................
420
419
426
422
422
427
426
432
429
434
441
436
432
440
478
Textile mill products..............
Apparel and other textile
507
504
504
524
510
509
516
522
525
527
523
520
521
531
566
products.........................
604
614
607
606
612
613
612
612
612
613
621
620
615
834
615
Paper and allied products......
1,397
1,400
1,393
1,395
1,401
1,406
1,403
1,407
1,405
1,401
1,419
1,413
1,428
1,490
1,410
Printing and publishing.........
1,007
1,007
1,006
1,005
1,006
1,006
1,010
1,008
1,008
1,008
1,006
1,010
1,022
1,008
1,011
Chemicals and allied products
125
125
125
125
126
125
126
125
126
125
125
126
126
126
125
Petroleum and coal products..
Rubber and miscellaneous
916
919
918
927
926
925
929
929
936
924
929
927
928
927
958
plastics products...............
54
51
57
57
55
53
56
555
55
55
56
55
60
56
56
Leather and leather products..
SERVICE-PRODUCING................ 106,978 106,957 106,665 106,726 106,775 106,832 106,875 106,978 107,112 107,081 107,210 107,186 107,119 107,310 107,054
TOTAL..................................
PRIVATE SECTOR...................

Transportation and public

Railroad transportation.........
Local and interurban
passenger transit..............
Trucking and warehousing....
Water transportation............
Pipelines, except natural gas..
Transportation services........
Communications and public
Communications.................
Electric, gas, and sanitary

Retail trade.................................

7,065
4,497
234

6,773
4,317
229

6,837
4,341
234

6,814
4,330
233

6,799
4,330
230

6,793
4,328
228

6,790
4,334
229

6,780
4,328
227

6,765
4,323
228

6,725
4,293
226

6,727
4,300
225

6,721
4,300
225

6,686
4,273
225

6,694
4,301
224

6,653
4,275
224

480
1,848
192
1,266
15
462

472
1,826
190
1,162
15
423

479
1,826
187
1,171
15
429

478
1,819
186
1,172
15
427

476
1,830
190
1,162
15
427

475
1,827
193
1,165
15
425

472
1,829
193
1,172
15
424

471
1,834
192
1,167
15
422

466
1,827
190
1,176
15
421

469
1,816
189
1,160
15
418

471
1,826
189
1,156
15
418

467
1,829
192
1,151
15
421

466
1,827
191
1,127
15
422

465
1,825
191
1,158
15
423

466
1,811
190
1,150
16
418

2,570
1,716

2,456
1,614

2,496
1,652

2,484
1,643

2,469
1,628

2,465
1,626

2,456
1,615

2,452
1,608

2,442
1,597

2,432
1,588

2,427
1,584

2,421
1,583

2,413
1,576

2,393
1,559

2,378
1,547

852
6,776
23,522

842
6,671
23,306

844
6,689
23,331

841
6,681
23,332

841
6,678
23,345

839
6,681
23,327

841
6,681
23,308

844
6,679
23,339

845
6,671
13,295

844
6,663
23,291

842
6,657
23,289

838
6,643
23,247

837
6,637
23,152

834
6,639
23,271

831
6,640
23,154

1,044
2,897
2,559

1,065
2,868
2,529

1,048
2,892
2,550

1,053
2,901
2,560

1,061
2,915
2,575

1,068
2,897
2,560

1,066
2,884
2,542

1,067
2,885
2,544

1,066
2,850
2,513

1,067
2,856
2,515

1,071
2,851
2,506

1,078
2,828
2,491

1,077
2,821
2,488

1,083
2,831
2,498

1,077
2,860
2,525

Building materials and garden
General merchandise stores....
Department stores..............
See footnotes at end of table.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Monthly Labor Review

April 2003

53

Current Labor Statistics:

Labor Force Data

12. Continued—Employment of workers on nonfarm payrolls by industry, monthly data seasonally adjusted
[In thousands]_______________
In d u s tr y

A n n u a l a v e ra g e
2001

Food stores.........................
Automotive dealers and
service stations..................
New and used car dealers....
Apparel and accessory stores..
Furniture and home furnishings
stores...............................
Eating and drinking places......
Miscellaneous retail
establishments..................
Finance, insurance, and
real estate...................................

Finance...............................
Depository institutions..........
Commercial banks.............
Savings institutions............
Nondepository institutions.....
Security and commodity
brokers............................
Holding and other investment
offices..............................
Insurance............................
Insurance carriers...............
Insurance agents, brokers,
and service.......................
Real estate..........................
Services1........................................

Agricultural services..............
Hotels and other lodging places
Personal services..................
Business services..................
Services to buildings.............
Personnel supply services.....
Help supply services...........
Computer and data
processing services............
Auto repair services
and parking........................
Miscellaneous repair services...
Motion pictures.....................
Amusement and recreation
services............................
Health services.....................
Offices and clinics of medical
doctors.............................
Nursing and personal care
facilities............................
Hospitals............................
Home health care services....
Legal services.......................
Educational services..............
Social services......................
Child day care services.........
Residential care...................
Museums and botanical and
zoological gardens..............
Membership organizations.......
Engineering and management
services.............................
Engineering and architectural
services............................
Management and public
relations..........................
G overnm ent................................... .

2002

2002

Feb.

M a r.

A p r.

M ay

June

J u ly

2003
Aug.

Sept

O c t.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

F e b .p

3,541

3,394

3,402

3,392

3,392

3,397

3,394

3,388

3,392

3,392

3,380

3,382

3,365

3,370

3,363

2,425
1,121
1,189

2,432
1,130
1,174

2,430
1,134
1,172

2,426
1,131
1,175

2,429
1,129
1,170

2,434
1,133
1,169

2,432
1,128
1,173

2,437
1,127
1,178

2,443
1,130
1,177

2,438
1,131
1,171

2,438
1,131
1,174

2,430
1,128
1,172

2,420
1,123
1,174

2,416
1,118
1,174

2,413
1,117
1,156

1,141
8,256

1,151
8,143

1,143
8,161

1,143
8,154

1,141
8,152

1,146
8,130

1,148
8,121

1,153
8,144

1,154
8,125

1,153
8,129

1,156
8,140

1,165
8,129

1,175
8,063

1,166
8,146

1,153
8,048

3,118

3,079

3,083

3,088

3,085

3,086

3,090

3,087

3,088

3,085

3,073

3,063

3,057

3,085

3,084

7,712
3,800
2,053
1,434
256
720

7,760
3,828
2,076
1,448
263
772

7,745
3,812
2,072
1,446
263
754

7,740
3,809
2,074
1,447
264
753

7,743
3,813
2,075
1,446
264
756

7,732
3,813
2,073
1,446
264
756

7,733
3,819
2,071
1,444
264
762

7,737
3,819
2,073
1,445
263
767

7,745
3,822
2,075
1,448
263
773

7,773
3,837
2,078
1,450
264
783

7,803
3,853
2,080
1,452
263
797

7,807
3,854
2,082
1,451
261
801

7,816
3,861
2,079
1,449
261
809

7,817
3,869
2,083
1,453
260
816

7,826
3,875
2,083
1,452
262
823

769

718

726

722

723

723

723

718

714

714

713

709

709

711

711

257
2,369
1,595

261
2,370
1,582

260
2,376
1,593

260
2,375
1,591

259
2,374
1,989

261
2,369
1,583

263
2,366
1,579

261
2,365
1,576

260
2,366
1,574

262
2,366
1,577

263
2,371
1,578

262
2,373
1,578

264
2,375
1,578

259
2,378
1,582

258
2,379
1,584

773
1,544
40,970
849
1,870
1,269
9,572
1,016
3,446
3,084

788
1,562
41,183
867
1,798
1,286
9,305
1,031
3,169
2,852

783
1,557
40,901
868
1,811
1,282
9,207
1,018
3,070
2,758

784
1,556
40,963
872
1,811
1,289
9,237
121
3,107
2,795

785
1,556
41,025
857
1,796
1,286
9,312
1,027
3,175
2,857

786
1,550
41,093
856
1,789
1,279
9,330
1,023
3,198
2,888

787
1,548
41,152
862
1,801
1,285
9,332
1,023
3,205
2,902

789
1,553
41,215
862
1,795
1,282
9,325
1,034
3,196
2,875

792
1,557
41,347
863
1,788
1,285
9,395
1,041
3,257
2,925

789
1,570
41,336
874
1,782
1,287
9,330
1,042
3,188
2,869

793
1,579
41,385
874
1,791
1,288
9,324
1,041
3,178
2,865

795
1,580
41,404
880
1,792
1,283
9,309
1,045
3,152
2,838

797
1,580
41,469
880
1,807
1,292
9,311
1,044
3,175
2,866

796
1,570
41,522
882
1,811
1,281
9,292
1,044
3,173
2,871

795
1,572
41,401
879
1,795
1,275
9,264
1,039
3,159
2,871

2,225

2,195

2,208

2,198

2,190

2,190

2,191

2,193

2,191

2,190

2,196

2,195

2,187

2,183

2,181

1,257
374
583

1,263
377
583

1,262
379
574

1,260
377
572

1,261
377
574

1,262
375
578

1,265
378
581

1,266
379
584

1,266
377
588

1,266
378
595

1,262
378
591

1,263
378
590

1,268
376
583

1,274
378
581

1,263
374
582

1,721
10,381

1,642
10,673

1,649
10,575

1,635
10,602

1,611
10,611

1,621
10,626

1,631
10,660

1,649
10,687

1,662
10,711

1,638
10,729

1,640
10,755

1,630
10,777

1,653
10,787

1,659
10,805

1,635
10,805

2,002

2,064

3,041

2,046

2,044

2,050

2,061

2,067

2,075

2,079

2,085

2,088

2,092

2,089

2,091

1,847
4,096
636
1,037
2,433
3,057
716
864

1,889
4,225
647
1,966
2,526
3,177
726
904

1,875
4,184
642
1,054
2,485
3,155
722
899

1,879
4,193
643
1,056
2,489
3,162
723
902

1,883
4,199
643
1,059
2,501
3,167
925
903

1,886
4,207
644
1,066
2,518
3,164
722
901

1,887
4,221
643
1,065
2,511
3,165
726
904

1,888
4,233
646
1,065
2,529
3,181
726
904

1,893
4,244
646
1,065
2,538
3,203
736
906

1,896
4,247
651
1,072
2,550
3,199
731
906

1,899
4,256
655
1,077
2,560
3,201
730
909

1,905
4,267
656
1,079
2,574
3,208
728
912

1,904
4,269
657
1,081
2,582
3,209
725
915

1,905
4,278
658
1,087
2,611
3,222
730
912

1,902
4,287
659
1,091
2,577
3,217
728
915

110
2,468

108
2,477

109
2,471

109
2,470

109
2,477

108
2,480

109
2,484

109
2,476

108
2,472

108
2,478

107
2,480

107
2,478

106
2,476

107
2,475

107
2,474

3,593

3,645

3,629

3,631

3,636

3,649

3,636

3,634

3,634

3,659

3,666

3,667

3,669

3,668

3,674

1,053

1,036

1,044

1,044

1,041

1,042

1,034

1,032

1,030

1,029

1,027

1,028

1,028

1,022

1,021

1,166
20,933
2,616

1,210
21,260
2,620

1,193
21,162
2,609

1,191
21,196
2,608

1,202
21,185
2,611

1,209
21,206
2,600

1,204
21,211
2,601

1,214
21,228
2,607

1,211
21,289
2,611

1,224
21,293
2,621

1,226
21,349
2,649

1,228
21,364
2,661

1,232
21,359
2,664

1,235
21,367
2,665

1,234
21,380
2,661

1,777
4,945
2,141
2,804
13,661
7,770
5,891

1,783
4,935
2,135
2,800
13,675
7,755
5,920

1,790
4,950
2,155
2,795
13,671
7,788
5,883

1,792
4,948
2,145
2,803
13,730
7,837
5,893

1,810
4,958
2,163
2,795
13,714
7,808
5,906

1,840
4,955
2,160
2,795
13,745
7,829
5,916

1,853
4,961
2,165
2,786
13,742
7,820
5,922

1,856
4.953
2,166
2,787
13,742
7,813
5,929

1,855
4,930
2,144
2,786
13,772
7,842
5,930

1,858
4,957
2,168
2,789
13,762
7,836
5,926

Federal................................
Federal, except Postal
Service............................
1,767
1,803
1,777
1,782
1,784
State...................................
4,885
4,947
4,937
4,940
4,942
Education...........................
2,096
2,147
2,130
2,133
2,135
Other State government........
2,789
2,800
2,807
2,807
2,807
Local................................... 13,432 13,694 13,593 13,617 13,645
Education...........................
7,646
7,799
7,746
7,767
7,754
Other local government........
5,786
5,895
5,871
5,878
5,879
1 Includes other industries not shown separately.
p= preliminary.
Note: See "Notes on the data" for a description of the most recent benchmark revision.

54FRASER
Monthly Labor Review
Digitized for
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

April 2003

13. Average weekly hours of production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonfarm payrolls, by industry, monthly
data seasonally adjusted
Industry

2002

Annual average

2001

2002

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

2003

July

Aug.

Sept

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.p Feb.p

PRIVATE SECTOR............................

34.2

24.1

34.2

34.2

34.2

34.2

34.3

34.0

34.1

34.2

34.2

34.2

34.1

34.3

34.1

GOODS-PRODUCING............................

40.4

40.3

40.4

40.5

40.4

40.3

40.5

40.0

40.3

40.3

40.1

39.9

40.2

40.5

39.8

MINING...............................................

43.5

42.9

43.4

43.3

42.4

43.0

43.3

42.7

43.3

42.8

42.7

43.1

42.1

42.8

42.7

MANUFACTURING..............................
Overtime hours..............................

40.7
3.9

40.9
4.1

40.7
3.9

41.0
4.1

40.9
4.2

40.9
4.2

41.1
4.3

40.7
4.0

40.9
4.2

40.8
4.1

40.7
4.1

40.6
4.0

40.9
4.2

40.9
4.1

40.8
4.1

Overtime hours.............................
Lumber and wood products..............
Furniture and fixtures......................
Stone, clay, and glass products........

41.0
3.9
40.6
39.0
43.6
43.6

41.3
4.1
41.0
40.2
43.5
44.3

41.1
3.9
40.9
40.3
44.1
43.8

41.3
4.1
41.1
40.6
43.6
44.4

41.4
4.1
40.8
40.8
43.8
44.3

41.3
4.1
40.8
40.4
43.4
44.1

41.5
4.2
41.0
40.2
43.7
44.6

41.0
3.9
41.2
40.1
43.2
44.1

41.2
4.1
41.0
40.3
43.3
44.3

41.3
4.1
41.1
40.2
43.4
44.2

41.2
4.2
41.0
39.6
43.4
44.7

40.9
4.0
40.6
39.5
42.9
44.3

41.3
4.2
41.2
40.7
43.1
44.7

41.4
4.1
41.1
40.3
43.5
44.3

41.3
4.1
40.9
39.8
43.1
44.9

44.6
41.4

45.6
41.7

44.8
41.6

45.5
41.7

45.1
41.6

45.6
41.9

46.1
42.0

45.5
41.7

45.8
41.7

46.0
41.6

46.2
41.6

45.4
41.2

46.5
41.2

44.8
41.6

45.1
41.4

40.6

40.6

40.1

40.5

40.6

40.7

40.9

40.3

40.8

40.7

40.5

40.3

40.6

41.0

41.3

39.4
41.9
42.7
40.9
37.9

39.0
42.6
44.2
40.7
38.7

38.9
42.3
43.7
40.4
38.4

39.4
42.4
43.9
40.6
38.8

39.5
42.6
44.4
40.4
38.8

39.4
42.3
44.2
40.4
38.8

39.4
43.5
44.1
40.9
39.6

38.7
41.7
42.9
40.4
38.4

38.7
42.2
43.8
40.7
38.5

38.8
42.6
44.3
40.8
38.6

38.3
42.6
44.4
40.7
38.9

38.7
42.2
44.0
40.6
38.5

39.0
42.5
44.4
40.9
38.8

38.5
43.1
45.2
40.7
38.9

38.9
42.3
43.6
40.5
38.1

40.3
4.0
41.1
39.9
37.3
41.6

40.3
4.2
41.2
41.2
36.9
41.6

40.2
3.9
41.0
40.9
36.7
41.5

40.4
4.2
41.4
41.4
37.4
41.5

40.3
4.3
41.2
41.5
37.1
41.6

40.4
4.3
41.2
41.4
37.0
41.9

40.6
4.3
41.6
41.5
37.0
41.6

40.2
4.2
41.0
41.6
36.8
41.2

40.5
4.2
41.3
41.8
36.8
41.7

40.2
4.0
40.8
41.2
36.9
41.4

40.1
4.1
40.8
41.9
36.6
41.3

40.1
4.0
41.0
40.9
36.6
41.5

40.4
4.2
41.4
41.2
36.7
41.8

40.1
4.0
40.8
40.5
36.6
41.8

40.2
4.1
40.6
40.7
36.5
42.2

38.1
42.3

37.5
42.2

37.4
41.9

37.5
42.0

37.2
41.8

37.5
42.3

37.7
42.5

37.3
42.1

37.7
42.6

37.5
42.4

37.4
42.2

37.1
42.2

37.7
42.1

38.0
41.8

38.2
42.4

Rubber and miscellaneous
plastics products...........................
Leather and leather products...........

40.7
36.3

41.0
36.8

40.9
37.2

41.1
37.3

41.6
37.5

41.2
36.7

41.3
36.8

41.0
36.7

41.2
35.7

40.8
35.6

40.9
36.3

40.7
37.0

40.8
37.1

40.6
37.0

40.4
37.0

SERVICE-PRODUCING.........................

32.7

32.7

32.7

32.8

32.7

32.8

32.8

32.6

32.7

32.8

32.8

32.9

32.8

32.9

32.8

TRANSPORTATION AND
PUBLIC UTILITIES...........................

38.2

38.3

38.2

38.2

38.3

38.4

38.3

38.3

38.4

38.5

38.4

38.5

38.3

38.3

38.3

WHOLESALE TRADE..........................

38.2

38.4

38.3

38.4

38.3

38.3

38.6

38.4

38.5

38.5

38.6

38.5

38.5

38.4

38.4

RETAIL TRADE..................................

28.9

29.0

29.0

29.1

29.0

29.1

29.1

28.8

28.9

29.0

29.1

29.2

29.2

29.3

29.1

Blast furnaces and basic steel
products.....................................
Fabricated metal products...............
Industrial machinery and equipment...
Electronic and other electrical
equipment...................................
Transportation equipment................
Motor vehicles and equipment........
Instruments and related products......

Overtime hours.............................
Food and kindred products...............
Textile mill products........................
Apparel and other textile products.....
Paper and allied products................


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Monthly Labor Review

April 2003

55

Current Labor Statistics:

Labor Force Data

14. Average hourly earnings of production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonfarm payrolls, by industry,
seasonally adjusted
Annual average

Industry

2003

2001

2002

Feb.

P R IV A T E S E C T O R (in c u r r e n t d o lla r s )..

$14.32

$14.77

$14.61

G o o d s - p r o d u c in g ..........................................

15.92

16.41

Mining.......................................
Construction..................................
Manufacturing...............................
Excluding overtime......................

17.56
18.34
14.83
14.15

17.76
18.87
15.30
14.57

S e r v ic e -p r o d u c in g .........................................

13.85

14.30

Transportation and public utilities.....
Wholesale trade.............................
Retail trade...................................
Finance, insurance, and real estate....
Services.......................................

16.79
15.86
9.77
15.80
14.67

17.29
16.21
10.04
16.35
15.24

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

July

Aug

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.p

$14.64 $14.66 $14.69 $14.74 $14.76 $14.83 $14.85 $14.90 $14.93 $14.98 $14.99 $15.08
16.28 16.29 16.32 16.35 16.39 16.38 16.44 16.48 16.54 16.54 16.61 16.64 16.67
17.66 17.72 17.63 17.87 17.70 17.78 17.87 17.82 17.83 17.89 17.78 17.91
18.18
18.68 18.74 18.83 18.77 18.81 18.87 18.90 18.98 19.00 19.00 19.14 19.04 19.16
15.17 15.19 15.19 15.27 15.31 15.28 15.34 15.35 15.44 15.44 15.48 15.53 15.57
14.46 14.45 14.43 14.53 14.56 14.57 14.59 14.62 14.70 14.71 14.72 14.79 14.84
14.13 14.18 14.19 14.23 14.27 14.31 14.37 14.40 14.44 14.50 14.53 14.53 14.65
17.11 17.21 17.21 17.26 17.31 17.27 17.28 17.36 17.38 17.51 17.45 17.44 17.59
16.19 16.23 16.11 16.12 16.15 16.14 16.28 16.29 16.31 16.32 16.37 16.36 16.50
9.92
9.95
9.97
9.99 10.06 10.05 10.09 10.10 10.12 10.14 10.18 10.15 10.22
16.08 16.14 16.18 16.17 16.27 16.38 16.43 16.53 16.57 16.71 16.73 16.77 16.78
15.04 15.08 15.13 15.16 15.19 15.26 15.30 15.34 15.40 15.46 15.49 15.51
15.65

P R IV A T E S E C T O R (in c o n s t a n t (1 9 8 2 )
d o lla r s ).................................................................
8.00
8.24
8.13
8.12
8.09
p= preliminary. Dash indicates data not available.
Note: See "Notes on the data" for a description of the most recent benchmark revision.

Digitized for
56 FRASER
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

April 2003

8.11

8.13

8.12

8.14

8.13

8.15

8.15

8.18

8.16

8.15

15. Average hourly earnings of production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonfarm payrolls, by industry
Industry
PRIVATE SECTOR.....................................

Annual average

2003

2002

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.p

2001

2002

$14.32

$14.77 $14.67 $14.67 $14.69 $14.67 $14.68 $14.65 $14.70 $14.92 $14.92 $14.97 $15.04 $15.07 $15.16
17.73

17.70

17.74

17.65

17.76

17.71

17.80

17.81

17.81

17.85

18.04

18.62

18.66

18.70

18.67

18.74

18.90

18.97

19.10

19.14

19.06

19.23

19.03

19.04

15.16

15.16

15.20

15.23

15.28

15.26

15.32

14.40

15.42

15.48

15.58

15.55

15.55

15.78
12.50
12.66
15.49
17.73

15.63
12.39
12.59
15.17
17.15

15.63
12.35
12.57
15.12
17.20

15.66
12.33
12.54
15.35
17.25

15.68
12.43
12.59
15.43
17.36

15.74
12.53
12.62
15.48
17.46

15.66
12.58
12.55
15.62
17.60

15.81
12.57
12.71
15.52
17.49

15.89
12.63
12.74
15.69
17.54

15.95
12.60
12.68
15.79
17.60

16.01
12.57
12.78
15.69
17.64

16.09
12.66
12.83
15.75
17.64

16.06
12.61
12.78
15.76
17.67

16.04
12.68
12.81
15.65
17.65

20.41
14.25

20.88
14.71

20.63
14.51

20.66
14.60

20.69
14.66

20.81
14.64

20.92
14.71

21.07
14.61

20.90
14.69

20.96
14.80

21.02
14.84

21.05
14.90

21.09
14.98

21.26
14.97

21.26
14.96

Industrial machinery and equipment...
Electronic and other electrical
equipment...................................
Transportation equipment................
Motor vehicles and equipment........
Instruments and related products.....

15.89

16.44

16.33

16.31

16.30

16.35

16.36

16.47

16.55

16.58

16.53

16.55

16.66

16.66

16.66

14.51
19.06
19.40
14.81
12.16

15.00
19.89
20.50
15.25
12.40

14.90
19.69
20.05
15.10
12.42

14.93
19.65
20.09
15.12
12.39

14.87
19.68
20.22
15.11
12.36

14.91
19.65
20.17
15.11
12.37

15.04
19.75
20.36
15.14
12.28

15.05
19.37
19.76
15.24
12.30

15.06
19.86
20.56
15.28
12.39

15.05
20.04
20.71
15.40
12.44

15.06
20.31
21.12
15.44
12.42

15.08
20.53
21.42
15.44
12.45

15.19
20.55
21.40
15.53
12.54

15.11
20.37
21.11
15.51
12.52

15.22
20.24
20.85
15.52
12.49

Nondurable goods...................................

14.16
12.89
21.50
11.35
9.43
16.87

14.61
13.23
21.65
11.74
9.91
17.49

14.47
13.08
21.71
11.64
9.77
17.17

14.46
13.10
22.47
11.65
9.82
17.25

14.53
13.18
22.80
11.65
9.93
17.33

14.55
13.25
23.09
11.73
9.93
17.51

14.60
13.29
23.26
11.69
9.95
17.53

14.69
13.34
23.34
11.74
9.91
17.73

14.60
13.24
20.83
11.75
9.95
17.55

14.69
13.26
20.61
11.80
9.94
17.66

14.66
13.21
20.35
11.74
9.97
17.58

14.71
13.26
20.37
11.81
9.98
17.63

14.84
13.40
20.70
11.84
10.11
17.83

14.82
13.32
21.09
11.91
10.06
17.74

14.85
13.29
21.72
11.85
9.94
17.76

14.82
18.61
22.08

15.18
19.18
22.33

15.06
18.95
22.45

15.12
18.93
22.39

15.11
19.01
22.39

15.05
18.96
22.02

15.11
19.14
22.15

15.15
19.32
22.22

15.18
19.28
22.11

15.32
19.45
22.46

15.30
19.32
22.48

15.34
19.41
22.57

15.45
19.44
22.75

15.37
19.45
22.58

15.47
19.50
22.95

13.39
10.31

13.73
10.30

13.65
10.35

13.61
10.40

13.68
10.39

13.69
10.43

13.66
10.27

13.76
10.37

13.71
10.27

13.74
10.04

13.77
10.08

13.79
10.25

13.97
10.51

14.00
10.41

14.02
10.37

16.79

17.29

17.12

17.19

17.26

17.18

17.24

17.28

17.26

17.40

17.38

17.52

17.48

17.50

17.64

11.57

11.52

11.58

11.75

11.71

11.72

11.76

11.84

11.90

MINING..........................................................

17.56

17,76

17.76

CONSTRUCTION.........................................

18.34

18.87

MANUFACTURING.....................................

14.83

15.30

Durable goods.................................

15.28
12.26
12.24
15.00
16.92

Lumber and wood products..............
Furniture and fixtures.......................
Stone, clay, and glass products........
Primary metal industries..................
Blast furnaces and basic steel
products.....................................
Fabricated metal products...............

Food and kindred products..............
Textile mill products........................
Apparel and other textile products.....
Paper and allied products................
Printing and publishing....................
Chemicals and allied products..........
Petroleum and coal products............
Rubber and miscellaneous
plastics products...........................
Leather and leather products............

18.22

TRANSPORTATION AND
PUBLIC UTILITIES..................................
WHOLESALE TRADE................................

15.86

11.62

11.58

11.57

11.58

11.54

RETAIL TRADE...........................................

9.77

10.04

9.95

9.98

10.00

9.98

10.00

9.98

10.01

10.15

10.14

10.15

10.18

10.23

10.26

AND REAL ESTATE...............................

15,80

16.35

16.13

16.17

16.23

16.18

16.27

16.25

16.31

16.57

16.53

16.68

16.82

16.78

16.95

SERVICES.....................................................

14.67

15.24

15.17

15.16

15.16

15.12

15.08

15.02

15.05

15.36

15.40

15.62

15.68

15.65

15.81

FINANCE, INSURANCE,

p= preliminary.
NOTE: See "Notes on the data" for a description of the most recent benchmark revision.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Monthly Labor Review

April 2003

57

Current Labor Statistics:

Labor Force Data

16. Average weekly earnings of production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonfarm payrolls, by industry
Industry

Annual average
2001

2002

Feb.

2002

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

July

2003

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.p

Feb.p

P R IV A T E S E C T O R

Current dollars....................... $489.74 $503.66 $497.31 $497.31 $497.99
Seasonally adjusted............
- 499.68 500.69 501.37
Constant (1982) dollars......... 273.45 283.37 277.36 275.82 274.53

$500.25 $509.40 $501.03 $505.68 $514.74 $508.77 $508.98 $517.38 $507.86 $515.44
502.40 505.58 501.84 505.70 507.87 509.58 510.95 510.82 514.16 514.23
275.77 280.66 275.75 277.54 281.74 278.02 277.98 283.19 276.91 278.77

M IN IN G ....................................................

763.86

761.90

761.90

757.07

750.48.

766.37

767.78

763.68

768.61

768.96

765.83

764.05

755.06

757.68

765.24

C O N S T R U C T IO N .................................

720.76

732.16

716.87

716.54

723.69

728.13

740.23

740.88

749.32

754.45

746.46

724.28

726.89

723.14

696.86

603.58
337.01

625.77
-

610.95
340.74

620.04
343.89

620.16
341.87

622.91
343.39

631.06
347.69

614.98
338.46

629.65
345.58

636.02
348.12

630.68
344.63

633.15
345.78

646.57
353.90

631.33
344.24

628.22
339.76

626.48
Lumber and wood products.... 497.76
Furniture and fixtures............ 477.36
Stone, clay, and glass
products........................... 654.00
Primary metal industries........ 737.71
Blast furnaces and basic
steel products.................. 910.29
Fabricated metal products...... 589.95
Industrial machinery and
equipment....................... 645.13
Electronic and other electrical
equipment........................ 571.69
Transportation equipment....... 798.61
Motor vehicles and
equipment...................... 828.38
Instruments and related
products........................... 605.73
Miscellaneous manufacturing... 460.86

651.71
512.50
508.63

637.70
495.60
501.08

645.52 646.76
503.88 504.30
509.09 506 31/50

649.15
510.87
504.86

656.36
520.00
508.59

634.23
517.04
449.49

654.53
519.14
516.03

662.61
526.67
519.79

658.74
520.38
502.13

659.61
511.60
504.81

674.17
520.33
529.88

658.46
505.66
508.64

656.04
509.74
506.00

673.82
772.15

646.24
746.03

645.62
758.52

667.73
762.45

675.83
767.31

687.31
782.21

682.59
769.12

684.43
774.81

699.77
780.53

693.18
784.96

676.24
788.51

672.53
800.86

663.50
782.78

655.74
785.43

952.13
613.41

915.97
597.81

933.83
607.36

937.26
606.92

951.02
611.95

972.78
619.29

965.01
599.01

957.22
614.04

972.54
620.12

964.82
620.31

964.09
621.33

976.47
632.16

950.32
618.26

950.32
613.36

667.46

658.10

663.82

660.15

665.45

669.12

658.80

671.93

676.46

667.41

670.68

688.06

681.39

686.39

585.00
847.31

576.63
825.01

588.24
835.13

581.42
844.27

582.98
842.99

592.58
847.28

571.90
780.61

584.33
848.02

589.96
863.72

579.81
869.27

591.14
872.95

606.08
891.87

581.74
869.80

589.01
848.06

906.10

868.17

883.96

907.88

905.63

910.09

810.16

914.92

931.95

939.84

947.21

969.42

937.28

900.72

620.68
479.88

611.55
473.20

616.90
483.21

607.42
479.57

607.42
479.96

620.74
485.06

609.60
468.63

620.37
479.49

628.32
480.18

628.41
483.14

631.50
480.57

646.05
491.57

628.16
478.26

628.56
473.37

570.65
529.78
851.40
452.87

588.78
545.08
883.32
483.69

574.46
523.20
881.43
471.41

581.29
533.17
912.28
483.48

582.65
533.79
932.52
485.81

586.37
543.25
962.85
486.80

592.76
550.21
983.90
489.81

587.60
546.94
982.61
480.17

592.76
553.43
839.45
494.68

597.88
554.27
828.52
489.70

590.80
546.89
826.21
477.82

595.76
551.62
808.69
484.21

606.96
561.46
830.07
492.54

591.32
538.13
845.71
481.16

591.03
528.94
868.80
478.74

351.74
701.79

365.68
727.58

357.58
705.69

368.25
713.43

369.40
717.46

369.40
728.42

373.13
727.50

362.71
728.70

366.16
730.08

364.80
743.49

362.91
729.57

366.27
740.46

375.08
757.78

364.17
741.53

361.82
738.82

564.64
787.20
945.02

569.25
809.40
924.46

558.73
790.22
938.41

568.51
793.17
920.23

560.58
794.62
900.23

559.86
800.11
887.41

563.60
815.36
917.01

562.07
809.51
928.80

573.80
819.40
904.30

582.16
830.52
968.03

575.28
815.30
946.41

578.32
821.04
941.17

591.74
828.14
941.85

577.91
813.01
950.62

584.77
822.90
977.67

544.97
374.25

562.93
379.04

556.92
380.88

559.37
386.88

564.98
388.59

564.03
382.78

569.62
384.10

554.53
373.32

563.48
369.72

564.71
358.43

563.19
367,92

562.63
382.33

579.76
389.92

565.60
381.01

563.60
381.62

676.86

665.65

672.77

678.22

661.50

673.85

M A N U F A C T U R IN G

Current dollars......................
Constant (1982) dollars..........
D u ra b le g o o d s .....................................

N o n d u ra b le g o o d s ..........................

Food and kindred products.....
Tobacco products.................
Textile mill products..............
Apparel and other textile
products...........................
Paper and allied products.......
Printing and publishing...........
Chemicals and allied products..
Petroleum and coal products....
Rubber and miscellaneous
plastics products.................
Leather and leather products....
T R A N S P O R T A T IO N A N D
P U B L IC U T IL IT IE S ..........................

641.38

662.21

648.85

651.50

654.15

657.99

668.91

663.55

667.96

W H O L E S A L E T R A D E ........................

605.85

622.46

615.98

614.55

615.40

615.86

630.63

616.63

623.32

636.40

624.77

628.71

641.07

623.30

636.41

R E T A IL T R A D E ....................................

282.35

291.16

284.57

286.43

287.00

289.42

297.00

295.41

295.30

295.37

293.05

292.32

300.31

290.53

296.51

F IN A N C E , IN S U R A N C E ,
A N D R E A L E S T A T E .......................

570.38

590.24

582.29

580.50

581.03

577.63

597.11

581.75

588.79

608.12

591.77

600.48

617.29

604.08

628.85

S E R V IC E S ..............................................

479.71

496.82

493.03

492.70

491.18

489.89

497.64

489.65

493.64

505.34

502.04

505.95

514.30

505.50

518.57

p= preliminary.
Note: See "Notes on the data" for a description of the most recent benchmark revision. Dash indicates data not available.

Digitized for
58 FRASER
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

April 2003


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

17.

Diffusion indexes of employment change, seasonally adjusted

[In percent]
Timespan and year

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

July

Aug. Sept.

Oct.

Nov

Dec.

Private nonfarm payrolls, 356 industries

Over 1-month span:
1998........................................
1999........................................
2000........................................
2001.........................................
2002.........................................
2003.........................................

62.4
55.3
55.9
49.4
47.3
50.1

57.5
58.6
57.5
45.7
41.4
-

59.1
53.6
57.9
50.3
49.7
-

60.2
58.4
51.2
42.4
47.8
-

57.5
55.5
50.1
47.3
50.9
-

56.8
57.8
55.8
43.2
49.4

Over 3-month span:
1998........................................
1999.........................................
2000.........................................
2001.........................................
2002.........................................
2003........................................

65.3
59.2
60.4
45.5
40.1
-

66.3
57.6
61.4
46.1
43.2
-

65.3
59.5
59.4
40.8
42.5
-

65.9
55.2
53.2
43.4
46.5
-

Over 6-month span:
1998........................................
1999........................................
2000........................................
2001........................................
2002........................................
2003........................................

70.2
60.2
61.1
44.7
37.0
-

67.4
58.9
59.4
42.7
41.6
-

64.7
58.5
58.1
39.5
43.4
-

Over 12-month span:
1998........................................
1999........................................
2000........................................
2001.........................................
2002.........................................
2003.........................................

69.9
61.2
61.4
41.5
35.2
-

67.9
60.1
59.9
41.5
36.0
-

67.6
58.2
58.8
38.9
37.3
-

-

53.0
57.2
52.4
40.5
48.3
-

57.9
60.4
53.2
39.3
45.8
-

56.8
58.1
52.7
44.1
45.5
-

59.1
59.2
56.2
38.0
45.1
-

59.8
59.7
51.2
35.3
47.3
-

57.9
58.9
51.0
33.7
45.1
-

57.1
61.2
53.2
36.3
42.7
-

58.8
60.7
51.6
38.9
45.5
-

59.1
61.2
52.9
37.0
46.5
-

58.8
62.5
54.2
32.4
43.1
-

57.5
62.7
52.4
34.3
40.8
-

60.2
61.8
48.7
33.1
44.2
-

59.2
61.2
45.7
34.1
-

58.4
62.8
46.5
35.6
-

61.7
62.2
53.0
34.1
40.8
-

62.2
61.1
51.0
33.6
-

60.8
63.8
47.7
34.4
-

59.4
62.2
45.2
33.9
-

60.8
59.7
44.5
33.3
-

58.9
60.5
42.9
34.4
-

59.1
54.8
51.4
42.5
48.8

57.2
57.1
52.4
42.4
49.3

-

54.6
57.1
57.8
44.5
48.6
-

-

62.7
60.2
52.4
37.8
48.0
-

58.2
57.2
55.5
43.2
50.1
-

58.9
59.4
56.6
39.3
47.1
-

61.5
59.7
57.9
40.1
44.4
-

64.1
57.2
54.2
40.8
46.5
—

62.1
60.8
52.4
35.8
46.0
-

65.6
61.0
56.2
37.5
38.3
-

64.1
60.7
55.3
37.3
40.5
-

62.7
61.6
53.6
36.2
40.2
-

Manufacturing payrolls, 139 industries

Over 1-month span:
1998.........................................
1999........................................
2000........................................
2001.........................................
2002.........................................
2003.........................................

57.0
47.4
44.9
34.9
35.3
44.1

52.6
41.2
52.2
26.8
37.9
-

52.2
42.6
49.3
38.2
40.4
-

52.9
46.0
46.0
29.0
47.4
-

44.9
46.3
49.3
28.3
47.1
-

47.4
43.4
50.7
30.5
40.4
-

38.2
50.0
57.4
34.9
48.9
-

52.9
42.6
36.8
25.7
41.9
-

44.9
46.0
39.0
31.6
40.1
-

38.6
45.6
42.3
31.3
40.4
-

42.3
51.5
47.1
25.0
40.1
-

41.5
49.3
40.8
30.9
38.2
-

Over 3-month span:
1998........................................
1999........................................
2000.........................................
2001.........................................
2002.........................................
2003.........................................

59.2
39.3
48.2
21.3
24.6
-

57.0
39.3
48.9
21.3
30.1
-

54.8
39.7
48.9
18.4
37.1
-

51.8
40.1
44.5
23.5
38.6
-

48.2
41.2
46.7
19.9
40.1
-

38.2
43.8
52.2
23.2
41.2
-

41.9
44.1
46.0
17.3
38.6
-

43.0
46.3
38.6
19.1
34.6
-

43.0
42.3
29.0
16.2
32.4
-

38.2
44.1
34.2
18.0
32.0
-

32.7
47.8
39.0
18.4
29.8
-

40.4
45.2
36.0
18.0
32.4
-

Over 6-month span:
1998........................................
1999........................................
2000.........................................
2001.........................................
2002.........................................
2003.........................................

60.7
36.4
47.8
20.2
19.9
-

54.4
36.0
45.2
16.9
26.8
-

49.3
37.5
44.5
14.0
29.8
-

40.1
40.4
50.0
16.2
38.2
-

45.2
37.5
41.9
16.5
36.4
-

42.6
42.3
37.9
13.2
34.2
-

39.0
43.0
36.0
14.7
31.6
-

38.2
44.5
35.3
11.8
26.8
-

34.6
48.2
32.4
14.0
26.1
-

41.2
43.0
26.1
13.2
28.3
-

35.7
44.5
21.3
17.6
-

33.1
47.4
21.7
16.5
-

Over 12-month span:
1998........................................
1999.........................................
2000.........................................
2001.........................................
2002.........................................
2003.........................................

54.8
38.6
49.3
13.6
18.0
-

52.2
34.6
44.1
13.6
18.0
-

51.8
32.4
39.3
13.6
20.2
-

46.7
36.0
36.8
15.4
20.2
-

40.4
37.9
35.3
12.1
24.6
-

40.1
39.0
34.2
11.0
22.4
-

38.2
40.1
33.8
11.0
24.6
-

37.5
40.4
28.7
11.0
-

36.4
44.5
22.1
12.9
-

34.6
44.5
19.1
12.9
-

35.7
43.4
17.6
14.0
-

34.2
44.5
14.0
14.0
-

NOTE: Figures are the percent of industries with employment
increasing plus one-half of the industries with unchanged
employment, where 50 percent indicates an equal balance
between industries with inceasing and decreasing employment.

Data for the 2 most recent months shown in each span are
preliminary. See the "Definitions" in this section. See "Notes on
the data" for a description of the most recent benchmark
revision.
Dash indicates data not available.

Monthly Labor Review

April 2003

59

Current Labor Statistics:

18.

Labor Force Data

Establishment size and employment covered under Ul, private ownership, by Supersector, first quarter 2001
S iz e o f e s t a b lis h m e n ts
In d u s t r y , e s t a b lis h m e n ts , a n d
e m p lo y m e n t

T o ta l

F e w e r th a n

5 to 9

1 0 t o 19

2 0 to 4 9

5 0 to 99

100 to 2 49

2 5 0 to 4 9 9

5 0 0 to 9 9 9

5 w o rk e rs 1

w o rk e rs

w o rke rs

w o rke rs

w o rk e rs

w o rk e rs

w o rk e rs

w o rke rs

1 ,0 0 0 o r
m o re
w o rk e rs

Total all industries2
Establishments, first quarter .......
Employment, March ...................

7,665,968
108,932,804

4,526,062
6,886,752

Natural resources and mining
Establishments, first quarter .......
Employment, March ...................

127,969
1,566,104

74,644
110,942

23,304
154,199

15,169
203,845

9,501
285,486

2,935
200,360

1,700
254,358

499
172,011

167
109,973

50
74,930

Construction
Establishments, first quarter .......
Employment, March ...................

765,649
6,481,334

494,254
714,992

127,017
832,978

75,983
1,020,982

47,230
1,410,131

13,591
925,178

6,040
890,282

1,176
390,630

293
197,146

65
99,015

Manufacturing
Establishments, first quarter .......
Employment, March ...................

398,837
16,806,452

148,682
255,376

67,510
453,750

60,267
830,685

58,942
1,836,858

28,633
2,009,224

22,490
3,456,620

7,636
2,622,512

3,198
2,166,352

1,479
3,175,075

Trade, transportation, and utilities
Establishments, first quarter .......
Employment, March ...................

1,840,104
25,518,430

969,760
1,629,626

376,578
2,507,906

244,890
3,278,074

153,450
4,630,611

53,110
3,670,363

32,898
4,888,033

6,970
2,343,794

1,813
1,191,894

635
1,378,129

Information
Establishments, first quarter .......
Employment, March ...................

150,855
3,692,948

84,672
113,812

20,636
137,426

17,119
234,492

14,772
457,236

6,698
465,567

4,475
685,746

1,476
507,063

674
462,533

333
629,073

Financial activities
Establishments, first quarter ....... .
Employment, March ................... .

716,808
7,623,126

458,390
750,421

128,266
843,311

71,615
952,198

37,529
1,121,825

11,731
801,994

6,084
917,250

1,808
621,240

897
609,199

488
1,005,688

Professional and business services
Establishments, first quarter ........
Employment, March ....................

1,238,267
16,441,289

825,617
1,170,098

173,773
1,140,772

107,694
1,451,932

73,807
2,245,729

29,139
2,022,745

19,405
2,951,873

5,654
1,933,668

2,177
1,480,878

1,001
2,043,594

Education and health services
Establishments, first quarter ....... .
Employment, March ................... .

679,762
14,712,829

321,428
603,470

155,333
1,027,913

96,121
1,291,605

61,097
1,836,799

22,789
1,589,809

15,989
2,383,443

3,721
1,274,120

1,690
1,178,727

1,594
3,526,943

Leisure and hospitality
Establishments, first quarter ........
Employment, March ....................

627,875
11,590,048

249,542
390,258

104,548
705,222

110,374
1,542,760

117,264
3,560,715

33,939
2,263,935

9,463
1,344,217

1,725
586,269

667
453,703

353
742,969

Other services
Establishments, first quarter ........
Employment, March ....................

954,627
4,187,740

750,261
977,871

115,619
752,689

55,756
734,980

24,254
703,687

5,498
372,499

2,630
384,044

484
160,249

102
66,660

23
35,061

1 Includes establishments that reported no workers in March 2001.
2 Includes data for unclassified establishments, not shown separately.

Digitized for
60FRASER
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

April 2003

1,304,741
858,606
598,438
208,084
121,189
31,149
8,633,337 11,588,220 18,104,061 14,323,060 18,158,276 10,611,556

11,678
6,021
7,917,065 12,710,477

NOTE: Detail may not add to totals due to rounding. Data reflect the movement of
Indian Tribal Council establishments from private industry to the public sector. See
Notes on Current Labor Statistics.

19. Annual data: establishments, employment, and wages covered under Ul and UCFE by ownership
Year

A v e ra g e
e s t a b lis h m e n ts

A v era g e
annual
e m p lo y m e n t

T o ta l a n n u a l w a g e s
(in th o u s a n d s )

A v e ra g e an n u al

A v e ra g e

w ages

w e e k ly

p e r e m p lo y e e

w age

T o ta l c o v e r e d (U l a n d U C F E )

1992............................................
1993............................................
1994............................................
1995............................................
1996 ............................................
1997............................................
1998............................................
1999 ............................................
2000 ............................................
2001 ............................................

6,532,608
6,679,934
6,826,677
7,040,677
7,189,168
7,369,473
7,634,018
7,820,860
7,879,116
7,984,529

107,413,728
109,422,571
112,611,287
115,487,841
117,963,132
121,044,432
124,183,549
127,042,282
129,877,063
129,635,800

$2,781,676,477
2,884,472,282
3,033,676,678
3,215,921,236
3,414,514,808
3,674,031,718
3,967,072,423
4,235,579,204
4,587,708,584
4,695,225,123

$25,897
26,361
26,939
27,846
28,946
30,353
31,945
33,340
35,323
36,219

$498
507
518
536
557
584
614
641
679
697

$25,622
26,055
26,633
27,567
28,658
30,058
31,676
33,094
35,077
35,943

$493
501
512
530
551
578
609
636
675
691

$25,547
25,934
26,496
27,441
28,582
30,064
31,762
33,244
35,337
36,157

$491
499
510
528
550
578
611
639
680
695

$27,789
28,643
29,518
30,497
31,397
32,521
33,605
34,681
36,296
37,814

$534
551
568
586
604
625
646
667
698
727

$25,434
26,095
26,717
27,552
28,320
29,134
30,251
31,234
32,387
33,521

$489
502
514
530
545
560
582
601
623
645

$35,066
36,940
38,038
38,523
40,414
42,732
43,688
44,287
46,228
48,940

$674
710
731
741
777
822
840
852
889
941

Ul c o ve red

1992............................................
1993............................................
1994............................................
1995............................................
1996 ............................................
1997............................................
1998............................................
1999............................................
2000............................................
2001 ............................................

6,485,473
6,632,221
6,778,300
6,990,594
7,137,644
7,317,363
7,586,767
7,771,198
7,828,861
7,933,536

104,288,324
106,351,431
109,588,189
112,539,795
115,081,246
118,233,942
121,400,660
124,255,714
127,005,574
126,883,182

$2,672,081,827
2,771,023,411
2,918,684,128
3,102,353,355
3,298,045,286
3,553,933,885
3,845,494,089
4,112,169,533
4,454,966,824
4,560,511,280

P r iv a te in d u s tr y c o v e r e d

1992............................................
1993............................................
1994............................................
1995............................................
1996 ............................................
1997............................................
1998............................................
1999 ............................................
2000 ............................................
2001 ............................................

6,308,719
6,454,381
6.596,158
6,803,454
6,946,858
7,121,182
7,381,518
7,560,567
7,622,274
7,724,965

89,349,803
91,202,971
94,146,344
96,894,844
99,268,446
102,175,161
105,082,368
107,619,457
110,015,333
109,304,802

$2,282,598,431
2,365,301,493
2,494,458,555
2,658,927,216
2,837,334,217
3,071,807,287
3,337,621,699
3,577,738,557
3,887,626,769
3,952,152,155

S ta te g o v e r n m e n t c o v e r e d

1992............................................
1993............................................
1994............................................
1995............................................
1996 ............................................
1997............................................
1998............................................
1999 ............................................
2000............................................
2001 ............................................

58,801
59,185
60,686
60,763
62,146
65,352
67,347
70,538
65,096
64,583

4,044,914
4,088,075
4,162,944
4,201,836
4,191,726
4,214,451
4,240,779
4,296,673
4,370,160
4,452,237

$112,405,340
117,095,062
122,879,977
128,143,491
131,605,800
137,057,432
142,512,445
149,011,194
158,618,365
168,358,331

L o cal g o v e rn m e n t c o v e re d

1992 ............................................
1993............................................
1994 ............................................
1995............................................
1996 ............................................
1997............................................
1998............................................
1999 ............................................
2000 ............................................
2001 ............................................

117,923
118,626
121,425
126,342
128,640
130,829
137,902
140,093
141,491
143,989

10,892,697
11,059,500
11,278,080
11,442,238
11,621,074
11,844,330
12,077,513
12,339,584
12,620,081
13,126,143

$277,045,557
288,594,697
301,315,857
315,252,346
329,105,269
345,069,166
365,359,945
385,419,781
408,721,690
440,000,795

F e d e r a l G o v e r n m e n t c o v e r e d (U C F E )

1992 ............................................
1993............................................
1994............................................
1995............................................
1996 ............................................
1997............................................
1998............................................
1999 ............................................
2000............................................
2001 ............................................

47,136
47,714
48,377
50,083
51,524
52,110
47,252
49,661
50,256
50,993

3,125,404
3,071,140
3,023,098
2,948,046
2,881,887
2,810,489
2,782,888
2,786,567
2,871,489
2,752,619

$109,594,650
113,448,871
114,992,550
113,567,881
116,469,523
120,097,833
121,578,334
123,409,672
132,741,760
134,713,843

NOTE: Detail may not add to totals due to rounding. Data reflect the movement of Indian Tribal Council establishments from private industry to
the public sector. See Notes on Current Labor Statistics.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Monthly Labor Review

April 2003

61

Current Labor Statistics:

20.

Labor Force Data

Annual data: establishments, employment, and wages covered under Ul and UCFE, by State
A v e ra g e

A v e ra g e an n u al

T o ta l a n n u a l w a g e s

A v e r a g e w e e k ly

e s t a b lis h m e n ts

e m p lo y m e n t

(in t h o u s a n d s )

w age

S ta te

20002001

2000-

2 00 1

2001

change

2 00 1

20002001

change

2001

20002 00 1

2001

change

change

Total United States .......

7,984,529

154,540

129,635,800

-185,779

$4,695,225,123

$109,884,920

$697

$18

Alabama.......................
Alaska..........................
Arizona.........................
Arkansas ......................
California......................

112,356
19,287
118,706
72,814
1,065,699

30
467
3,546
587
74,645

1,854,462
283,033
2,243,652
1,127,151
14,981,757

-23,500
7,479
22,942
-3,731
138,284

55,822,097
10,237,292
74,963,072
30,725,592
619,146,651

1,284,088
553,237
2,546,248
963,862
7,497,476

579
696
643
524
795

21
20
16
18
3

Colorado.......................
Connecticut...................
Delaware.......................
District of Columbia........
Florida..........................

153,824
108,201
25,253
28,414
454,077

5,347
414
505
9
9,367

2,201,379
1,665,607
406,736
635,749
7,153,589

14,728
-9,121
482
-1,535
92,606

83,547,602
78,272,099
15,629,636
35,543,559
225,713,701

2,274,669
2,095,243
787,067
1,790,086
9,933,356

730
904
739
1,075
607

15
29
36
56
19

Georgia........................
Hawaii..........................
Idaho............................
Illinois...........................
Indiana.........................

230,232
35,439
46,480
319,588
151,376

5,219
1,412
1,084
-2,723
-1,328

3,871,763
557,146
571,314
5,886,248
2,871,236

-10,941
3,961
8,137
-54,259
-63,392

136,039,438
17,412,210
15,864,510
230,054,835
91,246,189

3,195,926
469,266
263,832
4,050,811
183,520

676
601
534
752
611

18
12
1
20
14

Iowa.............................
Kansas .........................
Kentucky......................
Louisiana......................
Maine...........................

91,006
80,521
108,025
115,807
46,206

-5,825
52
302
-2,386
1,344

1,429,543
1,319,667
1,736,575
1,869,966
593,166

-13,432
5,984
-26,160
827
2,472

41,223,534
39,792,114
52,133,417
54,473,146
17,092,043

919,492
1,221,387
1,367,028
2,345,871
750,886

555
580
577
560
554

18
15
23
24
22

Maryland......................
Massachusetts..............
Michigan ......................
Minnesota.....................
Mississippi ....................

147,158
191,824
259,556
156,031
63,207

622
6,848
5,809
487
-748

2,421,899
3,276,224
4,476,659
2,609,669
1,111,255

16,392
21,104
-107,880
1,325
-25,520

92,644,873
147,348,234
167,385,129
95,479,188
28,806,869

5,096,016
3,574,494
-2,295,158
3,107,396
151,385

736
865
719
704
499

36
16
7
23
14

Missouri ......... ..............
Montana.......................
Nebraska.....................
Nevada ........................
New Hampshire .............

163,121
40,477
52,653
49,635
46,070

138
2,136
836
1,770
171

2,652,876
383,905
883,920
1,043,748
610,192

-23,960
4,862
1,516
25,919
3,685

86,009,694
9,672,371
25,083,293
34,569,506
21,650,267

2,000,438
472,112
646,745
1,717,063
582,754

623
485
546
637
682

19
18
13
16
14

New Jersey...................
New Mexico..................
New York......................
North Carolina...............
North Dakota.................

256,536
48,439
538,898
224,426
23,326

-13,793
522
9,822
2,208
38

3,876,194
729,422
8,423,312
3,805,498
311,632

-1,221
12,293
-47,446
-57,272
2,412

171,793,642
20,935,825
393,598,666
121,866,007
8,011,085

2,443,618
1,216,191
9,383,346
1,858,872
378,510

852
552
899
616
494

12
23
27
19
19

Ohio.............................
Oklahoma .....................
Oregon.........................
Pennsylvania ................
Rhode Island.................

285,567
90,603
111,073
331,405
33,636

4,705
1,574
2,150
16,187
311

5,434,769
1,463,622
1,596,753
5,552,366
468,952

-77,865
11,771
-11,175
-5,535
1,351

180,885,154
41,004,250
53,018,365
194,211,696
15,758,369

1,681,299
1,821,743
317,098
5,158,632
507,610

640
539
639
673
646

15
20
9
19
19

South Carolina..............
South Dakota................
Tennessee ....................
Texas ...........................
Utah .............................

114,979
27,365
125,165
494,088
68,607

5,613
221
140
4,509
2,470

1,786,899
364,715
2,625,746
9,350,770
1,050,674

-33,210
598
-41,005
62,437
6,551

52,275,679
9,337,014
82,762,402
337,047,962
31,600,715

986,967
306,302
1,275,641
12,484,223
1,082,204

563
492
606
693
578

21
15
18
21
16

Vermont.......................
Virginia.........................
Washington...................
West Virginia.................
Wisconsin .....................
Wyoming.......................

24,156
195,639
221,450
46,620
148,227
21,288

287
3,048
1,775
-186
2,374
429

298,020
3,436,172
2,689,507
685,754
2,717,660
237,278

1,558
8,411
-14,921
-845
-18,388
6,446

9,011,468
126,222,350
100,746,663
19,187,832
85,713,725
6,654,092

439,492
5,662,779
413,740
726,836
1,733,629
459,596

581
706
720
538
607
539

25
30
7
21
17
23

Puerto Rico...................
Virgin Islands................

51,733
3,236

-633
-17

1,007,919
44,330

-18,234
1,981

19,884,381
1,294,885

578,173
120,936

379
562

17
29

NOTE: Detail may not add to totals due to rounding.

Digitized for62
FRASER
Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

April 2003


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

21. Annual data: Employment and average annual pay for all workers
covered under Ul and UCFE in the 249 largest U.S. counties
E m p lo y m e n t
C o u n ty 1
2 00 1

P e rc e n t
change,
2 0 0 0 -2 0 0 1

2

A v e ra g e a n n u a l pay
R anked by
p e rc e n t
change,
2 0 0 0 -2 0 0 1 3

2 00 1

P e rc e n t
change,
2 0 0 0 -2 0 0 1 2

-.1

-

36,219

2.5

Jefferson, AL.................
Madison, AL...................
Mobile, AL.....................
Montgomery, AL............
Anchorage, AK ..............
Maricopa, AZ.................
Pima, AZ.......................
Pulaski, AR....................
Alameda, CA.................
Contra Costa, CA...........

380,680
156,169
167,000
129,878
133,842
1,561,773
326,917
240,754
697,181
337,444

-1.0
1.3
-1.5
-.9
3.1
1.2
-.6
-.7
-.1
.7

197
54
212
192
16
61
170
175
135
80

35,453
37,089
29,502
29,979
37,998
35,689
30,690
32,261
46,489
44,744

4.2
3.5
3.1
3.8
3.7
1.6
5.1
4.7
3.1
5.7

Fresno, CA ....................
Kern, CA.......................
Los Angeles, CA............
Marin, CA......................
Monterey, CA.................
Orange, CA....................
Placer, CA .....................
Riverside, CA..................
Sacramento, CA............
San Bernardino, CA........

322,084
242,232
4,103,370
111,939
166,186
1,411,944
116,185
491,535
588,426
545,113

-.1
1.5
.6
1.3
.8
1.6
6.1
4.2
3.0
2.8

136
49
87
55
75
46
1
8
18
21

27,878
30,106
40,891
43,547
31,735
40,252
34,773
29,971
39,173
30,995

6.5
5.3
3.1
2.2
5.9
2.6
4.1
2.8
3.8
3.6

San Diego, CA...............
San Francisco, CA..........
San Joaquin, CA............
San Mateo, CA..............
Santa Barbara, CA .........
Santa Clara, CA.............
Santa Cruz, CA..............
Solano, CA ....................
Sonoma, CA..................
Stanislaus, CA...............

1,218,982
586,085
204,504
369,868
177,234
1,002,637
102,669
121,402
194,922
164,473

2.0
-3.3
1.9
.1
.8
-2.3
.9
3.0
2.1
2.2

37
246
39
120
76
233
64
19
32
30

38,418
61,068
30,818
62,288
33,626
65,931
35,022
33,496
36,145
29,591

2.3
6.1
5.3
-7.2
3.2
-13.5
-2.2
5.7
1.1
4.9

Tulare, CA .....................
Ventura, CA...................
Adams, CO....................
Arapahoe, CO................
Boulder, CO...................
Denver, CO....................
El Paso, CO...................
Jefferson, CO ................
Larimer, CO...................
Fairfield, CT...................

132,878
293,208
146,043
285,963
184,755
461,996
240,100
210,375
121,880
421,211

.0
1.5
.6
-.2
3.2
-.6
.9
.1
2.3
-1.0

130
50
88
144
13
171
65
121
29
198

24,732
37,783
34,753
44,999
44,310
46,134
34,391
37,819
33,248
63,163

4.2
1.9
4.0
-2.7
-2.8
4.0
4.1
4.5
2.6
3.3

Hartford, CT...................
New Haven, CT .............
New London, CT............
New Castle, DE .............
Washington, DC ............
Alachua, FL...................
Brevard, FL....................
Broward, FL...................
Collier, FL .....................
Duval, FL......................

497,280
363,265
124,684
282,318
635,734
119,148
184,725
663,954
110,230
436,663

-.5
-1.1
1.6
.2
-.2
.7
1.7
2.1
5.9
1.8

163
201
47
112
145
81
43
33
2
41

45,050
39,483
38,505
42,849
55,909
26,917
32,798
33,966
30,839
33,721

Hillsborough, FL .............
Lee, FL .........................
Leon, FL .......................
Manatee, FL..................
Miami-Dade, FL.............
Orange, FL ....................
Palm Beach, FL.............
Pinellas, FL....................
Polk, FL ........................

121,285
595J68
171,902
142,981
118,788
993,834
602,668
499,688
448,788
184,471

.8
1.8
4.5
.9
5.2
1.6
.2
3.9
3.3
.1

77
42
5
66
4
48
113
9
12
122

28 610
32^874
29,432
30,287
26,629
34,524
32,218
35,957
31,742
28,890

3.2
2.9
4.8
5.8
5.6
2.9
2.2
2.2
2.9
2.9
71
3.7
4.6
3.5
4.4
3.6
3.5
2.1
1.5
3.6

Sarasota, FL..................
Seminole, FL .................
Volusia, FL.....................
Chatham, GA.................
Clayton, GA...................
Cobb, GA......................
Dekalb, GA....................
Fulton, GA ....................
Gwinnett, GA.................
Richmond, GA...............

147,206
145,147
142,478
122,608
114,982
301,520
305,903
754,870
289,538
104,694

4.5
2.2
-.2
-.2
-.3
-.1
-.7
.1
2.9
-.9

6
31
146
147
151
137
176
123
20
193

29,030
31,951
26,064
30,549
38,301
40,174
39,648
47,761
39,405
29,431

1.9
3.6
3.9
3.0
4.2
3.6
2.7
1.5
.9
2.9

United States4................ 129,635,800

See footnotes at end of table.

Monthly Labor Review

April 2003

63

Current Labor Statistics:

Labor Force Data

21. Continued—Annual data: Employment and average annual pay for
all workers covered under Ul and UCFE in the 249 largest U.S.
counties
E m p lo y m e n t
C o u n ty 1
2 00 1

P e rc e n t
change,
2 0 0 0 -2 0 0 1

2

A v e ra g e a n n u a l pay
R anked by
p e rce n t
change,
2 0 0 0 -2 0 0 1 3

2 00 1

P e rc e n t
change,
2 0 0 0 -2 0 0 1 2

Honolulu, HI...................
Ada, ID..........................
Cook, IL........................
Du Page, IL....................
Kane, ÏL........................
Lake, IL.........................
Peoria, IL......................
Sangamon, IL................
Will, IL...........................
Winnebago, IL ...............

409,669
182,309
2,630,768
580,938
194,374
316,150
102,764
145,195
145,570
139,815

.4
2.7
-1.5
-.2
-.1
-.3
-1.8
.2
.1
-2.9

99
23
213
148
138
152
223
114
124
241

32,531
33,081
44,108
43,470
33,362
43,970
33,288
36,259
34,280
31,951

2.1
-4.0
2.8
2.1
3.7
3.2
6.1
4.3
6.1
1.4

Allen, IN........................
Elkhart, IN.....................
Lake, IN ........................
Marion, IN............. ........
St. Joseph, IN................
Vanderburgh, IN ............
Linn, IA .........................
Polk, IA.........................
Johnson, KS..................
Sedgwick, KS ................

183,329
113,524
194,624
591,406
124,967
109,418
119,914
263,469
292,984
249,863

-2.3
-6.8
-1.9
-1.3
-3.1
.1
-1.7
-.2
2.4
.1

234
249
226
210
244
125
219
149
27
126

32,830
30,797
32,017
37,885
30,769
30,494
34,649
34,944
37,204
33,937

1.7
1.5
1.4
3.8
3.7
3.1
1.6
3.8
-.1
3.8

Shawnee, KS.................
Fayette, KY....................
Jefferson, KY.................
Caddo, LA.....................
East Baton Rouge, LA....
Jefferson, LA .................
Lafayette, LA.................
Orleans, LA....................
Cumberland, ME............
Anne Arundel, MD..........

100,462
167,714
431,347
120,877
243,392
213,911
119,294
263,427
168,147
200,174

.3
-2.4
-1.7
1.3
-1.1
-.4
4.5
.1
1.3
2.8

105
237
220
56
202
160
7
127
57
22

30,513
32,237
34,688
29,354
30,397
29,326
32,364
32,880
32,327
37,190

3.9
5.0
4.1
2.0
3.9
4.6
8.2
3.7
5.1
4.9

Baltimore, MD................
Howard, MD...................
Montgomery, MD...........
Prince Georges, MD.......
Baltimore City, MD..........
Bristol, MA ....................
Essex, MA ....................
Hampden, MA................
Middlesex, MA...............
Norfolk, MA....................

360,128
132,935
449,881
304,022
381,155
218,818
306,111
204,824
850,295
327,067

.2
1.3
.9
.5
.4
-1.1
.2
.9
1.4
.7

115
58
67
94
100
203
116
68
52
82

36,240
40,191
45,893
38,986
40,508
32,012
39,242
33,357
51,734
44,173

6.2
6.1
5.0
5.2
5.0
4.1
.5
3.6
.0
2.2

Plymouth, MA................
Suffolk, MA ....................
Worcester, MA...............
Genesee, Ml..................
Ingham, Ml....................
Kalamazoo, Ml...............
Kent, Ml ........................
Macomb, Ml...................
Oakland, Ml ...................
Ottawa, Ml .....................

166,471
602,983
321,044
160,442
174,290
116,728
339,510
326,600
755,451
115,880

.8
.1
.3
-3.0
-.3
-1.7
-1.8
-3.2
-1.4
-2.5

78
128
106
242
153
221
224
245
211
239

34,929
58,906
37,299
35,995
35,753
33,908
34,570
40,481
45,038
32,246

3.4
4.0
-.9
-.9
2.3
3.8
1.7
-1.0
1.2
.9

Washtenaw, Ml..............
Wayne, Ml .....................
Anoka, MN.....................
Dakota, MN....................
Hennepin, MN................
Ramsey, MN..................
Hinds, MS.....................
Greene, MO...................
Jackson, MO..................
St. Louis, MO.................

195,562
848,463
109,521
155,662
863,674
333,380
134,285
140,739
384,942
641,151

.2
-2.4
-.3
1.3
-.8
.0
-.9
-.9
-2.3
-.8

117
238
154
59
186
131
194
195
235
187

40,249
42,968
34,585
35,683
45,495
40,400
31,138
28,065
37,405
38,929

.2
1.2
1.9
3.8
3.8
3.4
1.8
4.1
3.7
2.1

St. Louis City, MO...........
Douglas, NE ..................
Lancaster, NE................
Clark, NV ......................
Washoe, NV ..................
Hillsborough, NH ............
Rockingham, NH ............
Atlantic, NJ ....................
Bergen, NJ.....................
Burlington, NJ................

245,192
325,629
148,200
720,184
193,571
192,712
130,917
141,240
453,626
187,398

-2.2
-.7
.9
3.2
2.4
.0
.7
.9
1.5
3.6

231
177
69
14
28
132
83
70
51
11

40,834
32,866
29,352
32,648
34,231
39,320
36,642
32,555
46,828
38,776

5.8
1.6
2.9
1.6
4.5
.3
2.3
4.8
1.1
3.1

See footnotes at end of table.


64 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

April 2003


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

21. Continued—Annual data: Employment and average annual pay for
all workers covered under Ul and UCFE in the 249 largest U.S.
counties
E m p lo y m e n t
C o u n ty 1
2 00 1

P e rc e n t
change,
2 0 0 0 -2 0 0 1

2

A v e ra g e a n n u a l p ay
R anked by
p e rc e n t
change,
2 0 0 0 -2 0 0 1 3

2 00 1

P e rc e n t
change,
2 0 0 0 -2 0 0 1 2

Camden, NJ...................
Essex, NJ .....................
Hudson, NJ....................
Mercer, NJ.....................
Middlesex, NJ................
Monmouth, NJ ...............
Morris, NJ .....................
Ocean, NJ......................
Passaic, NJ....................
Somerset, NJ.................

199,869
361,569
237,253
215,524
399,332
240,757
277,653
133,657
175,108
176,713

.5
-.5
.0
2.6
1.3
3.2
.4
3.7
-1.1
1.7

95
164
133
25
60
15
101
10
204
44

36,530
46,526
47,638
46,831
47,726
40,399
53,829
31,034
39,192
55,769

4.0
4.2
.4
4.9
2.7
1.8
-11.0
1.9
3.8
1.8

Union, NJ......................
Bernalillo, NM ................
Albany, NY.....................
Bronx, NY.....................
Dutchess, NY.................
Erie, NY........................
Kings, NY......................
Monroe, NY ...................
Nassau, NY ...................
New York, NY................

236,609
309,166
229,957
214,227
112,912
454,839
439,343
393,783
593,368
2,342,338

-.1
.7
-.5
.4
2.5
-1.1
-.1
-.7
-.8
-1.5

139
84
165
102
26
205
140
178
188
214

46,204
31,663
37,848
34,248
38,748
32,103
31,952
36,597
40,599
74,883

2.0
4.9
5.7
4.3
7.4
1.9
3.9
3.3
1.4
3.2

Oneida, NY....................
Onondaga, NY...............
Orange, NY....................
Queens, NY...................
Rockland, NY.................
Suffolk, NY.....................
Westchester, NY............
Buncombe, NC..............
Cumberland, NC............
Durham, NC...................

108,686
249,754
120,903
478,661
107,348
581,938
404,974
105,378
106,381
169,609

-1.8
-1.1
.7
-.7
.4
.1
-.4
-.3
-2.8
.3

225
206
85
179
103
129
161
155
240
107

28,381
33,469
30,218
36,963
38,720
38,706
48,716
28,701
26,981
48,076

4.0
3.0
2.9
5.7
3.9
2.2
3.5
3.8
3.3
-2.6

Forsyth, NC ...................
Guilford, NC...................
Mecklenburg, NC............
Wake, NC .....................
Butler, OH......................
Cuyahoga, OH...............
Franklin, OH ..................
Hamilton, OH.................
Lorain, OH.....................
Lucas, OH......................

180,155
274,077
514,036
385,777
126,863
796,353
702,628
559,852
103,115
234,678

-.7
-2.0
.3
.9
-.5
-1.6
.2
-1.1
-3.5
-1.7

180
229
108
71
166
217
118
207
247
222

34,693
33,217
41,775
36,996
32,325
37,533
36,090
38,339
32,194
33,088

2.0
3.1
3.1
4.6
2.6
2.8
3.2
2.0
.6
2.6

Mahoning, OH ...............
Montgomery, OH ............
Stark, OH......................
Summit, OH...................
Oklahoma, OK...............
Tulsa, OK......................
Clackamas, OR .............
Lane, OR......................
Marion, OR ....................
Multnomah, OR .............

108,769
298,982
173,888
261,098
415,507
342,502
133,997
137,574
126,999
444,393

-3.7
-1.5
-1.6
-2.1
.4
.6
-.2
-1.9
-.6
-1.1

248
215
218
230
104
89
150
227
172
208

26,860
34,783
29,197
33,416
30,161
32,771
33,699
28,983
28,785
37,668

3.5
.7
2.4
2.1
3.2
5.2
3.7
4.0
2.4
2.4

Washington, OR ............
Allegheny, PA................
Berks, PA......................
Bucks, PA.....................
Chester, PA...................
Cumberland, PA ............
Dauphin, PA ..................
Delaware, PA.................
Erie, PA ........................
Lancaster, PA................

228,453
711,532
165,263
246,491
217,148
122,649
173,292
214,106
128,893
218,415

1.4
.3
-.7
.6
.6
-.6
.3
1.0
-2.3
-.3

53
109
181
90
91
173
110
63
236
156

42,222
38,086
32,807
35,239
44,216
33,996
34,855
38,494
29,293
31,493

-5.0
3.7
2.5
3.5
1.0
3.6
3.5
4.5
3.3
2.2

Lehigh, PA....................
Luzerne, PA...................
Montgomery, PA............
Philadelphia, PA............
Westmoreland, PA..........
York, PA .......................
Providence, Rl...............
Charleston, SC ..............
Greenville, SC ...............
Richland, SC..................

172,860
141,944
485,822
658,827
134,128
165,879
288,650
180,711
226,362
205,841

.2
-.8
.5
-.7
-.4
-1.0
-.7
-1.0
-3.0
-.5

119
189
96
182
162
199
183
200
243
167

35,564
28,924
44,366
40,813
28,827
31,936
34,566
29,013
32,622
30,591

.8
3.8
1.3
2.8
3.0
3.3
3.5
4.8
4.3
3.3

See footnotes at end of table.

Monthly Labor Review

April 2003

65

Current Labor Statistics:

Labor Force Data

21. Continued—Annual data: Employment and average annual pay for
all workers covered under Ul and UCFE in the 249 largest U.S.
counties
E m p lo y m e n t

C o u n ty 1
2 00 1

P erc en t
change,
2 0 0 0 -2 0 0 1

P e rc e n t
change,
2 0 0 0 -2 0 0 1 2

2 00 1

Spartanburg, SC.............
Minnehaha, SD..............
Davidson, TN.................
Hamilton, TN..................
Knox, TN.......................
Shelby, TN.....................
Bexar, TX......................
Cameron, TX.................
Collin, TX......................
Dallas, TX......................

117,262
106,717
434,006
187,724
203,470
496,647
655,195
111,374
181,007
1,550,835

-2.2
1.1
-.1
-.3
.6
-.5
.9
2.1
5.7
-.6

232
62
141
157
92
168
72
34
3
174

31,856
29,205
35,509
31,240
30,765
35,791
31,032
22,142
41,338
44,909

4.1
3.5
1.9
2.2
2.2
4.2
3.7
2.7
2.0
1.2

Denton, TX ....................
El Paso, TX....................
Harris, TX ......................
Hidalgo, TX....................
Jefferson, TX.................
Lubbock, TX ..................
Nueces, TX....................
Tarrant, TX ....................
Travis, TX.....................
Salt Lake, UT.................

122,552
248,407
1,864,100
168,610
118,764
118,042
143,470
709,162
534,861
530,497

.9
-1.2
1.7
3.1
-1.9
2.1
.7
.5
-.7
-.1

73
209
45
17
228
35
86
97
184
142

30,788
25,847
43,751
22,313
32,570
26,577
29,406
37,287
41,698
33,210

5.1
3.1
4.5
2.8
4.1
1.1
4.3
5.2
.9
3.2

Utah, UT.......................
Arlington, VA..................
Chesterfield, VA.............
Fairfax, VA.....................
Henrico, VA ...................
Norfolk, VA ....................
Richmond, VA................
Virginia Beach, VA..........
Clark, WA ......................
King, WA.......................

143,423
159,170
107,721
542,984
169,827
146,414
164,906
166,007
114,716
1,146,191

.5
.3
-.1
2.7
2.0
.8
-.7
.9
2.1
-.9

98
111
143
24
38
79
185
74
36
196

28,266
55,390
32,957
52,641
37,869
33,504
40,173
26,750
33,125
47,186

1.3
4.8
3.4
2.1
4.8
4.1
4.0
5.3
3.0
-.6

Pierce, WA.....................
Snohomish, WA.............
Spokane, WA.................
Kanawha, WV................
Brown, Wl .....................
Dane, Wl.......................
Milwaukee, Wl ...............
Waukesha, Wl ...............

238,600
209,657
190,057
111,552
141,950
279,208
522,022
224,721

-1.5
-.3
.0
-.8
-.3
1.9
-.8
.6

216
158
134
190
159
40
191
93

31,261
36,388
29,310
31,601
32,631
34,097
35,736
37,092

4.7
3.6
-1.5
4.8
3.5
3.9
2.9
3.7

San Juan, PR ................

324,791

-.5

169

22,179

4.1

1 Includes areas not officially designated as
counties.
See Notes on Current Labor
Statistics.
2 Percent changes were computed from
annual employment and pay data adjusted for
noneconomic county reclassifications. See
Notes on Current Labor Statistics.
3 Rankings for percent change in
employment are based on the 249 counties that
are comparable over the year.

22.

2

A v e ra g e a n n u a l p ay
Ranked by
p e rc e n t
change,
2 0 0 0 -2 0 0 1 3

4
Totals for the United States do not include
data for Puerto Rico.
Note: Data pertain to workers covered by
Unemployment
Insurance
(Ul)
and
Unemployment Compensation for Federal
Employees (UCFE) programs. The 248 U.S.
counties comprise 66.2 percent of the total
covered workers in the United States.

Annual data: Employment status of the population

[Numbers in thousands]____________________________________
Employment status

Civilian noninstitutional population.........
Civilian labor force.............................
Labor force participation rate............
Employed....................................
Employment-population ratio.......
Unemployed................................
Unemployment rate....................
Not in the labor force.........................

Monthly Labor Review
Digitized for 66
FRASER
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

194,838
129,200
66.3
120,259
61.7
8,940
6.9
65,638

196,814
131,056
66.6
123,060
62.5
7,996
6.1
65,758

198,584
132,304
66.6
124,900
62.9
7,404
5.6
66,280

200,591
133,943
66.8
126,708
63.2
7,236
5.4
66,647

203,133
136,297
67.1
129,558
63.8
6,739
4.9
66,836

205,220
137,673
67.1
131,463
64.1
6,210
4.5
67,547

207,753
139,368
67.1
133,488
64.3
5,880
4.2
68,385

212,577
142,583
67.1
136,891
64.4
5,692
4.0
69,994

215,092
143,734
66.8
136,933
63.7
6,801
4.7
71,359

217,570
144,863
66.6
136,485
62.7
8,378
5.8
72,707

April 2003

23.

Annual data: Employment levels by industry

[In thousands]
Industry

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

Total employment...................................
Private sector.......................................
Goods-producing...............................
Mining............................................
Construction...................................
Manufacturing.................................

110,713
91,872
23,352
610
4,668
18,075

114,163
95,036
23,908
601
4,986
18,321

117,191
97,885
24,265
581
5,160
18,524

119,608
100,189
24,493
580
5,418
18,495

122,690
103,133
24,962
596
5,691
18,675

125,865
106,042
25,414
590
6,020
18,805

128,916
108,709
25,507
539
6,415
18,552

131,720
111,018
25,669
543
6,653
18,473

131,922
110,989
24,944
565
6,685
17,695

130,793
109,531
23,836
557
6,555
16,725

Service-producing..............................
Transportation and public utilities......
Wholesale trade..............................
Retail trade.....................................
Finance, insurance, and real estate....
Services.........................................

87,361
5,811
5,981
19,773
6,757
30,197

90,256
5,984
6,162
20,507
6,896
31,579

92,925
6,132
6,378
21,187
6,806
33,117

95,115
6,253
6,482
21,597
6,911
34,454

97,727
6,408
6,648
21,966
7,109
36,040

100,451
6,611
6,800
22,295
7,389
37,533

103,409
6,834
6,911
22,848
7,555
39,055

106,051
7,031
6,947
23,337
7,578
40,457

106,978
7,065
6,776
23,522
7,712
40,970

106,957
6,773
6,671
23,306
7,761
41,184

18,841
19,128
19,305
19,419
2,915
2,870
2,822
2,757
4,488
4,576
4,635
4,606
11,438
11,682
11,849
12,056
NOTE: See "Notes on the data" for a description of the most recent benchmark revision.

19,557
2,699
4,582
12,276

19,823
2,686
4,612
12,525

20,206
2,669
4,709
12,829

20,702
2,777
4,786
13,139

20,933
2,616
4,885
13,432

21,262
2,619
4,947
13,695

Government...................................
Federal.......................................
State...........................................
Local...........................................

24. Annual data: Average hours and earnings of production or nonsupervisory workers on nonfarm
payrolls, by industry
Industry

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

P r iv a t e s e c t o r :

Average weekly hours.........................................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars).....................
Average weekly earnings (in dollars)....................

34.5
10.83
373.64

34.7
11.12
385.86

34.5
11.43
394.34

34.4
11.82
406.61

34.6
12.28
424.89

34.6
12.78
442.19

34.5
13.24
456.78

34.5
13.76
474.72

34.2
14.32
489.74

34.1
14.77
503.66

44.3
14.60
646.78

44.8
14.88
666.62

44.7
15.30
683.91

45.3
15.62
707.59

45.4
16.15
733.21

43.9
16.91
742.35

43.2
17.05
736.56

43.1
17.22
742.18

43.5
17.56
763.86

42.9
17.76
761.90

38.5
14.38
553.63

38.9
14.73
573.00

38.9
15.09
587.00

39.0
15.47
603.33

39.0
16.04
625.56

38.9
16.61
646.13

39.1
17.19
672.13

39.3
17.88
702.68

39.3
18.34
720.76

38.8
18.87
732.16

41.4
11.74
486.04

42.0
12.07
506.94

41.6
12.37
514.59

41.6
12.77
531.23

42.0
13.17
553.14

41.7
13.49
562.53

41.7
13.90
579.63

41.6
14.37
597.79

40.7
14.83
603.58

40.9
15.30
625.77

39.3
13.55
532.52

39.7
13.78
547.07

39.4
14.13
556.72

39.6
14.45
572.22

39.7
14.92
592.32

39.5
15.31
604.75

38.7
15.69
607.20

38.4
16.21
622.46

38.2
16.79
641.38

38.3
17.29
662.21

38.2
11.74
448.47

38.4
12.06
463.10

38.3
12.43
476.07

38.3
12.87
492.92

38.4
13.45
516.48

38.3
14.07
538.88

38.3
14.59
558.80

38.5
15.22
585.97

38.2
15.86
605.85

38.4
16.21
622.46

28.8
7.29
209.95

28.9
7.49
216.46

28.8
7.69
221.47

28.8
7.99
230.11

28.9
8.33
240.74

29.0
8.74
253.46

29.0
9.09
263.61

28.9
9.46
273.39

28.9
9.77
282.82

29.0
10.04
291.16

35.8
11.35
406.33

35.8
11.83
423.51

35.9
12.32
442.29

35.9
12.80
459.52

36.1
13.34
481.57

36.4
14.07
512.15

36.2
14.62
529.24

36.4
15.14
551.10

36.1
15.80
570.38

36.1
16.35
590.24

32.5
10.78
350.35

32.5
11.04
358.80

32.4
11.39
369.04

32.4
11.79
382.00

32.6
12.28
400.33

32.6
12.84
418.58

32.6
13.37
435.86

32.7
13.93
455.51

32.7
14.67
479.71

32.6
15.24
496.82

M in in g :

Average weekly hours.......................................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars)...................
Average weekly earnings (in dollars)..................
C o n s t r u c t io n :

Average weekly hours.......................................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars)...................
Average weekly earnings (in dollars)..................
M a n u f a c t u r in g :

Average weekly hours.......................................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars)...................
Average weekly earnings (in dollars)..................
T r a n s p o r t a t io n a n d p u b lic u tilitie s :

Average weekly hours.......................................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars)...................
Average weekly earnings (in dollars)..................
W h o le s a l e t r a d e :

Average weekly hours.......................................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars)...................
Average weekly earnings (in dollars)..................
R e ta il t r a d e :

Average weekly hours.......................................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars)................... .
Average weekly earnings (in dollars)..................
F in a n c e , i n s u r a n c e , a n d re a l e s t a te :

Average weekly hours.......................................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars)....................
Average weekly earnings (in dollars)..................
S e r v ic e s :

Average weekly hours.......................................
Average hourly earnings (in dollars)................... .
Average weekly earnings (in dollars)..................


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Monthly Labor Review

April 2003

67

Current Labor Statistics:

25.

Compensation & Industrial Relations

Employment Cost Index, compensation,1by occupation and industry group

[June 1989 = 100]
2000
Series

Sept.

2001
Mar.

June

2002

Sept.

Dec.

Mar.

June

Percent change

Sept.

Dec.

3 months
ended

12 months
ended

Dec.2002
C iv ilia n w o r k e r s 2.......................................................................................

Workers, by occupational group:
White-collar workers...................................................
Professional specialty and technical............................
Executive, adminitrative, and managerial.....................
Administrative support, including clerical.....................
Blue-collar workers.....................................................
Service occupations...................................................
Workers, by industry division:
Goods-produdng........................................................
Manufacturing..........................................................
Service-producing......................................................
Services..................................................................
Health services.......................................................
Hospitals..............................................................
Educational services...............................................
Public administration3.................................................
Nonmanufacturing......................................................
P r iv a te in d u s t r y w o r k e r s ....................................................................

Excluding sales occupations.....................................
Workers, by occupational group:
White-collar workers..................................................
Excluding sales occupations...................................
Professional specialty and technical occupations........
Executive, adminitrative, and managerial occupations..
Sales occupations...................................................
Administrative support occupations, including clerical...
Blue-collar workers...................................................
Precision production, craft, and repair occupations.....
Machine operators, assemblers, and inspectors..........
Transportation and material moving occupations.........
Handlers, equipment cleaners, helpers, and laborers....

149.5

152.5

153.8

155.6

156.8

158.4

159.9

161.3

162.2

0.6

3.4

151.5
150.0
153.7
151.8
145.6
148.5

154.4
153.2
156.6
155.3
148.2
152.0

156.0
154.3
158.6
156.8
149.3
153.3

157.7
156.7
159.6
158.8
151.1
155.0

158.9
157.5
161.2
160.0
152.0
156.9

160.5
158.5
163.7
162.0
153.7
158.4

162.1
159.3
165.6
163.3
155.1
159.4

163.5
161.4
166.3
164.9
156.4
161.3

164.3
162.4
166.7
166.1
157.5
162.2

.5
.6
.2
.7
.7
.6

3.4
3.1
3.4
3.8
3.6
3.4

148.0
148.7
150.1
151.2
149.0
149.5
149.7
146.9
149.6
149.9
149.8

150.7
151.3
153.0
154.3
152.5
153.2
151.7
150.6
152.6
153.0
153.0

152.2
152.6
154.4
155.4
154.6
155.6
152.2
151.9
154.0
154.5
154.4

153.2
153.3
156.4
158.1
156.7
158.2
156.1
153.8
156.0
155.9
156.0

154.4
154.6
157.6
159.0
158.3
160.0
156.6
155.2
157.2
157.2
157.2

156.3
156.6
159.1
160.2
160.5
162.3
157.1
156.5
158.7
158.9
159.0

157.7
158.1
160.7
161.1
161.8
163.8
157.4
157.5
160.2
160.7
160.5

158.7
159.1
162.2
163.2
163.1
165.7
161.6
160.2
161.7
161.6
161.6

169.2
160.5
162.8
163.9
164.5
167.6
162.8
161.7
162.4
162.3
162.4

.9
.9
.4
.4
.9
1.1
.7
.9
.4
.4
.5

3.8
3.8
3.3
3.1
3.9
4.8
4.0
4.2
3.3
3.2
3.3

152.6
152.9
152.2
154.4
151.2
152.3
145.5
145.8
146.0
139.9
149.4

155.7
156.5
156.3
157.3
152.3
156.1
148.2
148.7
148.3
142.6
152.2

157.4
158.1
157.5
159.4
154.5
157.7
149.3
149.7
149.1
143.9
153.4

158.7
159.6
159.2
160.2
155.0
159.5
151.0
151.8
150.4
145.6
154.9

160.1
160.9
160.3
161.8
156.7
160.8
151.9
152.5
151.5
146.3
156.5

161.9
162.8
161.5
164.4
157.7
162.8
153.6
153.7
153.6
148.7
158.7

163.8
164.3
162.5
166.6
161.6
164.2
155.1
155.7
154.7
149.6
159.9

164.6
165.3
163.6
167.0
161.6
165.6
156.3
156.9
155.4
151.0
161.4

165.2
165.9
164.4
167.2
161.9
166.7
157.3
157.8
156.7
151.8
162.9

.4
.4
.5
.1
.2
.7
.6
.6
.8
.5
.9

3.2
3.1
2.6
3.3
3.3
3.7
3.6
3.5
3.4
3.8
4.1

Service occupations..................................................
Production and nonsupervisory occupations4..............

146.6

150.0

151.3

152.6

154.8

156.4

157.4

159.0

159.8

.5

3.2

148.4

151.4

152.7

154.3

155.5

157.1

158.7

159.7

160.5

.5

3.2

Workers, by industry division:
Goods-producing......................................................
Excluding sales occupations................................
White-collar occupations........................................
Excluding sales occupations................................
Blue-collar occupations..........................................
Construction...........................................................
Manufacturing........................................................
White-collar occupations........................................
Excluding sales occupations................................
Blue-collar occupations..........................................
Durables...............................................................
Nondurables..........................................................

147.9
147.2
151.3
149.6
145.8
145.1
148.7
151.4
149.3
146.7
149.4
147.5

150.7
150.1
154.5
153.0
148.2
148.2
151.3
154.2
152.2
149.1
151.8
150.4

152.1
151.5
156.5
155.0
149.3
150.3
152.6
156.0
154.0
150.0
153.1
151.6

153.1
152.5
156.8
155.3
150.8
151.7
153.3
156.0
153.8
151.3
154.0
152.0

154.4
153.7
158.1
156.5
151.9
153.0
154.6
156.9
154.7
152.7
155.3
153.2

156.2
155.5
160.1
158.4
153.6
154.1
156.6
159.1
156.7
154.6
156.9
156.0

157.6
156.9
161.9
160.2
154.8
155.2
158.1
161.1
158.6
155.8
158.3
157.5

158.6
157.9
162.9
161.1
155.9
156.3
159.1
162.2
159.6
156.7
158.9
159.2

160.1
159.2
164.3
162.3
157.3
157.9
160.5
163.3
160.7
158.3
160.6
160.3

.9
.8
.9
.7
.9
1.0
.9
.7
.7
1.0
1.1
.7

3.7
3.6
3.9
3.7
3.6
3.2
3.8
4.1
3.9
3.7
3.4
4.6

Service-producing.....................................................
Excluding sales occupations................................
White-collar occupations........................................
Excluding sales occupations................................
Blue-collar occupations..........................................
Service occupations..............................................
Transportation and public utilities..............................
Transportation......................................................
Public utilities........................................................
Communications.................................................
Electric, gas, and sanitary services.......................
Wholesale and retail trade.......................................
Excluding sales occupations................................
Wholesale trade....................................................
Excluding sales occupations................................
Retail trade..........................................................
General merchandise stores.................................
Food stores........................................................

150.6
151.1
152.6
153.9
144.5
146.3
147.4
142.8
153.5
153.9
152.9
148.3
149.6
152.1
152.7
146.2
142.2
143.4

153.8
154.6
155.8
157.5
147.7
149.6
150.5
145.4
157.3
158.3
156.0
151.0
152.6
155.1
156.9
148.7
147.3
146.1

155.3
156.0
157.4
159.1
148.7
150.8
152.4
146.9
159.8
161.1
158.1
152.6
153.9
157.8
158.5
149.7
149.4
148.2

156.9
157.8
159.0
160.9
150.9
152.2
153.5
148.2
160.7
162.8
158.1
153.7
155.4
158.6
160.0
150.9
149.7
149.7

158.2
159.0
160.3
162.2
151.4
154.2
155.5
151.1
161.5
163.4
159.1
155.5
157.1
159.5
160.6
153.2
150.9
151.7

159.9
160.9
162.1
164.1
153.2
155.9
157.3
152.5
163.9
166.0
161.3
156.5
157.5
161.9
162.3
153.5
152.4
152.9

161.8
162.4
164.0
165.6
155.2
157.0
158.9
153.9
165.5
166.1
164.8
159.5
160.0
166.3
164.4
155.6
154.2
154.5

162.7
163.5
164.7
166.5
156.6
158.5
160.8
155.4
168.2
169.0
167.2
159.6
160.3
165.9
166.1
156.0
156.1
156.3

163.1
164.0
165.1
167.0
156.9
159.3
161.7
156.1
169.2
170.1
168.1
159.7
160.4
166.7
167.2
155.8
155.1
156.3

.2
.3
.2
.3
.2
.5
.6
.5
.6
.7
.5
.1
.1
.5
.7
-.1
-.6
.0

3.1
3.1
3.0
3.0
3.6
3.3
4.0
3.3
4.8
4.1
5.7
2.7
2.1
4.5
4.1
1.7
2.8
3.0

See footnotes at end of table.

68 Monthly Labor Review

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

April 2003

25. Continued—Employment Cost Index, compensation,1by occupation and industry group
[June 1989 = 100]
2000
Series

Dec.

2001
Mar.

June

2002

Sept.

Dec.

Mar.

June

Percent change

Sept.

Dec.

3 months
ended

12 months
ended

Dec. 2002

Finance, insurance, and real estate............................
Excluding sales occupations.................................
Banking, savings and loan, and other credit agencies.
Insurance..............................................................
Services..................................................................
Business services..................................................
Health services......................................................
Hospitals.............................................................
Educational services..............................................
Colleges and universities......................................
Nonmanufacturing....................................................
White-collar workers...............................................
Excluding sales occupations................................
Blue-collar occupations...........................................
Service occupations...............................................

155.7
158.4
166.5
155.2
154.1
158.4
150.6
151.1
159.9
159.2
151.1
153.7
155.1
144.8
147.8
148.9

157.9
161.2
170.8
157.6
156.5
160.5
152.7
153.5
162.3
162.2
153.1
155.8
157.5
146.9
149.5

159.5
163.1
172.7
159.3
157.8
163 0
154.7
155.9
162.6
162.6
154.7
157.5
159.1
148.1
150.7
151.2

150.3
Workers, by occupational group:
White-collar workers..................................................... 148.3 149.5 150.4
Professional specialty and technical............................. 147.4 148.4 149.2
Executive, administrative, and managerial....................
150.7 152.4 153.7
Administrative support, Including clerical......................
149.4 150.7 151.6
Blue-collar workers......................................................
147.2 148.6 149.0
Workers, by industry division:
Services....................................................................
148.9 149.9 150.6
148.8 150.1
151.9
Services excluding schools5.......................................
Health services......................................................
151.6 152.1
154.4
Hospitals............................................................. 152.0 152.2 154.7
Educational services............................................... 148.7 149.6 150.1
Schools..............................................................
149.0 149.9 150.5
Elementary and secondary.................................
148.1
148.5 149.0
Colleges and universities....................................
151.7 153.7 154.3
148.3 150.6 151.9
Public administration3..................................................
1 Cost (cents per hour worked) measured in the Employment Cost Index consists of
wages, salaries, and employer cost of employee benefits.
2 Consists of private industry workers (excluding farm and household workers) and
State and local government (excluding Federal Government) workers.

S t a t e a n d l o c a l g o v e r n m e n t w o r k e r s ..............................................


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

160.9
164.7
175.4
159.9
160.0
165 2
156.8
158.4
166.4
166.2
156.3
159.0
160.9
150.2
152.1

161,3
165.0
174.5
161.3
161.0
166 2
158.4
160.3
167.6
167.5
157.6
160.5
162.3
150.6
154.1

154.3

155.2

165.2
169.8
182.1
164.0
162.6
166 3
160.6
162.8
168.5
168.1
159.3
162.2
164.2
152.2
155.9
156.1

167.3
171.3
184.2
166.1
163.7
166 6
162.0
164.5
169.0
168.4
161.1
164.1
165.7
154.0
156.9
156.7

153.7
152.8
156.4
154.2
151.5

154.4
153.2
157.6
155.6
153.2

155.2
153.6
159.5
156.9
154.0

154.4
154.5
157.1
157.4
154.1
154.4
152.8
153.8
151.9

154.9
156.1
158.5
159.1
154.5
154.8
153.1
159.6
155.2

155.5
157.9
160.4
160.7
154.8
155.1
153.4
160.0
156.5

168.0
172.1
184.6
167.1
164.9

168.5
173.1
185.3
167.9
165.4

0.3
.6
.4
.5
.3

4.5
4.9
6.3
4.1
2.7

163.2
166.2
173.5
172.0
162.0
164.8
166.6
155.4
158.4

164.4
168.1
175.2
173.7
162.5
165.3
167.1
155.9
159.2

160.1

161.5

.7
1.1
1.0
1.0
.3
.3
.3
.3
.5
.9

3.8
4.9
4.5
3.7
3.1
3.0
3.0
3.5
3.3
4.1

155.7
154.1
159.6
158.0
154.7

159.3
158.1
162.3
161.0
158.4

160.7
159.4
163.8
162.4
159.8

.9
.8
.9
.9
.9

4.1
4.0
3.9
4.4
4.3

155.9
158.7
161.4
161.8
155.1
155.4
153.6
160.4
157.9

159.7
161.0
163.5
164.1
159.2
159.6
157.7
164.7
160.2

160.9
162.8
165.5
166.2
160.3
160.7
158.8
165.8
161.7

.8
1.1
1.2
1.3
.7
.7
.7
.7
.9

3.9
4.3
4.4
4.5
3.8
3.8
3.7
3.9
4.2

3 Consists of legislative, judicial, administrative, and regulatory activities.
4 This series has the same Industry and occupational coverage as the Hourly
Earnings Index, which was discontinued in January 1989.
5 Includes, for example, library, social, and health services.

Monthly Labor Review

April 2003

69

Current Labor Statistics:

26.

Compensation & Industrial Relations

Employment Cost Index, wages and salaries, by occupation and industry group

[June 1989 = 100]
2000

2001

2002

Percent change

Series
Dec.

Mar.

June

Sept.

Dec.

Mar.

June

Sept.

Dec.

3 months
ended

12 months
ended

Dec. 2002
C iv ilia n w o r k e r s 1 .........................................................................................

Workers, by occupational group:
White-collar workers.....................................................
Professional specialty and technical............................
Executive, adminitrative, and managerial......................
Administrative support, including clerical......................
Blue-collar workers......................................................
Workers, by industry division:
Goods-produclng.........................................................
Manufacturing...........................................................
Service-producing.......................................................
Services....................................................................
Health services........................................................
Hospitals...............................................................
Educational services.................................................
Public administration2..................................................
Nonmanufacturing.......................................................
P r iv a t e in d u s t r y w o r k e r s .....................................................................

Excluding sales occupations......................................
Workers, by occupational group:
White-collar workers...................................................
Excluding sales occupations................................
Professional specialty and technical occupations.........
Executive, adminitrative, and managerial occupations..
Sales occupations....................................................
Administrative support occupations, including clerical...
Precision production, craft, and repair occupations.....
Machine operators, assemblers, and inspectors..........
Transportation and material moving occupations.........
Handlers, equipment cleaners, helpers, and laborers....
Service occupations...................................................
Production and nonsupervisory occupations3..............
Workers, by industry division:
Goods-producing.......................................................

Construction............................................................
Manufacturing..........................................................

Nondurables.................... .......................................
Excluding sales occupations.................................

Service occupations...............................................
Transportation.......................................................
Public utilities.........................................................
Communications..................................................
Wholesale and retail trade........................................
Wholesale trade.....................................................
Excluding sales occupations.................................
General merchandise stores..................................
Food stores..........................................................
See footnotes at end of table.


70 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

April 2003

147.9

149.5

150.8

152.3

153.4

154.8

156.1

157.2

157.8

0.4

2.9

150.2
149.6
152.4
149.6
142.9
147.1

151.7
151.1
154.0
151.6
144.7
148.6

153.1
152.155.8
152,7
146.0
149.7

154.5
154.2
156.7
154.6
147.6
151.2

155.6
155.1
158.1
155.7
148.5
153.0

157.0
155.6
160.7
157.3
149.7
154.2

158.4
156.2
162.6
158.4
151.0
155.1

159.6
158.0
163.5
159.6
151.9
‘56.2

160.1
158.6
163.8
160.6
152.6
156.9

.3
.4
.2
.6
.5
.4

2.9
2.3
3.6
3.1
2.8
2.5

145.3
146.5
148.9
151.0
148.3
147.3
149.6
146.1
148.1

147.0
148.5
150.5
152.6
149.8
148.8
150.5
147.6
149.7

147,6
150.0
151.7
153.6
151.8
151.2
151.0
148.7
149.7

149.5
150.7
153.4
156.2
153.7
15.5
154.6
150.3
152.6

150.5
151.7
154.5
157.1
155.5
155.5
155.1
151.6
153.8

151.8
153.1
155.9
158.1
157.3
157.2
155.3
152.5
155.0

153.1
154.5
157.2
158.8
158.5
158.6
155.6
153.4
156.4

153.9
155.4
156.4
160.7
159.6
160.3
159.3
154.8
157.5

155.1
156.5
158.8
161.1
160.9
162.2
160.1
155.8
158.0

.8
.7
.3
.2
.8
1.2
.5
.6
.3

3.1
3.2
2.8
2.5
3.5
4.3
3.2
2.8
2.7

147.7
147.6

149.4
149.5

150.9
150.8

152.1
152.2

153.3
153.3

154.7
154.9

156.3
156.1

157.0
157.0

157.5
157.9

.3
.3

2.7
2.7

150.6
151.1
150.2
153.0
148.7
150.1
142.8
142.8
143.7
137.6
146.2

152.3
153.0
152.1
154.7
149.2
152.3
144.6
144.6
145.6
139.5
148.0

153.8
154.4
153.2
156.5
151.5
153.6
145.9
145.7
146.9
140.7
149.8

154.8
155.7
154.8
157.2
151.2
155.3
147.5
147.7
148.1
142.1
151.0

156.1
156.9
155.9
158.6
152.6
156.5
148.3
148,4
149.0
142.8
152.4

157.7
158.6
156.7
161.3
153.6
158.2
149.6
149.2
150.5
144.8
154.2

159.4
160.0
157.4
163.6
157.0
159.2
150.9
151.0
151.6
145.2
155.1

160.0
169.8
158.2
164.3
156.9
160.3
151.7
151.8
152.0
146.3
156.0

160.4
160.8
158.5
164.5
156.8
161.3
152.4
152.3
153.2
146.9
157.2

.3
.3
.2
.1
-.1
.6
.5
.3
.8
.4
.8

2.8
2.8
1.7
3.7
2.8
3.1
2.8
2.6
2.8
2.9
3.1

144.9

146.4

147.5

148.7

150.6

152.0

152.8

153.9

154.4

.4

2.6

146.0

147.7

149.0

150.3

151.5

152.7

154.0

154.7

155.2

.3

2.4

145.2
144.6
148.7
147.2
143.1
140.7
146.5
149.2
147.5
144.6
147.3
145.4

147.0
146.3
150.5
148.9
144.7
142.1
148.5
151.1
149.9
146.4
149.0
147.5

148.6
147.8
152.3
150.5
146.1
143.9
150.0
152.7
150.5
147.8
150.5
149.0

149.5
148.7
152.6
150.8
147.4
145.1
150.7
152.8
150.5
149.1
151.5
149.3

150.5
149.7
153.6
151.7
148.4
146.3
151.7
153.3
151.0
150.3
151.7
153.9

151.7
150.9
155.0
152.9
149.6
147.0
153.1
154.9
152.3
151.7
153.9
151.9

153.1
152.2
156.6
154.5
150.7
148.2
154.4
156.6
153.9
152.8
155.3
153.1

153.9
153.0
157.9
155.4
151.5
149.0
155.4
157.7
155.0
153.5
156 0
154.4

155.0
154.0
158.6
156.3
152.6
150.2
156.5
158.6
155.9
154.7
157 3
155 2

.7
.7
.7
.6
.7
.8
.7
6
.6
8
8
5

3.0
2.9
3.3
30
28
2.7
3.2
35
3.2
29
31
33

148.9
149.4
150.9
152.3
142.2
144.8
142.3
138.6
147.1
147.4
146.6
147.4
149.0
151.6
153.2
145.2
142.2
141.6

150.5
151.3
152.5
154.3
144.3
146.1
143.7
139.8
148.7
149.2
148.1
148.4
150.7
151.6
154.9
146.9
143.8
143.3

151.9
152.6
154.0
155.6
145.3
147.2
145.7
141.6
151.0
151.8
149.9
150.1
151.9
154.5
156.5
147.8
145.5
144.5

153.2
154.2
155.2
157.2
147.5
148.4
146.7
142.6
152.0
153.3
150.4
150.6
153.1
154.1
157.4
148.8
145.7
145.7

151.9
156.1
157.2
158.2
148.1
149.4
149.2
145.7
153.6
155.2
151.7
152.1

156.1
157.2
158 2
160.4
149.4
151.6
150.5
147.4
154.3
155.3
153.0
153.0

157 7
158.5
159.9
161.6
151.1
152.4
152.1
148.6
156.4
157.1
155.5
155.7

158 4
159.3
160 5
162.5
151.8
153.5
153.4
149.6
158.2
159.6
156.5
155.5

158 6
159.6
160 7
162.8
152.0
154.1
154.1
150.1
159.3
160.7
157.4
155.5

.1

.2
1
.2
.1
.4
.5
.3
.7
.7
.6
.0

2J
26
27
2.6
26
26
3.3
3.0
3.7
3.5
38
2.2

154.8
157.9
150.7
146.5
146.7

157.2
159.4
150.9
147.9
148.0

161.3
161.2
152.7
148.9
148.9

160.4
162.6
152.9
150.1
150.1

161.0
163.7
152.7
149.2
150.3

•„

.4
.7
-.1

-.6
.1

4.0
3.7
13
1.8
2.5

26. Continued—Employment Cost Index, wages and salaries, by occupation and industry group
[June 1989 = 100]
2000

2001

2002

Percent change

Series
Dec.

Mar.

June

Sept.

Dec.

Mar.

June

Sept.

Dec.

3 months
ended

12 months
ended

Dec. 2002

Finance, insurance, and real estate...........................
Excluding sales occupations.................................
Banking, savings and loan, and other credit agencies.
Insurance.......................................................
Services.................................................................
Business services..................................................
Health services......................................................
Hospitals.............................................................
Educational services..............................................
Colleges and universities.......................................

151.7
154.1
165.7
150 8
151.8
156.0
148.1
146.8
154.3
152.9

Nonmanufacturing....................................................
White-collar workers...............................................
Excluding sales occupations................................
Blue-collar occupations...........................................
Service occupations...............................................

153.9
156.6
169.4
153.8
158 2
149.8
148.5
155.4
154.1

154.6
157.6
170.8
153 3
155.0
160 8
151.8
151.0
156 1
155.0

147.9
150.6
151.9
140.9
144.7

149.5
152.3
153.9
142.8
146.0

150.9
153.8
155.3
143.9
147.1

State and local governm ent workers......................................

148.3

150.2

Workers, by occupational group:
White-collar workers.....................................................
Professional specialty and technical.............................
Executive, administrative, and managerial....................
Administrative support, including clerical......................
Blue-collar workers......................................................

148.0
148.2
148.8
146.2
145.1

149.0
149.1
150.1
147 0
146.0

152 4

155.8
159.1
173.2
153 fi
157.1

156.0
159.1
171.7

162 8

153.6
153.3
150 6
158.4

155.4
155.4

157.3
157.1

160 6

161 2

160.3
164.5
181.2

162.0
165.7
182.8

162.4
166.1
182.7

162.6
167.3
183.9

0.1
.7
.7

4.2
5.2
7.1

158.2

159.5

160.3

161.5

161.7

.1

2.2

168 7

164 0

159.9
160.2

160.7
162.1

.8
1.2

3.4
4.3

155 0

159.6

159.9

158.4
158.6
1fi1 2
159.9

163.1

164.3

.7

2.9

152.2
155.0
156.9
145.8
148.2

153.5
156.4
158.3
146.4
150.1

155.0
158.0
160.1
147.5
151.4

156.5
159.6
161.3
149.0
152.3

157.2
160.2
162.1
149.8
153.4

157.5
160.5
162.5
150.2
154.0

.2
.2
.2
.3
.4

2.6
2.6
2.7
2.6
2.6

151.2

154.3

155.2

156.1

156.7

160.1

161.5

.6

3.2

149.8
149.8
151.5
147 6
146.5

152.7
153.0
153.9
140 8
149.1

153.3
153.4
155.1
150 Q
150.8

153.9
153.6
156.6
161 Q
151.6

154.4
154.1
156.8
162 8
152.1

157.4
157.5
159.0

158.4
158.4
160.1

.6
.6
.7

3.3
3.3
3.2

.4

2.9

154.5 155.1
Workers, by industry division:
Services....................................................................
148.7 149.5 150.2 153.7 154.2 154.6 155.0 158.4 159.2
Services excluding schools4.......................................
147.9 149.1
150.7 153.2 154.9 156.7 157.3 159.1
160.3
Health services......................................................
149.3 149.9 151.9 154.2 155.8 157.8 158.6 160.5 162.2
Hospitals............................................................. 149.2 149.5 151.8 154.2 155.7 157.7 158.8 160.6 162.5
Educational services...............................................
148.7 149.5 150.0 153.6 154.0 154.2 154.5 158.1
158.9
Schools..............................................................
148.9 149.7 150.2 153.8 154.1
154.3 154.6 158.3 159.0
Elementary and secondary.................................
148.5 149.0 149.5 152.8 153.1
153.4 153.6 157.4 158.1
Colleges and universities....................................
149.5 151.4 151.8 156.5 156.7 156.8 157.3 160.7 161.6
Public administration2.................................................. 146.1
147.6 148.7 150.3 151.6 152.5 153.4 154.8 155.8
1 Consists of private industry workers (excluding farm and household workers) and
3 This series has the same industry and occupational coverage
State and local government (excluding Federal Government) workers.
Earnings Index, which was discontinued in January 1989.
2 Consists of legislative, judicial, administrative, and regulatory activities.
4 Includes, for example, library, social, and health services.

27.

.5
.8
1.1
1.2
.5
.4
.4
.6
.6
as the Hourly

3.2
3.5
4.1
4.4
3.2
3.2
3.3
3.1
2.8

Employment Cost Index, benefits, private industry workers by occupation and industry group

[June 1989 = 100]

____________________________
2000

2001

2002

Percent change

Series
Dec.

Mar.

June

Sept.

Dec.

Mar.

June

Sept.

Dec.

3 months
ended

12 months
ended

Dec. 2002
Private industry workers............................................................

158.6

161.5

163.2

165.2

166.7

169.3

171.6

173.1

174.6

0.9

4.7

Workers, by occupational group:
White-collar workers....................................................
Blue-collar workers......................................................

161.5
154.1

165.2
155.7

167.4
156.7

169.5
158.3

171.2
159.2

173.5
162.2

176.1
164.0

177.2
166.2

178.5
167.8

.7
1.0

4.3
5.4

Workers, by industry division:
Goods-producing.........................................................
Service-producing........................................................
Manufacturing.............................................................
Nonmanufacturing.......................................................

156.2
159.4
154.8
159.7

158.5
162.6
157.1
162.9

159.6
164.6
157.9
164.9

160.8
167.1
158.5
167.4

162.6
168.4
160.4
168.6

165.8
170.7
163.7
171.1

167.4
173.3
165.5
173.5

168.8
174.9
166.8
175.2

171.0
175.9
168.9
176.3

1.3
.6
1.3
.6

5.2
4.5
5.3
4.4


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Monthly Labor Review

April 2003

71

Current Labor Statistics:

28.

Compensation & Industrial Relations

Employment Cost Index, private nonfarm workers by bargaining status, region, and area size

[June 1989 = 100]
2000

2001

2002

Percent change

Series
Dec.

Mar.

June

Sept.

Dec.

Mar.

June

Sept.

Dec.

3 months
ended

12 months
ended

Dec. 2002
C O M P E N S A T IO N
W o r k e r s , b y b a r g a in in g s ta t u s 1

Union..............................................................................
Goods-producing..........................................................
Service-producing.........................................................
Manufacturing..............................................................
Nonmanufacturing........................................................

146.9
147.3
146.4
147.4
146.2

147.9
147.9
147.6
147.9
147.3

149.5
149.3
149.5
148.8
149.4

151.0
150.6
151.2
149.9
151.1

153.1
151.6
154.2
151.4
153.5

154.8
153.4
156.0
153.4
155.0

156.3
154.7
157.6
154.6
156.6

158.1
156.2
159.9
155.9
158.8

159.5
157.8
161.1
157.9
159.9

0.9
1.9
.8
1.3
.7

4.2
4.0
4.5
4.3
4.2

Nonunion.........................................................................
Goods-producing..........................................................
Service-producing.........................................................
Manufacturing..............................................................

151.6
149.3
152.3
149.9
151.8

153.8
151.6
154.4
152.4
153.9

155.3
153.1
155.9
153.7
155.4

156.7
154.0
157.5
154.4
157.0

157.8
155.3
158.6
155.5
158.2

159.6
157.2
160.3
157.6
159.9

161.4
158.6
162.2
159.1
161.7

162.5
159.5
162.9
160.1
162.4

162.8
160.8
163.3
161.3
162.9

.4
.8
.2
.7
.3

3.2
3.5
3.0
3.7
3.0

150.3
148.6
153.3
151.8

151.6
151.1
154.8
154.3

153.7
152.3
156.0
156.0

155.2
153.5
157.4
157.6

156.3
154.6
158.6
159.4

158.3
156.2
161.1
160.4

159.9
157.6
162.2
162.9

160.5
158.9
163.5
163.8

161.3
159.0
164.6
165.0

.5
.1
.7
.7

3.2
2.8
3.8
3.5

151.0
150.3

153.1
152.1

154.6
153.7

156.0
154.8

157.4
155.6

159.1
157.5

160.9
158.5

161.8
160.0

162.5
169.8

.4
.5

3.2
3.3

Union..............................................................................
Goods-producing..........................................................
Service-producing.........................................................
Manufacturing...............................................................
Nonmanufacturing........................................................

141.2
141.3
141.5
142.6
140.4

142.1
142.4
142.2
143.9
141.1

143.7
144.2
143.7
145.5
142.7

145.1
145.3
145.4
146.7
144.3

147.4
146.3
148.9
148.0
147.1

148.4
147.2
150.0
149.0
148.1

149.8
158.6
151.4
150.2
149.6

151.3
150.0
152.9
151.6
151.1

152.5
151.2
154.1
153.1
152.1

.8
.8
.8
1.0
.7

3.5
3.3
3.5
3.4
3.4

Nonunion........................................................................
Goods-producing..........................................................
Service-producing.........................................................
Manufacturing..............................................................
Nonmanufacturing........................................................

149.0
146.8
149.6
148.0
148.9

150.8
148.8
151.4
150.1
150.7

152.2
150.3
152.7
151.6
152.0

153.4
151.1
154.1
152.2
153.3

154.4
152.1
155.1
153.1
154.4

155.9
153.5
156.7
154.7
155.9

157.5
154.8
158.3
156.1
157.5

158.1
155.5
158.9
156.8
158.1

158.5
156.6
159.0
157.8
158.3

.3
.7
.1
.6
.1

2.7
3.0
2.5
3.1
2.5

146.0
146.3
149.6
149.2

147.3
148.3
150.9
151.3

149.2
149.3
152.3
152.9

150.6
150.2
153.6
154.3

151.7
151.2
154.7
156.0

153.5
152.5
157.1
156.4

154.9
153.6
158.5
158.7

155.1
154.7
159.2
159.3

155.7
154.6
160.2
160.1

.4
-.1
.6
.5

2.6
2.2
3.6
2.6

148.0
146.0

149.8
147.4

151.2
148.8

152.4
149.7

153.7
150.5

155.1
151.7

156.7
152.6

157.4
153.8

157.9
154.8

.3
.7

2.7
2.9

W o r k e r s , b y r e g io n 1

Northeast........................................................................
South.............................................................................
Midwest (formerly North Central)......................................
W o r k e r s , b y a r e a s iz e 1

Metropolitan areas...........................................................
Other areas....................................................................
W A G E S A N D S A L A R IE S
W o r k e r s , b y b a r g a in in g s t a t u s 1

W o r k e r s , b y r e g io n 1

Northeast........................................................................
South.............................................................................
Midwest (formerly North Central)......................................
W o r k e r s , b y a r e a s iz e 1

Metropolitan areas..........................................................
Other areas....................................................................

1 The indexes are calculated differently from those for the occupation and industry groups. For a detailed description of the index calculation, see the Monthly Labor R eview
Technical Note, "Estimation procedures for the Employment Cost Index," May 1982.


72 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

April 2003

29. Percent of full-time employees participating in employer-provided benefit plans, and in selected features within plans,
medium and large private establishments, selected years, 1980-97
Ite m

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1989

1991

1993

1995

1997

21,352

21,043

21,013

21,303

31,059

32,428

31,163

28,728

33,374

38,409

20,711
20,498
17,936

20,412
20,201
17,676

20,383
20,172
17,231

20,238
20,451
16,190

27,953
28,574
19,567

29,834
30,482
20,430

25,865
29,293
18,386

23,519
26,175
16,015

25,546
29,078
17,417

29,340
33,495
19,202

Participants with:
Paid lunch time................................................
Average minutes per day.................................
Paid rest time...................................................
Average minutes per day.................................

10
75
-

9
25
76
25

9
26
73
26

Average days per occurrence...........................
Paid holidays...................................................
Average days per year....................................
Paid personal leave..........................................
Average days per year....................................
Paid vacations..................................................
Paid sick leave '...............................................
Unpaid maternity leave.....................................
Unpaid paternity leave......................................
Unpaid family leave.........................................

99
10.1
20
100
62
_

99
10.0
24
3.8
99
67
_

_
99
9.8
23
3.6
99
67
_

10
27
72
26
88
3.2
99
10.0
25
3.7
100
70
-

11
29
72
26
85
3.2
96
9.4
24
3.3
98
69
33
16

8
30
67
28
80
3.3
92
10.2
21
3.3
96
67
37
26

81
3.7
89
9.3
20
3.5
95
56

_

9
29
68
26
83
3.0
91
9.4
21
3.1
97
65
60
53
_

fin
3.3
89
9.1
22
3.3
96
58

_

10
26
71
26
84
3.3
97
9.2
22
3.1
97
68
37
18
_

84

93

97

97

97

95

90

92

83

82

77

76

58

62

46
62
8

66
70
18

76
79
28

75
80
28

81
80
30

86
82
42

78
73
56

85
78
63

26
46
96

27
51
96

36
$11.93
58
$35.93

43
$12.80
63
$41.40

61
$31.55
76
$107.42

96

47
$25.31
66
$72.10
94

51
$26.60
69
$96.97

96

44
$19.29
64
$60.07
92

94

91

67
$33.92
78
$118.33
87

69
$39.14
80
$130.07
87

69

72

74

78
8
49

71
7
42

71
6
44

76
5
41

77
7
37

74
6
33

41

42

43

53

55

Number of employees (in 000’s):
With medical care............................................
With life insurance...........................................
T im e - o f f p la n s

_

In s u r a n c e p la n s

Participants in medical care plans.........................
Percent of participants with coverage for:
Home health care...........................................
Physical exam................................................
Percent of participants with employee
contribution required for:
Self coverage................................................
Average monthly contribution..........................
Family coverage.............................................
Average montniy contrioution..........................
Participants in life insurance plans........................
Percent of participants with:
Accidental death and dismemberment
insurance......................................................
Survivor income benefits..................................
Retiree protection available...............................
Participants in long-term disability
insurance plans...............................................
Participants in sickness and accident

_

64

64

72
10
59

40

43

47

48

42

45

40

54

51

51

49

46

43

45

Participants in short-term disability plans 1..............
Retirement plans

Participants in defined benefit pension plans.........
Percent of participants with:
Normal retirement priorto age 65......................
Early retirement available.................................
Ad hoc pension increase in last 5 years..............
Terminal earnings formula...............................
Benefit coordinated with Social Security.............
Participants in defined contribution plans................
Participants in plans with tax-deferred savings
arrangements..................................................

84

84

82

76

63

63

59

56

52

50

55
98
53
45

58
97
52
45

63
97
47
54
56

-

-

_

64
98
35
57
62
60

59
98
26
55
62
45

62
97
22
64
63
48

55
98
7
56
54
48

52
95
6
61
48
49

52
96
4
58
51
55

52
95
10
56
49
57

-

-

-

33

36

41

44

43

54

55

2
5

5
12

9
23

10
36

12
52

12
38
5

13
32
7

Other benefits

Employees eligible for:
Flexible benefits plans......................................
Reimbursement accounts2.................................
_
Premium conversion plans.................................
The definitions for paid sick leave and short-term disability (previously sickness and
accident insurance) were changed for the 1995 survey. Paid sick leave now includes only
plans that specify either a maximum number of days per year or unlimited days. Shortterms disability now includes all insured, self-insured, and State-mandated plans available
on a per-disability basis, as well as the unfunded per-disability plans previously reported as
sick leave. Sickness and accident insurance, reported in years prior to this survey, included
only insured, self-insured, and State-mandated plans providing per-disability bene­


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

_

_

_

fits at less than full pay.
2 Prior to 1995, reimbursement accounts included premium conversion plans, which
specifically allow medical plan participants to pay required plan premiums with pretax
dollars. Also, reimbursement accounts that were part of flexible benefit plans were
tabulated separately.
NOTE: Dash indicates data not available.

Monthly Labor Review

April 2003

73

Current Labor Statistics:

Compensation & Industrial Relations

30. Percent of full-time employees participating in employer-provided benefit plans, and in selected features
within plans, small private establishments and State and local governments, 1987, 1990, 1992,1994, and 1996
Small private establishments

Item

1990
Scope of survey (in 000's)...........................
Number of employees (in 000’s):
With medical care....................................
With life insurance...................................
With defined benefit plan..........................
Time-off plans
Participants with:
Paid lunch time........................................
Average minutes per day.........................
Paid rest time...........................................
Average minutes per day.........................
Paid funeral leave................................. .
Average days per occurrence...................
Paid holidays...........................................
Average days per year'...........................
Paid personal leave..................................
Average days per year............................
Paid vacations.........................................
Paid sick leave2...................................... .
Unpaid leave............................................
Unpaid paternity leave..............................
Unpaid family leave..................................
Insurance plans
Participants in medical care plans.................
Percent of participants with coverage for:
Home health care...................................
Extended care facilities............................
Physical exam........................................
Percent of participants with employee
contribution required for:
Self coverage................................ .........
Average monthly contribution..................
Family coverage.....................................
Average monthly contribution..................
Participants in life insurance plans.................
Percent of participants with:
Accidental death and dismemberment
insurance..............................................
Survivor income benefits...........................
Retiree protection available.......................
Participants in long-term disability
insurance plans...................................... .
Participants in sickness and accident
insurance plans....................................... .
Participants in short-term disability plans2.....
Retirement plans
Participants in defined benefit pension plans..
Percent of participants with:
Normal retirement priorto age 65..............
Early retirement available.........................
Ad hoc pension increase in last 5 years.....
Terminal earnings formula........................
Benefit coordinated with Social Security.....
Participants in defined contribution plans.......
Participants in plans with tax-deferred savings
arrangements..........................................

1992

1994

1996

1987

1990

1992

1994

32,466

34,360

35,910

39,816

10,321

12,972

12,466

12,907

22,402
20,778
6,493

24,396
21,990
7,559

23,536
21,955
5,480

25,599
24,635
5,883

9,599
8,773
9,599

12,064
11,415
11,675

11,219
11,095
10,845

11,192
11,194
11,708

8
37
48
27
47
2.9
84
9.5
11
2.8
88
47
17
8
-

9
37
49
26
50
3.0
82
9.2
12
2.6
88
53
18
7
-

11
36
56
29
63
3.7
74
13.6
39
2.9
67
95
51
33
-

10
34
53
29
65
3.7
75
14.2
38
2.9
67
95
59
44
-

62
3.7
73
11.5
38
3.0
66
94

69

-

-

-

-

-

-

50
3.1
82
7.5
13
2.6
88
50

51
3.0
80
7.6
14
3.0
86
50

_

_

-

-

47

48

17
34
58
29
56
3.7
81
10.9
38
2.7
72
97
57
30
-

71

66

64

93

93

90

87

79
83
26

80
84
28

_

_

-

-

76
78
36

82
79
36

87
84
47

84
81
55

42
$25.13
67
$109.34
64

47
$36.51
73
$150.54
64

52
$40.97
76
$159.63
61

52
$42.63
75
$181.53
62

35
$15.74
71
$71.89
85

38
$25.53
65
$117.59
88

43
$28.97
72
$139.23
89

47
$30.20
71
$149.70
87

78
1
19

76
1
25

79
2
20

77
1
13

67
1
55

67
1
45

74
1
46

64
2
46

22

31

27

28

30

14

21

22

21

—

-

_
-

93

19

23

20

6

26

26

-

-

-

20

22

15

15

93

90

87

91

54
95
7
58
49
31

50
95
4
54
46
33

_
-

47
92

-

-

-

34

53
44
38

92
90
33
100
18
9

89
88
16
100
8
9

92
89
10
100
10
9

92
87
13
99
49
9

17

24

23

28

28

45

45

24

1
8

2
14

3
19

4
12
7

5
5

5
31

5
50

5
64

Other benefits
Employees eligible for:
Flexible benefits plans...............................
Reimbursement accounts 3........................
Premium conversion plans .......................

1 Methods used to calculate the average number of paid holidays were revised
in 1994 to count partial days more precisely. Average holidays for 1994 are
not comparable with those reported in 1990 and 1992.
2 The definitions for paid sick leave and short-term disability (previously
sickness and accident insurance) were changed for the 1996 survey. Paid sick
leave now includes only plans that specify either a maximum number of days
per year or unlimited days. Short-term disability now includes all insured, selfinsured, and State-mandated plans available on a per-disability basis, as well
as the unfunded per-disability plans previously reported as sick leave.


74 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

State and local governments

April 2003

29

Sickness and accident insurance, reported in years prior to this survey,
included only insured, self-insured, and State-mandated plans providing perdisability benefits at less than full pay.
3 Prior to 1996, reimbursement accounts included premium conversion plans,
which specifically allow medical plan participants to pay required plan
premiums with pretax dollars. Also, reimbursement accounts that were part of
flexible benefit plans were tabulated separately.
Note:

Dash indicates data not available.

31. Work stoppages involving 1,000 workers or more
Measure

Annual totals
2001

2002

2002p
Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

June

2003p

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Jan.

Dec.

Number of stoppages:
Beginning in period.........................
In effect during period.....................

29
30

19
20

0
1

1
2

1
1

2
3

3
5

1
3

3
4

1
3

3
3

1
3

2
2

1
1

1
2

Workers involved:
Beginning in period (in thousands)....
In effect during period (in thousands).

99
102

46
47

.0
1.0

1.5
2.5

2.9
2.9

4.1
7.0

5.1
9.2

1.5
5.3

6.7
8.2

3.5
6.2

13.7
13.7

1.2
13.5

4.3
4.3

1.4
1.4

17.5
18.8

Days idle:
Number (in thousands)...................
1,151
6,596
21.0
9.0
80.7 138.2
43.5
36.0
54.0
50.6
39.3 133.4
23.9
28.6
48.8
.00
.00
,00
,00
Percent of estimated workina time1....
,00
,00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
1 Agricultural and government employees are Included in the total employed and total working time; private household, forestry, and fishery employees are excluded. An explanation of
the measurement of idleness as a percentage of the total time worked is found in "Total economy’ measures of strike idleness," Monthly Labor R eview , October 1968, pp. 54—56.
2 Less than 0.005.
p= preliminary.
NOTE: Dash indicates data not available.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Monthly Labor Review

April 2003

75

Current Labor Statistics:

32.

Price Data

Consumer Price Indexes for All Urban Consumers and for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers: U.S. city average,
by expenditure category and commodity or service group

[1982-84 = 100, unless otherwise indicated]_________________________
A n n u a l a v e ra g e

2002

2003

S e r ie s
2001

2002

Feb.

M a r.

A p r.

M ay

June

J u ly

Aug.

S e p t.

O c t.

Nov.

D ec.

Jan.

Feb.

CONSUMER PRICE INDEX
FOR ALL URBAN CONSUMERS

All items..........................................................
All Items (1967= 100)........................................
Food and beverages.........................................
Food.............................................................
Food at home...............................................
Cereals and bakery products.........................
Meats, poultry, fish, and eggs.........................
Dairy and related products1...........................
Fruits and vegetables...................................
Nonalcoholic beverages and beverage
materials..................................................
Other foods at home.....................................
Sugar and sweets.......................................
Fats and oils.............................................
Other foods...............................................
Other miscellaneous foods1,2.....................
Food away fromhome1....................................
Other food away fromhome1,2.......................
Housing..........................................................
Shelter........................................................
Lodging away fromhome...............................
Owners’equivalent rent of primary residence3...
Fuels and utilities........................................
Fuels.......................................................
Fuel oil and other fuels..............................
Gas (piped) and electricity..........................
Apparel.........................................................
Men's and boys' apparel................................
Infants’and toddlers’apparel1.........................
Footwear...................................................
Transportation.................................................
New and used motor vehicles2........................
Used cars and trucks1.................................
Gasoline (all types).....................................
Public transportation.......................................
Medical care....................................................
Medical care commodities...............................
Medical care services.....................................
Professional services....................................
Hospital and related services.........................

Education and communication2..........................
Education2...................................................
Educational books and supplies....................
Tuition, other school fees, and childcare.........
Information and information processing1,2.......
Telephone services1,2...............................
Information and information processing
other than teleDhone services14................
Personal computers and peripheral
equipment1,2.....................................
Other goods and services..................................
Tobacco and smoking products........................
Personal care1..............................................
Personal care products1...............................
Personal care services1...............................
See footnotes at end of table.


76 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

177.1
530.4
173.6
173.1
173.4
193.8
161.3
167.1
212.2

179.9
538.8
176.8
176.2
175.6
198.0
162.1
168.1
220.9

177.8
532.7
176.4
175.9
176.0
197.6
161.8
170.1
223.3

178.8
535.5
176.6
176.1
176.3
197.0
162.8
169.4
225.8

179.8
538.6
176.7
176.2
176.4
198.1
162.5
168.7
223.4

179.8
538.5
176.4
175.8
175.5
198.2
162.4
169.0
221.0

179.9
538.9
176.4
175.8
175.0
198.7
161.9
168.0
217.4

180.1
539.5
176.6
176.0
175.2
198.7
162.3
167.6
217.4

180.7
541.2
176.6
176.0
174.9
198.6
162.2
167.2
217.0

181.0
542.1
176.9
176.4
175.2
198.4
161.8
166.3
218.4

181.0
543.2
177.1
176.5
175.1
198.9
161.3
166.5
217.4

181.3
543.1
177.4
176.8
175,5
198.3
162.1
167.1
219.8

180.9
541.9
177.8
177.3
176.1
197.3
162.4
167.3
224.9

181.7
544.2
178.1
177.5
176.7
199.8
161.6
166.4
227.1

183.1
548.5
178.9
178.3
177.6
201.8
164.7
167.2
223.3

139.2
159.6
155.7
155.7
176.0
108.9
173.9
113.4
179.3
176.4
200.6
192.1
118.6
206.3
106.2
150.2
135.4
129.3
142.4
129.1
127.3
125.7
119.3
129.2
123.0
154.3
150.0
101.3
142.1
158.7
124.7
124.0
104.8
183.5
210.6
272.8
247.6
278.8
246.5
338.3
104.9
101.5
105.2
118.5
295.9
341.1
93.3
92.3
99.3

139.2
160.8
159.0
155.4
177.1
109.2
178.3
117.7
183.6
180.3
208.1
199.7
118.3
214.7
108.7
143.6
127.2
115.5
134.4
128.3
124.0
121.7
115.8
126.4
121.4
152.9
148.8
99.2
140.0
152.0
116.6
116.0
106.9
190.2
207.4
285.6
256.4
292.9
253.9
367.8
1-6.2
102.6
107.9
126.0
317.6
362.1
92.3
90.8
99.7

140.0
160.4
158.5
157.2
176.3
108.0
177.0
115.8
182.6
178.5
206.1
197.7
119.3
212.2
106.8
140.0
123.7
112.3
130.6
128.6
123.5
122.0
115.3
127.2
119.5
148.4
144.1
100.1
141.2
153.9
98.2
97.6
106.1
188.0
207.3
281.0
253.7
287.7
251.4
356.4
105.9
102.9
107.3
123.2
314.4
353.9
93.1
92.0
100.3

140.1
159.9
157.2
156.4
175.9
107.8
177.1
116.3
182.5
179.1
207.0
198.2
121.9
212.8
106.8
140.2
123.8
112.8
130.7
128.7
128.2
125.2
121.3
129.9
123.5
150.5
146.3
99.6
140.7
152.1
107.7
107.1
106.5
188.5
207.9
282.0
254.1
288.9
251.9
359.4
106.1
102.9
106.6
123.3
314.2
354.1
92.0
90.8
99.1

140.1
161.5
159.6
156.5
177.8
108.0
177.2
116.9
182.9
179.5
207.5
198.5
122.1
213.3
107.2
140.3
123.8
115.1
130.6
128.9
128.8
125.6
122.2
198.9
124.5
153.7
149.6
99.3
140.4
152.8
121.4
120.8
106.8
189.0
209.7
283.2
254.8
290.2
252.5
362.4
106.5
102.9
106.2
123.3
314.4
354.1
91.2
90.0
98.2

138.0
160.0
157.9
155.9
176.1
108.9
177.6
117.1
183.3
179.7
207.5
198.8
120.1
213.7
107.6
141.5
125.1
114.4
132.1
128.9
127.1
124.3
229.4
127.4
124.5
153.8
149.5
99.1
139.8
151.8
121.4
120.8
106.8
189.9
211.3
284.1
255.4
291.2
252.9
364.5
106.4
103.1
106.6
123.5
315.6
354.6
91.9
90.7
99.3

137.5 138.3
160.8 161.0
158.0 160.2
154.6 154.9
177.4 177.3
109.0 110.1
178.2 1787.5
117.6 117.7
183.5 183.8
180.7 181.2
208.1 208.8
199.3 199.8
120.9 121.7
214.3 214.9
107.8 108.6
146.2 146.8
130.3 130.8
112.7 111.6
138.0 138.6
128.7 128.6
122.7 118.7
120.8 118.4
113.7 107.6
124.9 122.9
121.2 118.5
153.4 153.7
149.1 149.5
98.8
98.8
139.2 138.7
152.2 152.7
120.1 120.8
119.5 120.3
106.7 107.4
190.0 189.8
211.3 209.7
284.7 286.6
256.4 257.5
291.7 293.8
253.2 255.0
365.3 367.6
106.2 106.2
103.0 102.6
106.9 107.6
124.3 124.8
317.4 318.3
356.8 358.3
91.8
92.6
90.6
90.8
99.2
99.5

137.6
160.6
159.9
154.1
176.9
109.3
178.8
118.1
184.2
209.6
200.2
200.2
123.6
215.4
109.6
146.8
130.7
112.1
138.5
128.1
120.5
118.3
111.0
124.3
119.7
153.9
149.7
98.7
138.1
153.4
121.5
120.9
107.7
191.0
209.4
287.3
257.7
294.7
254.9
371.3
106.3
102.4
108.9
127.1
319.6
365.6
93.2
91.5
100.6

140.2
160.8
159.6
154.1
177.0
109.7
179.2
118.8
183.9
181.5
209.2
200.7
117.6
216.2
110.0
147.2
131.0
115.2
138.7
128.1
124.6
120.1
118.0
126.2
121.6
154.0
150.0
98.7
138.7
152.2
121.7
121.1
107 4
191.4
206.5
287.7
257.9
295.2
254.8
373.3
106.2
102.3
109.5
129.6
323.2
372.8
92.5
90.7
100.1

140.5
160.9
159.9
155.9
177.0
109.8
179.6
119.1
184.7
181.4
201.3
201.3
117.0
216.8
110.0
144.4
127.9
119.3
134.9
128.0
126.8
122.8
120.5
127.7
123.0
154.9
151.1
98.9
139.5
150.7
124 5
123.9
106 9
191 8
203.4
289.2
258.3
297.1
256.0
376.7
106.4
102.6
109.4
129.9
323.2
373.8
92.2
90.4
99.9

139.1
161.1
158.5
153.4
178.3
110.3
179.8
119.7
185.1
181.2
209.6
202.0
113.2
217.3
111.4
143.6
127.0
121.8
133.7
127.8
125.5
123.2
118.0
127.5
122.7
155.2
151 5
98.8
140 4
148.8
124 4
123.8
107 2
192 8
202.3
290.5
259.1
298.5
256.5
380.7
106.4
103.0
109.3
130.0
324.0
374.1
91.8
90.0
99.8

139.8
161.1
159.1
152.8
178.2
110.2
180.1
119.8
184.9
181.1
209.5
202.5
109.2
217.9
112.3
144.2
127.5
125.6
134.1
127.0
121.5
119.3
113.1
125.3
120.7
154.2
150 4
98.7
140 6
148.5
119 7
119.1
107 0
193 3
203.0
291.3
259.5
299.4
257.0
382.4
106.5
103.2
109.2
130.0
323.3
374.0
91.8
90.0
99.9

140.6
161.8
169.7
155.8
178.2
109.7
179.9
119.9
185.8
182.3
210.9
203.3
114.3
218.5
113.9
146.1
129.5
136.6
135.6
127.4
118.1
116.1
107 6
121.1
119.7
155.5
151 8
98.2
139 7
148.3
12fi 3
125.7
107 8
193 7
202.2
292.6
260.3
300.8
257.8
385.7
106.9
103.4
109.7
130.6
329.5
375.5
92.0
90.3
100.4

140.8
162.2
161.8
158.7
177.9
110.5
180.7
120.2
185.9
183.2
211.6
203.7
117.6
218.7
114.1
148.3
131.9
156.3
136.9
127.7
120.6
117.3
112 4
122.3
119.8
158.9
155 3
98.0
139 2
148.4
139.7
108 2
194 5
203.6
293.7
260.4
302.3
258.8
388.2
107.2
103.8
109.7
131.0
332.8
376.3
91.9
90.1
100.5

21.3

18.3

19.0

18.8

18.6

18.5

18.4

18.4

18.3

17.8

17.7

17.3

17.2

17.1

16.9

29.5
282.6
425.2
170.5
155.1
184.3

22.2
293.2
461.5
174.7
154.7
188.4

23.8
290.2
449.3
173.7
155.5
186.4

23.1
288.5
433.4
174.1
155.1
187.3

22.9
292.9
461.4
174.4
155.4
187.9

23.0
291.5
449.0
174.7
154.8
188.3

22.6
294.4
467.4
174.9
155.4
188.3

22.3
294.5
467.2
175.0
154.6
188.7

22.0
295.9
478.2
174.9
154.3
189.1

21.1
297.0
485.8
174.9
154.4
189.2

20.7
295.4
470.6
175.3
154.6
189.3

20.0
295.6
470.4
175.5
154.2
189.9

19.7
295.8
472.5
175.4
153.4
189.9

19.5
296.5
472.4
175.9
153.0
190.6

19.1
297.5
472.7
176.7
153.3
190.9

April 2003

32. Continued—Consumer Price Indexes for All Urban Consumers and for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers: U.S. city
average, by expenditure category and commodity or service group
[1982-84 = 100, unless otherwise indicated]___________
2002

A n n u a l a v e ra g e
S e rie s

2001

2002

Miscellaneous personal services..
Commodity and service group:

Feb.

M a r.

A p r.

M ay

June

J u ly

2003
Aug.

S e p t.

O c t.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

271.8

272.9

273.2

274.2

274.6

275.1

275.4

275.2

276.0

276.6

276.9

278.1

280.4

150.7
173.6
137.2
147.1
127.3

149.7
176.8
134.2
145.1
124.0

148.1
176.4
132.1
139.6
123.5

149.4
176.6
133.7
143.6
128.2

151.0
176.7
136.0
148.4
128.8

150.5
176.4
135.4
147.4
127.1

149.8
176.4
134.4
145.7
122.7

149.3
176.6
133.6
144.4
118.7

149.6
176.6
134.0
145.4
120.5

150.2
176.9
134.8
147.2
124.6

150.7
177.1
135.5
148.4
126.8

150.6
177.4
135.2
148.0
125.5

149.7
177.8
133.6
145.2
121.5

150.0
178.1
133.9
146.1
118.1

152.0
178.9
136.4
151.2
120.6

163.4
124.6
203.4
208.9
201.9
238.0

162.2
121.4
209.8
216.7
209.1
246.4

153.6
122.7
207.3
214.7
206.5
243.5

157.3
122.1
208.0
215.6
207.3
243.6

164.7
121.9
208.4
216.1
207.9
243.8

164.1
121.7
208.8
216.1
208.9
244.5

164.0
121.3
209.8
216.8
209.0
245.1

164.3
121.1
210.7
217.4
209.6
246.4

164.8
120.7
211.5
218.3
210.1
248.2

165.2
120.6
211.5
217.9
210.1
249.1

166.0
120.6
211.7
218.4
210.9
249.7

166.0
120.5
211.8
218.2
212.0
249.9

163.9
120.2
211.9
218.1
212.0
250.2

167.4
119.9
213.1
219.5
212.3
251.4

174.1
119.7
214.0
220.3
213.4
252.4

177.8
169.7
171.9
138.9
149.1
164.1
160.6
212.3
196.6
129.3
183.5
186.1
145.3
125.2
209.6

180.5
170.8
174.3
136.0
147.4
163.3
161.1
217.5
202.5
121.7
187.7
190.5
143.7
117.1
217.5

178.2
168.7
172.4
133.9
142.2
155.4
158.0
214.3
200.2
111.0
186.5
189.2
144.2
99.5
215.1

179.2
169.7
173.3
135.6
145.9
158.7
160.2
214.8
200.8
115.6
187.1
189.8
144.6
108.6
215.9

180.4
170.9
174.3
137.8
150.4
165.5
162.7
215.1
201.2
122.2
187.5
190.3
145.1
121.6
216.3

180.4
170.9
174.2
137.3
149.5
165.0
162.1
216.0
201.6
122.9
187.4
190.2
144.4
121.6
216.6

180.6
170.9
174.4
136.3
148.0
164.9
161.2
217.5
202.6
124.9
187.3
190.1
143.4
120.3
217.2

180.8
170.9
174.5
135.5
146.7
165.2
160.6
218.6
203.2
125.5
187.5
190.3
142.5
120.9
218.0

181.5
171.3
175.0
135.9
147.7
165.8
161.2
219.5
204.2
125.8
188.1
191.0
142.8
121.5
219.0

181.8
171,9
175.3
136.7
149.3
166.1
162.2
220.0
204.1
126.1
188.4
191.3
143.6
122.0
218.9

182.2
172.2
175.6
137.3
150.6
166.9
163.0
219.9
204.2
125.8
188.8
191.8
143.9
124.8
219.5

182.1
172.3
175.6
137.0
150.2
166.9
162.9
220.2
204.3
125.3
188.9
191.8
143.6
124.9
219.8

181.6
171.7
175.1
135.6
147.6
165.0
161.6
2205
204.3
123.3
188.6
191.4
142.5
120.7
219.8

182.4
172.3
175.9
135.8
148.4
168.2
162.2
221.6
205.5
127.5
189.0
191.8
141.7
127.5
221.0

183.9
174.0
177.3
138.3
153.3
174.4
165.3
222.8
206.4
135.4
189.7
192.5
142.1
142.1
221.9

173.5
516.8
173.0
172.5
172.4
193.6
161.2
167.1
210.8

175.9
523.9
176.1
176.5
175.1
197.1
162.0
167.2
222.9

173.7
517.5
175.8
175.3
175.1
197.5
161.6
170.0
222.2

174.7
520.2
176.1
175.6
175.5
197.0
162.7
169.2
224.9

175.8
523.7
176.1
175.5
175.3
197.9
162.1
168.7
222.0

175.8
523.6
175.7
175.1
174.4
198.2
162.1
168.7
219.1

175.9
524.0
175.7
175.2
174.1
198.6
161.8
167.8
216.4

176.0
524.5
176.0
175.4
174.3
198.7
162.2
167.4
216.4

176.6
526.0
175.9
175.3
174.0
198.5
162.0
167.0
216.2

177.0
527.3
176.2
175.7
174.3
198.4
161.5
166.1
217.5

177.3
528.2
176.3
175.7
174.2
198.9
161.2
166.4
216.2

177.4
528.4
176.6
176.0
174.5
198.2
162.1
166.9
218.0

177.0
527.2
177.1
176.5
175.1
197.1
162.3
167.2
222.9

177.7
529.2
177.4
176.8
175.7
199.9
161.5
166.3
225.7

179.2
533.7
178.3
177.7
176.7
201.9
164.5
167.1
221.8

138.4
159.1
155.6
155.4
176.3
109.1
173.8
113.6
178.8
172.1
194.5
191.5
118.4
187.6
106.4
149.5
134.2
129.2
141.5
125.8
126.1
125.8
117.3
130.9
123.1
153.6
150.8
101.9

138.6
160.4
158.8
155.3
177.6
109.7
178.2
118.1
183.3
175.7
201.9
199.0
118.4
195.1
108.7
142.9
126.1
115.0
133.4
124.4
123.1
121.7
114.6
128.6
121.2
151.8
149.0
99.4

139.5
160.1
158.5
157.0
176.8
108.5
176.9
116.0
182.1
173.9
199.8
197.0
119.4
192.9
106.8
139.4
122.7
112.4
129.7
124.9
122.4
122.2
113.8
128.4
119.3
147.1
144.2
100.3

139.7
159.6
157.1
156.3
176.5
108.3
177.0
116.8
182.2
174.4
200.6
197.5
122.2
193.3
106.9
139.6
122.8
112.7
129.8
124.9
126.9
125.2
119.7
131.7
122.8
149.2
146.4
99.7

139.4
161.0
153.4
156.2
178.2
108.5
177.1
117.4
182.8
174.8
201.0
197.8
122.0
193.9
107.5
139.6
122.7
114.7
129.6
125.1
127.9
125.8
120.9
131.7
124.4
152.7
149.8
99.5

137.3
159.7
157.6
155.7
176.7
109.5
177.5
117.7
183.1
175.1
201.2
98.1
120.7
194.2
107.6
140.7
123.9
114.0
131.0
125.0
126.2
124.6
118.2
129.9
124.4
152.7
149.8
99.3

136.9
160.4
158.8
154.3
177.9
109.6
178.0
118.1
183.2
176.1
20.7
198.7
120.4
194.7
107.9
145.6
129.1
112.2
136.9
124.8
122.0
121.1
112.7
127.5
121.0
152.4
149.5
99.1

137.6
160.5
159.9
154.7
177.6
110.8
178.4
118.2
183.6
176.5
202.3
199.2
121.3
195.2
108.7
146.1
129.6
110.9
137.5
124.7
118.0
118.6
106.5
125.3
118.2
152.7
149.9
99.1

136.9
160.1
159.6
154.0
177.3
109.9
178.7
118.9
183.8
176.9
202.9
199.6
122.9
195.7
109.7
146.2
129.6
111.3
137.4
124.2
119.6
118.2
109.6
126.8
119.6
153.0
150.2
99.1

139.6
160.3
159.5
155.2
177.2
110.1
179.0
119.3
183.4
177.0
203.0
200.0
117.7
196.4
110.1
146.5
129.9
114.5
137.6
123.9
123:5
119.8
116.8
128.4
121.4
153.1
150.4
99.0

139.9
160.3
159.5
155.8
177.2
110.1
179.4
119.6
184.3
176.9
203.5
200.6
117.7
196.9
110.1
143.6
126.7
118.6
133.8
123.9
125.5
122.3
119.3
129.5
122.3
154.0
151.4
99.0

138.6
160.7
158.2
153.4
178.8
111.0
179.7
120.0
184.6
176.9
203.7
201.3
114.0
197.4
111.2
143.0
126.0
121.0
132.9
123.7
124.6
122.7
117.2
129.7
122.5
154.2
151.6
98.7

139.1
160.6
158.9
152.9
178.5
110.7
180.0
120.1
184.7
176.9
203.9
201.9
109.6
198.0
112.3
143.5
126.4
125.0
133.2
123.0
120.9
118.8
112.3
127.2
120.8
153.0
150.4
98.5

139.9
161.3
160.4
155.7
178.5
110.1
179.8
120.2
185.5
177.9
204.9
202.6
114.3
198.5
113.7
145.3
128.3
135.8
134.7
123.2
117.3
115.7
106.7
122.4
119.5
154.6
152.0
98.2

140.1
161.9
161.3
158.7
178.5
110.9
180.5
120.4
185.7
178.7
205.5
203.0
118.0
198.6
113.9
147.4
130.5
155.7
136.0
123.5
119.4
116.8
111.0
123.6
119.3
158.2
155.7
97.9

Nondurables less food, beverages,

Special indexes:

C O N S U M E R P R IC E IN D E X F O R U R B A N
W A G E E A R N E R S A N D C L E R IC A L W O R K E R S

All items (1967- 100)....................................

Nonalcoholic beverages and beverage

12
12

Owners’equivalent rent of primary residence3
12

New and used motor vehicles2...................
See footnotes at end of table.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Monthly Labor Review

April 2003

77

Current Labor Statistics:

Price Data

32. Continued—Consumer Price Indexes for All Urban Consumers and for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers: U.S. city
average, by expenditure category and commodity or service group
[1982-84 = 100, unless otherwise indicated]____________________
A n n u a l a v e ra g e

2002

S e r ie s
2001

Newvehicles........................................
Used cars and trucks1.............................
Motor fuel...............................................
Gasoline (all types)................................
Motor vehicle parts and equipment..............
Motor vehicle maintenance and repair..........
Public transportation..................................
Medical care..............................................
Medical care commodities...........................
Medical care services................................
Professional services................................
Hospital and related services.....................
Video and audio1,2....................................
Education and communication2......................
Education2.........................................
Educational books and supplies................
Tuition, other school fees, and child care.....
Communication1,2.....................................
Information and information processing1,2.....
Telephone services1,2...........................
Information and information processing
other than teleohone services1,4............
Personal computers and peripheral
Other goods and services..............................
Tobacco and smoking products....................
Personal care1..........................................
Personal care products1...........................
Miscellaneous personal services................
Commodity and service group:
Commodities..............................................
Food and beverages..................................
Commodities less food and beverages...........
Nondurables less food and beverages..........
Apparel................................................
Nondurables less food, beverages,
and apparel.........................................
Durables................................................
Services.....................................................
Rent of shelter3........................................
Transporatation services............................
Other services..........................................
Special indexes:
All items less food.....................................
All items less shelter..................................
All items less medical care..........................
Commodities less food...............................
Nondurables less food................................
Nondurables less food and apparel...............
Nondurables............................................
Services less rent of shelter3.......................
Services less medical care services..............
Energy................................................
All items less energy..................................
All items less food and energy....................
Commodities less food and energy...........
Energy commodities.............................
Services less energy..............................

2002

M a r.

A p r.

M ay

June

J u ly

2003
Aug.

S e p t.

O c t.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

143.2
159.8
124.9
124.2
104.0
185.1
204.9
271.8
242.7
278.5
248.7
333.8
103.6
100.9
105.3
118.7
299.9
334.7
94.5
93.8
99.4

141.1
152.8
117.0
116.4
106.1
191.7
202.6
284.6
251.1
292.5
256.0
363.2
104.6
102.0
107.6
125.9
318.5
354.8
93.7
92.7
99.9

142.3
154.8
98.5
97.9
105.3
189.5
202.5
279.8
248.5
287.2
253.6
351.4
104.5
102.2
107.2
123.3
315.2
347.0
94.5
93.7
100.5

141.8
153.0
108.0
107.5
105.7
189.9
203.0
280.9
249.0
288.4
254.0
354.3
104.6
102.1
106.5
123.3
315.1
347.2
93.3
92.6
99.3

141.5
152.6
121.7
121.2
106.0
190.5
204.5
281.9
249.6
289.6
254.6
357.1
105.0
102.2
106.0
123.3
315.3
347.2
92.6
91.7
98.4

140.9
152.7
121.8
121.2
106.0
191.4
206.3
282.9
250.3
290.6
255.3
359.4
104.9
102.3
106.5
123.5
316.3
347.7
93.3
92.5
99.4

140.3
153.0
120.4
119.9
105.9
191.5
205.9
283.6
251.3
291.3
255.3
360.6
104.6
102.2
106.7
124 4
318.2
350.3
93.1
92.4
99.3

139.8
153.6
121.2
120.6
106.7
191.4
204.7
285.5
252.3
293.5
257.2
363.2
104.6
101.8
107.4
1P4 8
319.1
351.4
93.9
92.7
99.7

139.1
154.2
121.8
121.3
107.0
192.5
204.5
286.3
252.3
294.5
256.9
367.1
104.7
101.6
108.6

139.8
153.1
122.1
121.6
106.7
192.9
201.9
286.7
252.5
294.9
256.8
368.9
104.4
101.4
109.1

140.7
151.5
124.9
124.4
106.2
193.3
199.2
288.3
252.8
296.9
258.2
372.6
194.6
101.8
109.0

141.5
149.7
124.8
124.3
106.5
194.3
198.5
289.6
253.5
298.4
258.7
376.7
104 5
102 2
108 8

141.7
149.3
120.0
119.4
106.3
195.0
199.2
290.6
254.0
299.5
259.2
379.1
104 7
102 4
108.8

140.9
149.2
126.7
126.1
107.1
195.4
198.1
291.8
254.8
300.9
260.0
382.2

140.3
149.2
140.9
140.3
107.5
196.2
199.8
293.0
255.1
302.3
261.0
384.8

109 7
109.2

109.2

320.4
357.7
94.6
93.4
100.8

323.9
364.9
93.9
92.4
100.3

324.2
365.7
93.6
92.4
100.2

325.0
366.0
93.3
92.0
100.1

324.5
366.0
93.2
93.0
100.1

330.6
367.2
93.5
92.3
100.7

333.6
368.0
93.4
92.2
100.7

22.1

19.0

19.7

19.5

19.3

19.2

19.1

19.1

18.9

18.5

18.3

17.9

17.8

17.7

17.5

29.1
289.5
426.1
170.3
155.7
184.9
262.8

21.8
302.0
463.2
174.1
155.5
189.1
274.0

23.5
298.3
450.7
173.2
156.3
187.1
271.4

22.8
295.2
434.1
173.7
156.0
188.0
272.5

22.5
301.7
462.7
173.9
156.2
188.7
272.6

22.7
299.1
450.1
174.0
155.4
189.1
273.6

22.3
303.5
468.7
174.4
156.2
189 0
274.1

22 1
303.5
468.8
174.4
155 3
189 4
274.7

21 7
306.0
480.7
174.3

307.8
488.4
174.4

304.9
473.1
174.8

305.0
472.8
174.9

305.1
474.3
174.7

305.6
474.3
175.2

306.4
474.8
175.7

189 8
275.2

274.9

275.9

276.6

276.7

277.9

191.6
279.9

151.4
173.0
138.7
149.0
126.1

150.4
176.1
135.5
147.0
123.1

148.6
175.8
133.1
140.7
122.4

149.8
176.1
134.7
144.8
126.9

151.7
176.1
137.5
150.5
127.9

151.2
175.7
136.8
149.3
126.2

150.5
175.7
135.9
147.8
122.0

150.1
275.7
135.2
146.5
118.0

150.4
175.9
135.6
147.7
119.6

151.0
176.2
136.4
149.4
123.5

151.4
176.3
136.9
159.6
125.5

151.3
176.6
136.5
150.2
124.6

150.3
177.1
135.0
147.3
120.9

150.7
177.4
135.5
148.3
117.3

152.8
178.3
138.0
153.8
119.4

166.3
125.3
199.6
187.3
199.1
233.7

165.3
121.8
205.9
194.5
207.7
241.6

155.4
123.1
203.3
192.5
204.7
239.0

159.4
122.3
203.9
193.2
205.6
238.8

168.1
122.1
204.2
193.7
206.2
238.9

167.2
122.0
204.8
193.9
207.1
239.7

167.3
121.6
205.8
194.3
207.3
240.4

167.6
121.5
206.6
194.8
208.0
241.6

168.5
121.3
207.3
195.5
208.6
243.4

169.1
121.1
207.6
195.5
208.8
244.1

169.7
121.0
207.8
196.1
210.0
244.6

169.6
120.6
208.1
196.2
211.4
244.8

167.2
120.4
208.3
196.3
211.7
245.1

171.0
120.1
209.4
197.3
212.2
246.2

178.7
119.9
210.2
197.9
213.2
247.1

173.6
167.6
169.1
140.2
150.8
166.7
161.4
188.5
193.1
128.7
179.8
181.7
146.1
125.3
206.0

175.8
168.3
171.1
137.3
149.2
166.1
161.4
193.1
198.9
120.9
183.6
185.6
144.4
17.3
213.9

173.3
166.1
169.0
134.8
143.1
157.0
158.5
190.1
196.5
109.8
182.5
184.4
144.8
99.5
211.5

174.3
167.1
170.0
136.5
147.0
160.7
160.8
190.5
197.0
114.7
182.9
184.9
145.0
108.7
212.1

175.7
168.5
171.1
139.1
152.5
168.7
163.7
190.7
197.4
121.6
183.4
185.5
145.8
121.9
212.6

175.8
168.4
171.0
138.5
151.4
167.9
162.9
181.6
197.9
122.2
183.3
185.4
145.0
121.9
213.0

175.9
168.4
171.2
137.6
150.0
168.0
162.2
193.2
198.9
124.1
183.2
185.3
144.2
120.5
213.3

176.1
168.4
171.3
136.9
148.7
168.3
161.6
194.1
199.6
124.7
183.3
185.4
143.2
121.2
214.3

176.7
168.9
171.8
137.4
149.8
169.2
162.2
194.9
200.4
125.0
183.8
186.0
143.7
121.8
215.1

177.1
169.5
172.2
138.1
151.5
169.6
163.2
195.3
200.6
125.3
184.3
186.5
144.4
122.2
215.4

177.5
169.7
172.5
138.6
152.6
179.3
163.9
195.2
200.7
125.2
184.7
186.9
144.5
125.1
216.1

177.5
169.7
172.5
138.3
152.3
170.2
163.9
195.6
200.9
124.8
184.8
187.0
144.1
125.2
216.5

177.0
169.1
172.1
136.8
149.6
168.0
162.6
195.9
201.1
122.6
184.6
186.7
143.1
120.7
216.7

177.7
169.7
172.7
137.1
150.5
171.6
163.2
196.9
202.1
126.9
184.8
186.9
142.2
127.6
217.7

179.3
171.5
174.2
139.7
155.8
178.7
166.5
197.9
202.9
135.1
185.5
187.5
142.6
142.1
218.5

1 Not seasonally adjusted.
2 Indexes on a December 1997 = 100 base.
3 Indexes on a December 1982 = 100 base.

78 Monthly Labor Review

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Feb.

4 Indexes on a December 1988 = 100 base.
Dash indicates data not available.
NOTE: lndex applied t0 a month as a whole- not t0 anVsPecific da,e-

April 2003

33. Consumer Price Index: U.S. city average and available locai area data: all items
[1982-84 = 100, unless otherwise indicated]
2003

2002

schedule1
M

Urban Wage Earners
2002

All Urban Consumers

Pricing
Aug. Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

2003

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

180.7

181.0 181.3

181.3

180.9

181.7

183.1

176.6

177.0

177.3

177.4

177.0

177.7

179.2

M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M

189.3
181.3
112.0
175.8
178.2
111.4
169.7
173.8
175.4
110.9
172.7
185.3
187.9
113.0

189.5
191.2
112.6
176.2
178.2
111.5
170.0
174.2
175.7
111.2
172.6
185.7
188.2
113.1

189.9
191.5
113.0
176.3
178.7
111.9
170.2
174.9
176.9
111.6
173.9
185.8
188.4
113.3

190.1
191.7
113.1
176.1
178.3
111.7
170.4
174.9
176.1
111.9
173.0
185.8
188.4
113.1

189.6
191.4
112.6
175.5
177.8
111.4
169.5
174.6
175.9
111.6
172.3
185.5
188.0
113.1

190.5
192.2
113.1
176.2
178.2
112.0
170.7
175.1
176.7
111.7
173.2
186.6
189.2
113.8

191.7
193.5
113.8
177.8
180.0
112.8
172.5
176.4
178.3
112.5
174.8
188.1
190.9
114.5

185.7
186.4
112.0
171.3
172.8
111.0
167.6
171.3
172.7
110.2
172.8
180.3
181.3
112.5

186.2
186.7
112.0
171.7
173.4
111.1
167.8
171.7
172.9
111.5
173.0
180.7
181.7
112,7

186.5
186.9
112.9
171.8
173.3
111.4
168.1
172.3
173.7
110.9
173.2
180.6
181.7
112.9

186.9
187.3
113.1
171.6
173.0
111.3
168.2
172.4
173.3
111.1
173.4
181.0
181.9
112.9

186.6
187.1
112.7
171.0
172.4
111.0
167.2
172.0
173.1
110.8
172.6
180.8
181.6
112.9

187.2
187.7
113.2
171.8
172.9
111.7
168.4
172.5
174
110.9
173.2
181.5
182.5
113.2

188.6
189.1
114.0
173.3
174.6
112.5
170.1
173.9
175.7
111.7
174.8
183.2
184.4
114.0

M
M
M

165.3
111.5
173.9

165.5
111.8
174.3

165.8
112.1
174.3

165.7
112.2
174.5

165.4
111.9
173.8

166.1
112.3
174.6

167.5
113.1
176.0

163.4
111.0
172.5

163.8
111.3
172.9

164.0
111.6
173.0

164.0
111.7
173.1

163.7
111.4
172.5

164.3
111.8
173.2

165.8
112.6
174.7

181.6 182.1 182.8 183.2 182.4 182.7 184.1 175.5 175.8 176.5 176.9 176.0 176.4
M
M
183.0 183.4 183.7 184.0 183.7 185.2 186.5 1765.6 176.3 176.5 177.0 176.7 177.8
M
193.1 193.3 193.7 193.4 193.1 194.7 196.2 188.1 188.5 188.8 188.8 188.7 189.7
_ 200.4
_
_
_
«
199.2
199.3
197.7
1
199.8 _
199.1
_
- 164.9
- 165.3
165.7
173.4
173.5 1
174.6
Cleveland-Akron, OH................................................
_ 173.2
_
_
173.3
172.9
173.0
174.0 _
1
173.6
Dallas-Ft Worth, TX....................................................................................
114.1
113.7
113.5
114.6 114.0
1
114.0
Washington-Baltimore, DC-MD-VA-WV7.....................
174.6
176.3
- 177.3
180.7 176.8
179.4
179.7
2
Atlanta, GA.........................................................................................................
174.4
182.4
175.0
179.7
175
- 180.4
2
180.9
Detroit-Ann Arbor-Flint, Ml....................................................................
_ 162.6
_ 159.8
_
_
_
_
158.0
164
160.3
158
2
160.1
175.3
174.5
180.3 172.8
177.9
175.2
177.0
2
Mlami-Ft. Lauderdale, FL........................................................................
184.9
185.6
186.6 186.7
185.8
185.3
2
188.3
Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-DE-MD....
189.6
197.7 189.3
190.0
193.2
193.5
194.3
2
San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose, CA..........................................
184.6
185.5
191.3 184.8
190.0
190.9
2
190.3
Seattle-Tacoma-Bremerton, WA.......................................................
AK; Cincinnati, OH-KY-IN; Kansas City, MO-KS; Milwaukee-Racine, Wl;
1 Foods, fuels, and several other items priced every month in all areas; most other
Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN-WI; Pittsburgh, PA; Port-land-Salem, OR-WA; St Louis,
goods and services priced as indicated:
MO-IL; San Diego, CA; Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL.
M—Every month.
1— January, March, May, July, September, and November.
7 Indexes on a November 1996 = 100 base.
2— February, April, June, August, October, and December.
NOTE: Local area CPI indexes are byproducts of the national CPI program. Each local
index has a smaller sample size and is, therefore, subject to substantially more sampling
2 Regions defined as the four Census regions.
and other measurement error. As a result, local area indexes show greater volatility than
3 Indexes on a December 1996 = 100 base.
the national index, although their long-term trends are similar. Therefore, the Bureau of
4 The "North Central" region has been renamed the "Midwest" region by the Census
Labor Statistics strongly urges users to consider adopting the national average CPI for
Bureau. It is composed of the same geographic entities.
use in their escalator clauses. Index applies to a month as a whole, not to any specific
5 Indexes on a December 1986 = 100 base.
date.
6 In addition, the following metropolitan areas are published semiannually and appear in
Dash indicates data not available.
tables 34 and 39 of the January and July issues of the cpi Detailed Report : Anchorage,

178.1
179.6
191.3

U.S. city average.................................................
Region and area size2
Northeast urban........................................................
Size A—More than 1,500,000...................................
Size B/C—50,000 to 1.500.0003...............................
4

Size A—More than 1,500,000...................................
Size B/C—50,000 to 1,500,0003...............................
Size D—Nonmetropolitan (less than 50,000)...............
South urban............................................................
Size A— More than 1,500,000..................................
Size B/C—50,000 to 1,500,0003...............................
Size D—Nonmetropolitan (less than 50,000)...............
West urban..............................................................
Size A—More than 1,500,000..................................
Size B/C—50,000 to 1,500,0003...............................
Size classes:
A®

B/C3....................................................................
D........................................................................
Selected local areas6
Los Angeles-Riverside-Orange County, CA..................
NewYork, NY-Northern NJ-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT-PA.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Monthly Labor Review

April 2003

-

178.1
176.8
161.7
178
185.9
193.7
186.2

79

Current Labor Statistics:

Price Data

34. Annual data: Consumer Price Index, U.S. city average, all items and major groups
[1982-84 = 100]
Series

1993

Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers:
All items:
Index...............................................
Percent change...........................................
Food and beverages:
Index..................................................
Percent change..........................................
Housing:
Index.............................................
Percent change...............................................
Apparel:
Index...........................................................
Percent change.................................................
Transportation:
Index.............................................
Percent change..............................................
Medical care:
Index......................................................
Percent change............................................
Other goods and services:
Index.........................................................
Percent change...................................
Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners
and Clerical Workers:
All Items:
Index...................................................
Percent change................................................

80 Monthly Labor Review

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

1994

1995

1996

144.5
3.0

148.2
2.6

152.4
2.8

3.0

141.6
2.1

144.9
2.3

148.9
2.8

3.2

141.2
2.7

144.8
2.5

148.5
2.6

2.9

133.7
1.4

133.4
-.2

132.0
-1.0

-.2

130.4
3.1

134.3
3.0

139.1
3.6

2.8

201.4
5.9

211.0
4.8

220.5
4.5

3.5

192.9
5.2

198.5
2.9

206.9
4.2

4.1

142.1
2.8

145.6
2.5

149.8
2.9

154.1
2.9

April 2003

1997

1998

1999

2000

177.1
2.8

179.9
1.5

164.6
2.2

168.4
2.3

173.6
3.1

176.8
1.8

163.9

169.6
3.5

176.4
4.0

180.3
2.2

129.6
-1.3

127.3
-1.8

124.0
-2.6

153.3
6.2

154.3
0.7

152.9
-.9

3.5

260.8
4.1

272.8
4.6

285.6
4.7

8.7

271.1
5.0

282.6
4.2

293.2
3.8

168.9
3.5

173.5
2.7

175.9
1.4

,,

.

-1.3
AAA £\

144.4

I
2.3

/
1.3

2002

172.2
3.4

2.3
... .

2001

t_
.

2.2

35. Producer Price Indexes, by stage of processing
[1 9 8 2 = 100]

Grouping
F in is h e d g o o d s .....................................................

Finished consumer goods....................
Finished consumer foods...................
Finshed consumer goods
Nondurable goods less food.............
Durable goods................................

2001

2002

20 3 3

2002

Annual average
Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

140.7
141.5
141.3

138.8
139.3
140.0

137.7
137.5
142.3

138.7
138.9
143.4

138.8
139.2
139.2

138.6
139.1
139.4

139.0
139.6
139.8

138.8
139.6
139.8

138.8
139.6
139.3

139.1
140.0
138.7

140.6
141.5
139.1

139.6
140.3
139.2

139.1
139.8
139.6

141.2
142.5
141.7

142.5
144.3
142.3

141.4
142.8
133.9
139.7

138.7
139.8
132.9
139.1

135.4
134.3
134.1
139.8

136.9
136.7
133.6
139.5

138.9
139.8
133.5
139.3

138.6
139.5
133.0
139.1

139.3
140.6
132.8
139.0

139.1
141.0
131.5
138.4

139.3
141.5
131.0
138.2

140.2
142.8
131.1
138.3

142.1
143.9
134.5
139.7

140.3
141.8
133.5
139.3

139.6
141.3
132.1
138.6

142.4
144.7
133.8
139.6

144.8
148.7
132.7
139.1

128.7

127.8

125.2

126.1

127.2

127.1

127.7

128.1

128.4

129.3

129.7

129.8

129.4

131.2

133.6

127.8
125.3
133.3
126.4
126.1

127.3
127.2
131.5
126.3
126.0

127.9
128.9
133.5
126.3
125.8

129.6
129.6
138.2
127.2
125.9

In te r m e d ia te m a te r ia ls ,

Materials and components
for manufacturing...............................
Materials for food manufacturing...........
Materials for nondurable manufacturing...
Materials for durable manufacturing...... .
Components for manufacturing.............
Materials and components
for construction..................................
Containers..........................................

127.4
124.3
131.8
125.2
126.3

126.1
123.3
129.3
124.7
126.1

124.6
122.6
125.4
122.6
126.3

125.1
122.9
126.5
123.5
126.4

125.5
121.8
128.0
123.7
126.3

125.5
121.2
128.1
124.1
126.2

125.9
122.1
128.8
124.7
126.1

126.3
122.7
129.7
125.3
126.0

126.5
123.1
130.3
125.3
125.9

126.9
123.9
131.5
125.9
125.9

127.3
124.3
132.8
125.7
125.8

150.6
104.5
153.1
138.6

151.3
96.2
152.2
138.9

150.2
88.8
151.9
138.1

150.7
91.3
151.7
138.3

151.1
95.3
151.2
138.5

151.4
94.8
151.0
138.4

151.5
96.4
151.3
138.7

151.7
97.3
151.4
139.1

152.1
97.6
151.5
139.3

152.1
100.6
152.5
139.6

151.8
101.6
153.5
139.6

151.1
101.1
153.8
139.7

151.1
100.4
153.4
139.7

151.5
107.0
153.6
140.0

152.2
114.3
153.9
140.5

121.3
106.2
127.3

108.1
99.5
1115

98.0
102.0
91.4

103.7
102.8
100.9

108.3
96.5
114.0

109.9
98.2
115.6

105.7
96.8
109.2

106.8
98.0
110.2

108.7
99.7
112.1

110.9
100.7
115.4

111.6
99.7
117.4

117.1
99.4
127.3

119.4
100.4
130.6

127.9
105.7
141.3

134.1
106.3
151.9

140.4
96.8
147.5
150.8
150.0

138.3
88.8
147.3
150.8
150.2

136.3
81.3
148.1
151.6
150.4

137.2
85.0
148.2
151.9
150.2

138.5
88.8
147.3
150.6
150.4

138.2
88.4
147.1
150.5
150.2

138.6
89.8
147.3
150.7
150.2

138.3
90.5
146.7
150.3
149.5

138.4
91.3
146.5
150.0
149.3

139.0
93.0
146.4
149.9
149.5

140.7
94.4
147.8
151.2
151.2

139.5
91.1
147.5
151.0
150.8

138.7
90.4
147.1
150.7
150.1

140.9
95.1
148.5
152.3
151.2

142.3
101.5
148.2
152.1
150.6

156.9

157.7

157.6

157.4

157.9

157.7

157.8

157.1

156.8

157.1

159.0

158.6

157.8

159.1

158.4

175.1

177.7

176.2

176.3

177.6

177.6

178.0

177.9

177.9

178.3

178.7

178.8

178.8

179.6

179.3

130.5
115.9
104.1
135.1

128.5
115.6
95.9
134.6

125.9
113.6
88.4
133.3

126.8
114.3
90.9
133.8

127.9
113.6
94.9
134.0

127.9
112.9
94.6
134.0

128.4
114.2
96.2
134.4

128.8
115.8
96.7
134.8

129.0
116.8
97.0
135.0

130.0
118.0
100.4
135.3

130.4
117.4
101.6
135.4

130.5
117.7
101.0
135.7

130.0
119.1
99.5
135.6

131.8
120.3
105.9
136.1

134.3
121.2
113.8
137.1

136.4

135.8

134.6

135.0

135.4

135.4

135.7

136.0

136.2

136.5

136.6

136.9

136.7

137.2

138.2

122.8
112.2
130.6

101.8
108.6
135.6

76.9
108.5
128.1

89.9
109.3
129.0

107.3
105.5
131.8

108.3
107.5
134.9

97.8
107.4
138.6

98.1
108.9
141.0

101.2
110.0
140.3

105.9
111.6
140.0

108.9
109.8
139.4

123.2
109.5
139.1

127.6
110.4
139.7

141.6
115.0
142.5

154.8
116.6
146.7

C r u d e m a te r ia ls f o r f u r t h e r
p r o c e s s in g ...........................................................

S p e c ia l g r o u p in g s :

Finished consumer goods less energy....
Finished goods less food and energy......
Finished consumer goods less food
Consumer nondurable goods less food
Intermediate materials less foods
Intermediate foods and feeds................

Crude nonfood materials less energy.....


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Monthly Labor Review

April 2003

81

Current Labor Statistics:

Price Data

36. Producer Price Indexes for the net output of major industry groups
[December 1984 = 100, unless otherwise indicated]___________
SIC

Annual average

Industry

2001
T o ta l m in in a in d u s trie s ......................................

10
12
13
14
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

Metal mining..........................
Coal mining (12/85 = 100).......
Oil and gas extraction (12/85 = 100)...........
Mining and quarrying of nonmetallic
minerals, except fuels..................
T o ta l m a n u fa c tu r in g in d u s trie s ...........................

Food and kindred products..............
Tobacco manufactures..............
Textile mill products.................
Apparel and other finished products
made fromfabrics and similar materials....
Lumber and wood products,
except furniture..........................
Furniture and fixtures...................
Paper and allied products..............

27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34

Printing, publishing, and allied industries.....
Chemicals and allied products................
Petroleum refining and related products......
Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products.
Leather and leather products..............
Stone, clay, glass, and concrete products....
Primary metal industries.........................
Fabricated metal products,
except machinery and transportation
equipment........................

35
36

Machinery, except electrical....................
Electrical and electronic machinery,
equipment, and supplies......................
Transportation..........................
Measuring and controlling instruments;
photographic, medical, and optical
goods; watches and clocks...............
Miscellaneous manufacturing industries
industries (12/85 = 100)................

37
38
39

114.3
91 3
127 5

2002

96.3
73.4
94.0
106.5

2002
Feb.

72.3
94.5
77.9

Mar.

94.6
92.7

Apr.

2003

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

100.3

93.5
76.9
93.7
101.7

93.5
74.7
93.9
102.0

95.9
73.2
93.4
106.0

100.1
73.6
92.8
112.8

102.7
72.5
94.0
116.5

112.3
72.6
93.7
131.7

115.6
73.7
93.0
136.8

126.2
76.7
93.5
153.0

137.4
78.4
92.7
170.4

111.9

141.0

143.5

143.4

143.5

143.6

143.7

143.7

143.5

143.5

143.5

143.8

144.4

145.0

145.6

134.6
132.8
386.1
116.9

133.6
131.6
134.7
115.7

132.0
132.0
391.7
115.8

132.8
132.0

133.5
131.5

133.6
131.3

133.6
131.5
408.6
115.7

133.7
131.3
408.5
115.5

135.0
136.1
408.5
115.6

135.6
131.6
408.5
115.6

134.7
131.7
409.2
116.0

134.1
132.8
409.0
115.4

135.9
133.8
408.5
115.9

137.8
134.8
408.7
115.2

125.8

125.3

125.1

125.2

125.0

156.2
145 1
146.2

155.3
146.2
143.7

154.8
145.8
143.2

142.9

188.7
158 4
105.3
125.9
141.3
136.0
116.1

193.0
157.3
98.8
125.4
141.1
137.0
116.1

192.1
154.3
79.5
124.4
139.8
136.4
113.7

192.1
155.1
89.2
124.6
140.0
136.3
114.4

115.8
125.1

142.5
192.6

125.2

125.3

125.3

125.1

126.0

125.8

125.3

125.2

125.2

155.3

155.5
146.6
142.9

155.9
146.6
143.5

155.3
147.0
144.1

154.8
146.7
144.6

154.1
146.9
145.3

154.2
146.5
145.0

154.4
146.9
145.0

155.7
147.1
145.2

193.1
158.5
101.1
125.5
141.4
137.0
116.9

193.2
158.6
103.2
125.9
142.0
137.4
117.1

193.4
158.7
109.6
126.3
141.9
137.6
117.9

193.8
159.5
117.6
126.3
141.7
137.5
117.6

194.0
160.6
107.1
125.7
142.3
136.9
118.2

194.2
159.6
102.4
125.6
142.4
137.2
117.9

195.7
160.8
116.3
126.4
142.3
137.6
117.5

196.3
162.0
138.2
126.9
142.8
137.8
117.9

142.8

100.5
124.8
140.1
136.6

192.6 192.9
1JU.O 157.0
99.7
98.9
125.3 125.8
140.9
137.1 137.2

131.3

131.4

131.0

131.7

131.2

131.2

131.6

131.9

132.0

132.1

132.1

132.3

132.3

132.4

132.5

118.0

117.2

117.6

117.7

117.4

117.2

116.8

116.8

116.7

116.6

116.6

116.6

116.3

107.0
137.9

105.7
137.2

106.6
138.5

106.6

105.8
137.0

105.5
135.5

105.5
135.0

105.4
135.1

105.1
139.2

104.9
138.3

104.5
136.8

104.3
138.5

104.0
137.5

127.3

128.5

128.6

128.9

128.2

128.3

128.3

128.4

128.7

128.7

128.8

128.9

129.8

130.2

132.4

133.2

133.4

132.9

103 3

133.3

133.4

133.4

133.5

133.4

132.7

133.7

133.9

133.8

123.1
143.4
129 8
157.2
110.3

124.5
150.2
134.0
158.0
111.9

123.4
145.4
128.9
157.1
111.3

123.5
145.4
128.7
156.8
111.6

123.7
127.9
156.3
111.5

124.3
145.4
134.0
156.8
111.3 I 111.5

124.3
155.0
135.4
157.9
112.3

125.0
155.0
135.3
158.0
112.5

125.1
155.0
139.0
158.6
112.5

125.4
155.0
138.4
159.6
112.7 I

125.9
155.0
141.0
160.3
112.3

125.9
155.0
142.3
160.7
112.3

126.5
155.0
142.4
160.6
111.2

126.8
155.0
140.8
159.8
111.2

S e r v ic e in d u s trie s :

42
43
44
45
46

82

Motor freight transportation
and warehousing (06/93 - 100)........
U.S. Postal Service (06/89 = 100).............
Water transportation (12/92 = 100)............
Transportation by air (12/92 = 100)..............
Pipelines, except natural oas (12/92 = 100)....

Monthly Labor Review


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

April 2003

37.

Annual data: Producer Price Indexes, by stage of processing
Index

1993

1994

1995

1996

1998

1997

1999

Finished goods

2000

2001

124.7
125.7
78.0
135.8

125.5
126.8
77.0
137.1

127.9
129.0
78.1
140.0

131.3
133.6
83.2
142.0

131.8
134.5
83.4
142.4

130.7
134.3
75.1
143.7

133.0
135.1
78.8
146.1

138.0
137.2
94.1
148.0

140.7
141.3
96.8
150.0

138.8
140.0
88.8
150.2

116.2
115.6
84.6
123.8

118.5
118.5
83.0
127.1

124.9
119.5
84.1
135.2

125.7
125.3
89.8
134.0

125.6
123.2
89.0
134.2

123.0
123.2
80.8
133.5

123.2
120.8
84.3
133.1

129.2
119.2
101.7
136.6

129.7
124.3
104.1
136.4

127.8
123.3
95.9
135.8

102.4
108.4
76.7
94.1

101.8
106.5
72.1
97.0

102.7
105.8
69.4
105.8

113.8
121.5
85.0
105.7

111.1
112.2
87.3
103.5

96.8
103.9
68.6
84.5

98.2
98.7
78.5
91.1

120.6
100.2
122.1
118.0

121.3
106.2
122.8
101.8

108.1
99.5
101.8
100.8

Intermediate materials, supplies, and
components

Crude materials for further processing

Other...................................................................


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

2002

Monthly Labor Review

April 2003

83

Current Labor Statistics:

38.

Price Data

U.S. export price indexes by Standard International Trade Classification

[2000 = 1QQ]

_________

S IT C

0
01
04
05
2
22
24
25
26
28
3
32
33
5
54
55
57
58
59
6
62
64
66
68
7
71
72
74
75
76
77
78
87

2002

Industry

R ev. 3

Feb.
F o o d a n d liv e a n im a ls .........................................

Meat and meat preparations.........
Cereals and cereal preparations........
Vegetables, fruit, and nuts, prepared fresh or dry
C r u d e m a te ria ls , in e d ib le , e x c e p t fu e ls ......................

Oilseeds and oleaginous fruits..............
Cork and wood................
Pulp and waste paper...............
Textile fibers and their waste.........
Metalliferous ores and metal scrap......
M in e ra l fu e ls , lu b ric a n ts , a n d re la te d p ro d u c ts .......

Coal, coke, and briquettes.................
Petroleum, petroleum products, and related materials...
C h e m ic a ls a n d re la te d p ro d u c ts , n . e . s . ..

Medicinal and pharmaceutical products.
Essential oils; polishing and cleaning preparations...
Plastics in primary forms.............
Plastics in nonprimary forms..............
Chemical materials and products, n.e.s.....................
M a n u fa c tu r e d g o o d s c la s s ifie d c h ie fly b y m a te ria ls ...

Rubber manufactures, n.e.s.........
Paper, paperboard, and articles of paper, pulp,
and paperboard.......................
Nonmetallic mineral manufactures, n.e.s....................
Nonferrous metals.....................
M a c h in e r y a n d tr a n s p o rt e q u ip m e n t................................

Power generating machinery and equipment.......
Machinery specialized for particular industries..........
General industrial machines and parts, n.e.s.,
and machine parts..................
Computer equipment and office machines......
Telecommunications and sound recording and
reproducing apparatus and equipment.........
Electrical machinery and equipment.
Road vehicles.....................

Apr.

100.0
91.3
106.0
102.4

93.2
105.4
102.5

100 6
92.0
105.2
103.7

86 9
89.4
87.6
73.9
86.6
87.0

87.7
92.0
87.2
74.1
86.2
87.3

84.3
109.7
76.5

89.8
110.8
83.6

99.7

95.4

93.9

95.8

90.2

87.9

92.3
100.8
97.1
85.8
95.7
97.6

93.2
100.5
97.6
87.6
95.8
98.0

94.8
100.3
97.5

100.2
97.1

97.3

95.3
97.4

C
97.4

97.5

97.2
100.4

96.7
100.8

97.4
101.1

97.4

98.0

94.1
101.4
85.9

92.5
102.1
85.1

101.9

102.0
Ö0.0

102.2

99.3
104 4
100.8

99.5
104.6
101.1

99.5
104.6
101.4

104.6
102.0

102.0
92.9

102.2
93.1

92.5

10« Q
91.7

97.5
94.6
100.2

97.5
94.7

97.8
94.8

97.8
94.6

101.1

101.2

101.3

101.3

May

103.8

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

106.5
99.0

101.1
87.8
112.7
98.0

103.4
88.7
119.9
98.2

107.7
89.8
133.4
98.9

106.4
89.1
13Û.5
97.8

106.7
87.9
131.7
99.0

106.8
89.8
126.3
98.6

106.8
89.8
126.3
98.6

106.1
95.5
123.2
97.4

99.8
88.1
96.5
94.6
99.6

97.9
113.5
88.8
89.6
93.1
97.9

97.3
114.1
90.0
86.5
94.2
93.9

96.8
107.2
90.7
88.5
94.2
94.1

98.8
116.9
90.6
87.9
96.4
95.0

98.8
116.2
90.2
85.9
98.4
97.5

98.8
116.2
90.2
85.9
98.4
97.5

100.7
116.6
91.1
86.0
101.7
104.8

97.1
114.3
91.6

97.3
114.3
92.0

102.8
114.0
98.0

109.3
114.0
105.8

104.5
114.0
99.6

99.5
113.7
92.2

99.5
113.7
92.2

123.8
113.7
122.9

100.8
97.1
93.1
96.4
97.3

96.4
101.3
97.5
93.1
96.5
98.2

96.8
101.3
97.4
92.9
96.9
98.3

97.1
101.3
97.3
97.3
97.6
98.6

96.8
101.2
97.2
93.5
97.7
98.5

96.6
101.3
97.3
93.1
95.9
98.8

96.6
101.3
97.3
93.1
95.9
98.8

98.7
104.0
96.0
97.1
97.5
100.7

98.7
103.8

99.0
105.1

99.1
205.9

99.1
105.7

99.0
105.4

99.0
105.6

99.0
105.6

99.2
106.4

95.7
102.2
85.2

96.2
102.2
84.9

96.3
102.2
84.4

96.8
101.4
83.4

96.6
101.3
83.2

96.9
101.3
83.3

96.9
101.3
83.3

97.1
100.4
83.3

98.7
104.5
102.1

98.8
104.6
102.0

98.7
104.6
101.8

98.7
104.7
101.8

98.7
105.2
101.7

98.6
105.2
101.7

98.6
105.2
101.7

98.6
106.8
102.3

102.1
90.4

102.3
90.3

102.3
89.3

102.2
89.1

102.3
88.6

102.3
88.7

102.3
88.7

102.3
89.1

97.7

96.2
93.3
100.4

96.3
93.5
100.6

96.4
93.6
100.6

96.3
93.3
100.9

96.3
93.3
100.9

96.2
92.8
100.9

96.2
92.8
100.9

95.3
92.3
101.0

101.3

101.4

101.5

101.4

101.6

101.5

101.7 I 101.7 I 102.0

89.7
yo. i
87.1
86.8
91.7

2003

June

99.8

95 1

101.8

P r o fe s s io n a l, s c ie n tific , a n d c o n tro llin g
in s tr u m e n ts a n d a p p a r a tu s .............................

84

Mar.

Monthly Labor Review


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

April 2003

39.

U.S. import price indexes by Standard International Trade Classification

[20 0 0 =

100]

S IT C

0
01
03
05
07

F o o d a n d liv e a n im a ls .....................................................................

Meat and meat preparations......................... ...........
Fish and crustaceans, mollusks, and other
aquatic invertebrates.............................................
Vegetables, fruit, and nuts, prepared fresh or dry.........
Coffee, tea, cocoa, spices, and manufactures
thereof................................................................

Jan.

Feb.

98.8
103.4

97.6
102.0

97.6
101.2

98.9
106.8

100.1
101.7

99.4
107.4

83.0
105.0

84.9
106.7

81.4
107.5

82.0
106.2

82.5
105.6

80.5
111.4

80.6
103.4

84,5

93.5

94.3

98.6

99.9

102.6

106.8

102.5
102.2

102.7
102.4

102.9
102.4

103.3
102.7

May

June

July

94.3
107.4

96.4
109.8

97.0
110.1

96.4
105.4

94.5
104.0

96.3
105.9

96.6
105.4

82.0
98.1

80.4
104.0

80.1
104.9

80.0
108.1

79.8
102.2

81.9
105.0

73.8

83.3

88.5

83.8

84.6

84.2

Sept.

102.0
102.3

102.7
102.4

103.0
102.8

102.7
102.4

102.5
102.2

102.6
102.2

Cork and wood.......................................................
Pulp and waste paper.............................................
Metalliferous ores and metal scrap............................
Crude animal and vegetable materials, n.e.s...............

92.7
98.6
77.2
92.7
91.7

95.8
106.6
74.9
93.7
92.3

96.3
108.1
73.4
95.0
90.5

97.0
105.2
74.7
95.6
103.8

96.4
103.1
77.1
95.9
92.8

96.8
103.4
80.2
96.4
91.0

96.8
101.8
82.3
95.2
97.5

96.4
98.3
82.3
93.3
104.0

95.7
96.3
82.3
93.8
101.6

94.9
96.0
80.5
93.9
99.9

94.5
94.0
78.9
94.7
101.4

95.4
94.7
78.1
95.5
103.6

97.5
97.0
80.2
99.1
102.0

Petroleum, petroleum products, and related materials....
Gas, natural and manufactured.................................

65.2
65.6
58.2

76.4
77.4
64.8

87.1
86.8
86.0

89.0
89.1
84.3

86.0
85.9
83.6

66.1
88.9
77.7

91.1
92.9
72.7

96.3
97.8
81.1

97.0
97.7
87.3

90.4
89.8
92.1

94.8
94.1
97.0

107.5
106.4
111.7

120.8
119.3
129.3

96.7
97.1
97.4
96.3
99.9
97.1
100.6
95.2

96.3
97.8
97.2
96.0
99.8
91.5
100.6
93.6

97.3
98.5
95.6
96.6
98.9
91.4
101.8
94.5

97.5
98.5
95.6
96.7
99.1
91.1
101.8
94.3

97.0
98.6
96.2
98.0
99.9
91.8
100.3
93.6

98.6
100.0
96.4
98.7
100.4
96.6
99.6
93.5

98.9
100.2
96.8
100.0
101.2
96,4
99.5
93.5

98.7
100.1
96.6
99.6
98.4
97.9
99.5
92.4

98.3
101.5
95.8
99.5
98.4
96.4
99.4
91.0

98.0
102.5
95.9
99.3
98.8
96.0
99.5
90.8

98.2
102.5
96.7
99.2
99.2
94.7
99.6
91.6

99.0
104.2
96.5
101.8
97.2
96.9
100.2
92.2

100.7
106.7
97.5
101.6
97.9
97.9
100.3
93.1

92.3
97.6

92.2
97.6

92.6
97.9

92.3
98.1

92.8
98.2

93.0
98.2

93.1
98.2

93.5
99.3

93.5
99.3

93.6
99.4

93.7
99.3

93.3
99.5

94.2
99.1

93.7
97.0
77.2
98.5

93.4
96.9
76.9
98.5

92.5
96.9
79.2
98.2

91.9
97.0
79.7
98.3

91.7
97.0
79.7
98.3

91.7
97.2
79.2
98.3

92.7
97.5
77.7
98.6

93.7
97.5
76.4
98.6

93.3
97.6
76.0
98.5

93.3
97.6
76.6
98.3

93.0
97.6
77.3
98.3

92.6
97.6
76.1
97.4

92.7
97.8
79.2
98.0

97.2
98.5

97.1
98.5

97.2
98.6

97.0
98.8

97.1
99.0

96.9
98.7

96.9
99.2

96.7
98.3

96.4
98.5

96.2
98.7

96.1
99.2

96.0
99.6

96.0
100.3

97.5
88.2

97.5
88.1

97.6
88.2

97.4
88.0

97.8
87.8

98.1
87.2

98.4
86.9

98.4
86.4

98.5
84.9

98.6
84.6

98.6
84.1

98.6
83.8

99.3
83.5

Road vehicles........................................................

95.1
97.0
100.2
99.6

94.8
96.8
100.1
99.5

94.8
97.0
100.2
99.0

94.5
97.1
100.0
99.1

94.4
97.1
100.2
99.2

94.0
96.6
100.3
99.3

93.1
96.7
100.3
99.5

92.8
96.5
100.3
99.4

92.3
96.0
100.8
99.4

91.1
95.9
100.5
99.4

92.0
95.6
100.5
99.6

92.1
95.3
100.4
99.5

90.6
95.7
100.6
99.6

Photographic apparatus, equipment, and supplies,
and optical qoods, n.e.s........................................

97.3

97.2

97.2

97.4

97.8

98.4

98.8

98.4

98.5

98.3

98.5

98.8

99.2

April 2003

85

C r u d e m a te r ia ls , in e d ib le , e x c e p t f u e ls ..................................

Beverages.................................... ........................

5
52
53
54
55
57
58
59

C h e m ic a ls a n d re la te d p ro d u c ts , n .e .s ..................................

6
62
64

M a n u fa c tu r e d g o o d s c la s s ifie d c h ie fly b y m a te r ia ls .....

66
68
69

Nonmetallic mineral manufactures, n.e.s....................

77
78
85
88

Dec.

Apr.

102.1
102.5

2
24
25
28
29

75
76

Nov.

Mar.

102.9
103.2

B e v e r a g e s a n d t o b a c c o ..................................................................

7
72
74

Oct.

Aug.

Feb.

102.4
102.1

1
11

3
33
34

2003

2002

Industry

R ev. 3

Inorganic chemicals................................................
Dying, tanning, and coloring materials.......................
Medicinal and pharmaceutical products.....................
Essential oils; polishing and cleaning preparations...... .
Plastics in primary forms..........................................
Plastics in nonprimary forms....................................
Chemical materials and products, n.e.s................. ....
Rubber manufactures, n.e.s.....................................
Paper, paperboard, and articles of paper, pulp,

Manufactures of metals, n.e.s...................................
M a c h in e r y a n d t r a n s p o r t e q u ip m e n t .......................................

General industrial machines and parts, n.e.s.,
Computer equipment and office machines.................
Telecommunications and sound recording and


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Monthly Labor Review

Current Labor Statistics:

40.

Price Data

U.S. export price indexes by end-use category

[2000 = 100]
2002

Category
Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

July

2003

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

ALL COMMODITIES..........................................................

97.3

97.6

98.0

98.0

98.0

98.3

98.5

98.8

98.7

98.8

98.6

99.0

99.4

Foods, feeds, and beverages................................
Agricultural foods, feeds, and beverages..............
Nonagricultural (fish, beverages) food products....

98.9
99.4
94.5

99.7
100.0
98.3

100.3
100.8
96.2

100.4
100.9
96.1

101.5
101.7
100.7

104.0
104.5
100.0

106.1
106.7
100.7

109.8
110.7
101.3

107.6
108.2
102.1

109.6
110.4
102.0

108.8
109.5
102.3

108.9
109.6
103.1

108.4
108.9
104.6

Industrial supplies and materials.............................

91.4

91.9

93.4

93.8

94.6

95.6

95.5

95.9

96.4

96.1

96.0

97.2

99.0

Agricultural industrial supplies and materials.........

92.9

93.6

93.6

93.0

95.8

97.9

97.7

98.4

98.4

100.1

101.9

103.4

103.8

Fuels and lubricants...........................................
Nonagricultural supplies and materials,
excluding fuel and building materials..................
Selected building materials.................................

83.8

85.6

90.3

87.9

86.7

88.3

88.0

92.9

94.0

91.6

91.3

96.2

103.7

92.2
94.4

92.6
94.2

94.0
94.3

94.8
94.1

95.7
94.2

96.7
95.0

96.5
95.4

96.4
96.2

96.8
96.6

96.5
96.6

96.4
96.3

97.2
96.2

98.5
96.6

Capital goods......................................................
Electric and electrical generating equipment.........
Nonelectrical machinery.....................................

99.2
102.0
97.3

99.4
102.1
97.5

99.5
101.8
97.6

99.2
101.8
97.3

98.7
102.0
96.5

98.5
101.8
96.2

98.5
102.0
96.2

98.4
102.0
96.0

98.3
102.1
95.8

98.3
102.0
95.7

98.1
101.9
95.5

98.3
101.7
95.7

98.4
101.4
95.8

Automotive vehicles, parts, and engines.................

100.8

100.9

100.7

100.9

100.9

100.9

101.1

101.1

101.4

101.4

101.3

101.4

101.4

Consumer goods, excluding automotive..................
Nondurables, manufactured................................
Durables, manufactured.....................................

99.1
98.2
99.9

99.1
98.1
99.7

98.9
98.2
99.3

99.0
98.3
99.2

99.1
98.5
99.4

99.1
98.5
99.5

99.3
98.7
99.7

99.3
98.7
99.6

99.4
98.8
99.6

99.3
98.6
99.7

99.3
98.7
99.6

99.1
98.3
99.5

99.3
98.8
99.4

Agricultural commodities.......................................
Nonagricultural commodities..................................

98.3
97.2

98.9
97.5

99.6
97.8

99.5
97.8

100.7
97.8

103.4
97.9

105.2
97.9

108.6
98.0

106.6
98.1

108.7
98.0

108.2
97.8

108.5
98.2

108.0
98.7

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

41.

U.S. import price indexes by end-use category

[2000 = 100]
2002

Category
Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

July

2003

Aug.

Sept.

Feb.

ALL COMMODITIES..........................................................

91.6

92.8

94.3

94.4

94.1

94.5

94.8

95.5

95.5

94.6

95.2

96.7

98.5

Foods, feeds, and beverages................................
Agricultural foods, feeds, and beverages..............
Nonagricultural (fish, beverages) food products....

93.8
97.2
86.8

95.0
99.5
85.5

96.0
100.9
85.5

97.2
102.7
85.2

96.2
101.3
85.1

96.9
102.4
85.0

96.9
102.0
86.0

99.7
105.4
87.3

100.0
106.1
86.6

99.9
105.8
87.1

100.2
106.0
87.5

101.0
107.6
86.5

100.8
107.2
86.7

Industrial supplies and materials............................

79.8

84.9

90.3

90.8

89.8

91.3

92.6

95.2

95.4

92.3

94.6

100.6

107.3

Fuels and lubricants...........................................
Petroleum and petroleum products...................

65.9
65.7

76.4
76.9

87.1
86.7

88.5
88.4

85.8
85.3

88.1
88.5

90.7
91.8

96.2
97.1

96.7
97.0

89.8
89.0

94.6
93.8

107.3
106.3

120.5
119.4

Paper and paper base stocks.............................
Materials associated with nondurable
supplies and materials......................................
Selected building materials...............................
Unfinished metals associated with durable goods..
Nonmetals associated with durable goods...........

88.8

88.0

87.0

86.7

87.1

88.0

89.3

90.5

90.1

89.7

89.2

88.9

89.6

96.0
96.1
83.8
97.6

95.9
100.7
83.8
97.2

97.4
101.0
86.2
97.6

97.4
99.6
86.6
96.8

97.1
99.1
88.5
96.7

98.1
99.9
89.4
97.1

99.1
99.2
88.6
97.0

99.4
97.6
89.7
96.9

99.7
96.9
89.9
96.9

99.8
96.4
90.5
96.9

100.1
95.0
91.5
97.0

101.5
95.7
90.5
97.3

102.5
97.1
93.3
97.8

Capital goods......................................................
Electric and electrical generating equipment.........
Nonelectrical machinery......................................

95.4
96.7
94.5

95.2
95.5
94.4

95.2
95.3
94.5

95.1
95.0
94.4

95.1
95.1
94.4

94.8
95.3
93.8

94.9
95.9
93.9

94.7
95.7
93.7

94.0
95.2
92.9

94.0
94.8
92.9

93.9
94.9
92.8

93.8
95.1
92.7

94.0
95.5
92.8

Automotive vehicles, parts, and engines.................

100.1

99.9

100.1

99.9

100.1

100.2

100.2

100.3

100.7

100.4

100.5

100.3

100.4

Consumer goods, excluding automotive..................
Nondurables, manufactured................................
Durables, manufactured......................................
Nonmanufactured consumer goods.....................

98.4
99.7
97.4
95.7

98.2
99.2
97.3
96.1

98.1
99.1
97.2
95.8

98.2
99.1
97.2
97.6

98.1
99.1
97.2
95.6

98.2
99.3
97.3
95.3

98.2
99.6
97.0
95.6

98.1
99.5
96.8
95.4

98.1
99.5
96.8
95.4

97.9
99.3
96.7
95.2

98.0
99.7
96.5
95.4

98.1
96.7
96.7
95.5

98.0
99.9
96.4
95.5

42.

U.S. international price Indexes for selected categories of services

[2000 = 100]____________________

.

2000

Category

Dec.

2001
Mar.

June

2002
Sept.

Dec.

Mar.

June

Sept.

Dec.

Air freight (inbound).................................................
Air freight (outbound)..............................................

99.0
100.2

97.9
100.1

95.1
98.0

94.9
97.6

95.2
97.9

93.9
95.9

98.3
98.4

100.3
97.3

105.8
95.4

Air passenger fares (U.S. carriers)............................
Air passenger fares (foreign carriers)........................
Ocean liner freight (inbound)....................................

99.9
97.6
101.0

101.9
100.7
102.8

106.4
103.8
100.8

107.6
110.2
98.1

103.5
100.8
93.6

103.3
99.4
91.7

110.7
110.9
90.3

114.3
118.5
93.5

107.9
107.2
93.3

86 Monthly Labor Review

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

April 2003

43.

Indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, and unit costs, quarterly data seasonally adjusted

[1992 = 100]

Ite m

IV

1

II

2002

2001

2000

1999

III

IV

I

II

III

IV

1

III

II

IV

Business
115.2
127.0
107.8
110.2
115.3
112.1

115.3
131.4
110.5
114.0
110.7
112.8

117.2
132.4
110.5
113.0
114.1
113.4

117.3
135.0
111.7
115.1
111.2
113.7

117.9
136.3
111.9
115.6
112.0
114.3

117.5
137.3
111.8
116.9
112.3
115.2

117.4
137.5
111.0
117.1
113.6
115.8

117.9
137.8
111.1
116.8
115.5
116.4

120.1
138.3
111.6
115.1
117.2
115.9

122.5
139.3
112.0
113.7
119.9
116.0

123.1
140.8
112.3
114.4
119.3
116.2

124.8
142.7
113.2
114.3
119.7
116.3

124.9
144.2
113.8
115.4
118.9
116,7

114.7
126.3
107.2
110.1
117.0
112.6

114.7
130.8
110.0
114.0
112.3
113.4

116.4
131.5
109.8
113.0
115.6
113.9

116.6
134.3
111.1
115.2
112.8
114.3

117.1
135.3
111.2
115.6
113.4
114.8

116.7
136.3
110.9
116.8
113.8
115.7

116.6
136.3
110.1
116.9
115.3
116.3

117.2
136.7
110.2
116.6
117.2
116.8

119.3
137.2
110.7
115.0
119.2
116.5

121.8
138.1
111.1
113.4
121.7
116.4

122.3
139.5
111.2
114.1
121.7
116.8

123.9
141.3
112.1
114.0
121.8
116.9

123.2
142.9
112.8
115.1
121.0
117.2

115.8
122.7
104.2
105.7
106.0
104.6
126.0
110.1
107.4

117.8
126.9
106.7
106.9
107.8
104.5
119.5
108.4
108.0

118.3
127.8
106.6
107.5
108.0
106.3
118.8
109.5
108.5

119.5
130.4
107.9
108.6
109.1
107.1
109.5
107.7
108.6

119.5
131.7
108.2
109.8
110.2
108.9
98.6
106.3
108.9

118.8
131.3
106.9
110.8
110.6
111.6
93.1
106.9
109.3

119.4
131.9
106.5
111.3
110.4
113.5
95.4
108.9
109.9

120.4
132.7
107.0
111.7
110.3
115.5
97.9
111.0
110.5

123.5
133.6
107.8
109.8
108.2
114.1
107.6
112.4
109.6

124.9
134.7
108.4
109.5
107.9
114.0
107.6
112.4
109.4

236.7
136.2
108.6
109.4
107.5
114.5
107.8
112.8
109.3

128.4
138.2
109.6
109.6
107.7
114.8
104.1
112.1
109.1

132.1
124.2
105.4
94.0

133.6
131.4
110.5
98.4

134.9
129.3
107.9
95.9

135.4
132.2
109.4
97.7

135.9
131.5
108.0
96.7

135.4
132.0
107.4
97.5

135.4
133.0
107.4
98.2

136.4
133.3
107.5
97.8

137.6
134.3
108.3
97.6

140.1
135.6
109.0
96.8

141.5
137.2
109.4
96.9

143.4
139.1
110.3
97.0

Nonfarm business

Nonfinancial corporations
_
_
_
_
_
_

Manufacturing
Compensation per hour...........................................................
Unit labor costs............................................................................


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Monthly Labor Review

April 2003

143.5
140.9
111.2
98.2

87

Current Labor Statistics:

44.

Productivity Data

Annual indexes of multifactor productivity and related measures, selected years

[1996 = 100, unless otherwise indicated]
Ite m

1960

1970

1980

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

P rivate b u s in e s s

Productivity:
Output per hour of all persons................................
Output per unit of capital services...........................
Multifactor productivity...........................................
Output....................................................................
Inputs:
Labor input...........................................................
Capital services.....................................................
Combined units of labor and capital input................
Capital per hour of all persons..................................

45.6
110.4
65.2
27.5

63.0
111.1
80.0
42.0

75.8
101.5
88.3
59.4

90.2
99.3
95.3
83.6

91.3
96.1
94.4
82.6

94.8
97.7
96.6
85.7

95.4
98.5
97.1
88.5

96.6
100.3
98.1
92.8

97.3
99.7
98.4
95.8

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

102.0
100.5
101.1
105.2

104.8
100.1
102.6
110.6

104.8
100.1
102.6
110.6

54.0
24.9
42.3
41.3

61.0
37.8
52.4
56.7

71.9
58.6
67.3
74.7

89.4
84.2
87.7
90.8

88.3
86.0
87.5
95.0

89.3
87.7
88.8
97.0

91.8
89.8
91.1
96.8

95.6
92.6
94.6
96.3

98.0
96.0
97.3
97.6

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

103.7
104.7
104.0
101.5

106.4
110.4
107.7
104.7

106.4
110.4
107.7
104.7

48.7
120.1
69.1
27.2

64.9
118.3
82.6
41.9

77.3
105.7
90.5
59.6

90.3
100.0
95.6
83.5

91.4
96.6
94.7
82.5

94.8
97.9
96.6
85.5

95.3
98.8
97.1
88.4

96.5
100.3
98.1
92.6

97.5
99.9
98.6
95.8

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

101.7
100.2
100.9
105.1

104.5
99.8
102.4
110.6

104.5
99.8
102.4
110.6

50.1
22.6
39.3
40.5

59.3
35.5
50.7
54.8

70.7
56.4
65.9
73.1

89.2
83.5
87.3
90.3

88.0
85.4
87.1
94.7

89.0
87.3
88.4
96.8

91.8
89.5
91.0
96.5

95.4
92.3
94.4
96.3

97.8
95.9
97.2
97.6

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

103.8
104.9
104.2
101.5

106.6
110.8
108.0
104.7

106.6
110.8
108.0
104.7

41.8
124.3
72.7
38.5

54.2
116.5
84.4
56.5

70.1
100.9
86.6
75.3

92.8
101.6
99.3
97.3

95.0
97.5
98.3
95.4

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

101.9
101.1
100.4
103.3

105.0
104.0
102.6
108.7

109.0
105.0
105.0
113.4

112.8
104.5
106.1
116.9

117.1
105.6
109.8
123.5

124.3
106.5
113.2
130.7

124.3
106.5
113.2
130.7

92.0
30.9
51.3
38.2
28.2
52.9

104.2
48.5
85.4
44.8
48.8
67.0

107.5
74.7
92.5
75.0
73.7
87.0

104.8
95.8
99.9
92.5
92.5
98.0

100.4
97.9
100.1
93.6
92.1
97.0

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

101.4
102.2
103.7
105.7
103.0
102.9

103.6
104.5
107.3
111.3
105.1
106.0

104.0
108.0
109.5
112.8
110.0
107.9

103.7
111.9
107.0
120.4
108.9
110.2

105.5
116.9
103.9
120.4
114.2
112.5

105.2
122.8
109.2
127.2
116.8
115.5

105.2
122.8
109.2
127.2
116.8
115.5

P rivate n o n fa rm b u s in e s s

Productivity:
Output per hour of all persons................................
Output per unit of capital services...........................
Multifactor productivity...........................................
Output....................................................................
Inputs:
Labor input...........................................................
Capital services.....................................................
Combined units of labor and capital input................
Capital per hour of all persons..................................
M a n u fa c tu rin g (1992 = 100)
Productivity:
Output per hour of all persons.................................
Output per unit of capital services...........................
Multifactor productivity...........................................
Output................................................................
inputs:
Hours of all persons...............................................
Capital services.....................................................
Energy......................................................
Nonenergy materials..............................................
Purchased business services.................................
Combined units of all factor inputs...........................

88 Monthly Labor Review

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

April 2003

45.

Annual indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, selected years

[1992 = 100]
Item

1960

1970

1980

1990

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

Business
48.8
13.7
59.8
28.0
25.2
27.0

67.0
23.5
78.6
35.1
31.6
33.9

80.4
54.2
89.2
67.4
61.5
65.2

95.2
90.7
96.3
95.3
93.9
94.8

101.9
104.5
99.9
102.6
106.4
104.0

102.6
106.7
99.6
104.1
109.4
106.0

105.4
110.1
100.1
104.5
113.3
107.7

107.8
113.5
101.0
105.3
117.1
109.7

110.6
119.7
105.0
108.2
114.5
110.6

113.5
125.2
107.6
110.3
113.9
111.8

116.9
133.8
111.2
114.4
112.0
1113.5

118.2
137.7
111.4
116.5
114.7
115.8

123.8
141.8
112.8
111.4
119.5
116.3

51.9
14.3
62.6
27.5
24.6
26.5

68.9
23.7
79.2
34.4
31.3
33.3

82.0
54.6
89.8
66.5
60.5
64.3

95.3
90.5
96.2
95.0
93.6
94.5

101.8
104.3
99.7
102.5
106.9
104.1

102.8
106.6
99.4
103.7
110.4
106.1

105.4
109.8
99.8
104.2
113.5
107.6

107.5
113.1
100.6
105.2
118.0
109.8

110.3
119.1
104.5
108.0
115.7
110.8

112.9
124.3
106.8
110.1
115.5
112.1

116.2
133.0
110.6
114.4
113.5
114.1

117.5
136.6
110.5
116.3
116.4
116.3

123.1
140.5
111.8
114.1
121.6
116.8

55.4
15.6
68.1
26.8
28.1
23.3
50.2
30.2
28.8

70.4
25.3
84.4
34.8
35.9
31.9
44.4
35.1
35.6

81.1
56.4
92.9
68.4
69.6
65.1
68.8
66.0
68.4

95.4
90.8
96.5
95.9
95.2
98.0
94.3
97.1
95.8

103.1
104.2
99.6
101.1
101.0
101.3
131.7
109.0
103.7

104.2
106.2
99.0
102.0
101.9
102.2
139.0
111.6
105.1

107.5
109.0
99.0
101.2
101.4
100.6
152.2
113.8
105.5

108.4
110.3
98.1
101.5
101.8
100.9
156.9
115.2
106.2

111.7
116.0
101.7
103.3
103.8
102.2
141.7
112.3
106.6

114.7
121.1
104.1
105.1
105.6
103.5
131.7
110.7
107.3

118.8
129.2
107.4
108.2
108.8
106.7
111.6
108.0
108.5

120.5
132.5
107.0
110.9
109.9
113.7
98.5
109.8
109.8

41.8
14.9
65.0
35.6
26.8
30.2

54.2
23.7
79.2
43.8
29.3
35.0

70.1
55.6
91.4
79.3
80.2
79.9

92.9
90.8
96.4
97.8
99.8
99.0

105.0
105.6
101.0
100.7
102.8
102.0

109.0
107.9
100.6
99.0
106.9
103.9

112.8
109.4
99.4
96.9
109.9
104.8

117.6
111.5
99.1
94.8
110.0
104.1

123.3
117.4
103.0
95.2
103.7
100.4

129.7
122.1
104.9
94.1
104.9
100.7

134.9
131.1
109.0
97.2
107.0
103.2

136.0
133.1
107.7
97.9

Nonfarm business

Nonfinancial corporations

Manufacturing
Output per hour of all persons..................................

_
_
142.1
138.2
110.0
97.2

_

Dash indicates data not available.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Monthly Labor Review

April 2003

89

Current Labor Statistics:

Productivity Data

46. Annual indexes of output per hour for selected 3-digit SIC industries
[1987=100]
Industry

SIC

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

102
104
122
131
142

102.7
122.3
118.7
97.0
102.2

100.5
127.4
122.4
97.9
99.8

115.2
141.6
133.0
102.1
105.0

118.1
159.8
141.2
105.9
103.6

126.0
160.8
148.1
112.4
108.7

117.2
144.2
155.9
119.4
105.4

116.5
138.3
168.0
123.9
107.2

118.9
158.5
176.6
125.2
112.6

118.3
187.6
188.0
127.5
110.2

110.0
197.5
194.9
134.5
105.0

Meat products...................................................
Dairy products..................................................
Preserved fruits and vegetables.........................
Grain mill products...........................................
Bakery products................................................

201
202
203
204
205

97.1
107.3
95.6
105.4
92.7

99.6
108.3
99.2
104.9
90.6

104.6
111.4
100.5
107.8
93.8

104.3
109.6
106.8
109.2
94.4

101.2
111.8
107.6
108.4
96.4

102.3
116.4
109.1
115.4
97.3

97.4
116.0
109.2
108.0
95.6

102.5
119.3
110.7
118.2
99.1

102.3
119.3
117.8
126.2
100.9

101.8
112.7
120.4
129.3
106.4

Sugar and confectionery products.......................
Fats and oils.....................................................
Beverages.......................................................
Miscellaneous food and kindred products............
Cigarettes........................................................

206
207
208
209
211

103.2
118.1
117.0
99.2
113.2

102.0
120.1
120.0
101.7
107.6

99.8
114.1
127.1
101.5
111.6

104.5
112.6
126.4
105.2
106.5

106.2
111.8
130.1
100.9
126.6

108.3
120.3
133.5
102.9
142.9

113.7
110.1
135.0
109.1
147.2

116.7
120.2
135.5
104.0
147.2

123.0
137.3
136.4
112.4
152.2

127.0
154.4
129.7
113.9
137.7

Broadwoven fabric mills, cotton..........................
Broadwoven fabric mills, manmade.....................
Narrow fabric mills............................................

103.1
111.3
96.5

111.2
116.2
99.6

110.3
126.2
112.9

117.8
131.7
111.4

122.1
142.5
120.1

131.2
162.2
110.8

136.2
168.6
117.7

139.3
175.3
124.9

107.5

114.0

119.3

127.9

134.1

150.3

138.0

135.9

83.4

146.6

79.9

78.6

79.3

81.2

134.0
145.3
118.9
138.3
78.5

137.3
147.6
126.3

Textile finishing, except wool.............................

221
222
224
225
226

79.2

94.3

93.7

94.4

Carpets and rugs..............................................
Yarn and thread mills........................................
Miscellaneous textile goods...............................
Men's and boys' furnishings...............................
Women's and misses' outerwear.........................

227
228
229
232
233

93.2
110.2
109.2
102.1
104.1

89.2
111.4
104.6
108.4
104.3

96.1
119.6
106.5
109.1
109.4

97.1
126.6
110.4
108.4
121.8

93.3
130.7
118.5
111.7
127.4

95.8
137.4
123.7
123.4
135.5

100.2
147.4
123.1
134.7
141.6

100.3
150.4
118.7
162.1
149.9

102.3
153.0
120.1
174.8
151.9

96.0
157.6
128.0
190.9
173.9

Women's and children's undergarments..............
Hats, caps, and millinery....................................
Miscellaneous apparel and accessories..............
Miscellaneous fabricated textile products
Sawmills and planing mills.................................

234
235
238
239
242

102.1
89.2
90.6
99.9
99.8

113.7
91.1
91.8
100.7
102.6

117.4
93.6
91.3
107.5
108.1

124.5
87.2
94.0
108.5
101.9

138.0
77.7
105.5
107.8
103.3

161.3
84.3
116.8
109.2
110.2

174.5
82.2
120.1
105.6
115.6

208.9
87.1
101.5
119.2
116.9

216.4
98.7
108.0
117.3
118.7

294.7
99.3
105.8
128.8
125.4

Millwork, plywood, and structural members..........
Wood containers..............................................
Wood buildings and mobile homes......................
Miscellaneous wood products............................
Household furniture...........................................

243
244
245
249
251

98.0
111.2
103.1
107.7
104.5

98.0
113.1
103.0
110.5
107.1

99.9
109.4
103.1
114.2
110.5

97.0
100.1
103.8
115.3
110.6

94.5
100.9
98.3
111.8
112.5

92.7
106.1
97.0
115.4
116.9

92.4
106.7
96.7
114.4
121.6

89.1
106.2
100.3
123.4
121.3

91.3
106.5
99.2
131.2
125.7

89.2
103.9
100.3
140.7
128.9

Office furniture..................................................
Public building and related furniture...................
Partitions and fixtures........................................
Miscellaneous furniture and fixtures...................
Pulp mills.........................................................

252
253
254
259
261

95.0
119.8
95.6
103.5
116.7

94.1
120.2
93.0
102.1
128.3

102.5
140.6
102.7
99.5
137.3

103.2
161.0
107.4
103.6
122.5

100.5
157.4
98.9
104.7
128.9

101.1
173.3
101.2
110.0
131.9

106.4
181.5
97.5
113.2
132.6

118.3
214.9
121.1
110.7
82.3

113.1
207.6
125.6
121.9
86.6

108.9
222.4
125.9
119.1
84.8

Paper mills.......................................................
Paperboard mills..............................................
Paperboard containers and boxes.......................
Miscellaneous converted paper products.............
Newspapers.....................................................

262
263
265
267
271

102.3
100.6
101.3
101.4
90.6

99.2
101.4
103.4
105.3
85.8

103.3
104.4
105.2
105.5
81.5

102.4
108.4
107.9
107.9
79.4

110.2
114.9
108.4
110.6
79.9

118.6
119.5
105.1
113.3
79.0

111.6
118.0
106.3
113.6
77.4

112.0
126.7
109.7
119.5
79.0

114.8
127.8
113.5
123.0
83.6

126.2
134.9
111.9
126.0
86.0

Periodicals.......................................................
Books...............................................................
Miscellaneous publishing..................................
Commercial printing..........................................
Manifold business forms....................................

272
273
274
275
276

93.9
96.6
92.2
102.5
93.0

89.5
100.8
95.9
102.0
89.1

92.9
97.7
105.8
108.0
94.5

89.5
103.5
104.5
106.9
91.1

81.9
103.0
97.5
106.5
82.0

87.8
101.6
94.8
107.2
76.9

89.1
99.3
93.6
108.3
75.2

100.1
102.6
114.5
108.8
77.9

112.2
100.9
119.4
109.9
76.7

111.2
106.1
127.2
115.0
70.6

Greeting cards..................................................
Blankbooks and bookbinding.............................
Printing trade services.......................................
Industrial inorganic chemicals............................
Plastics materials and synthetics........................

277
278
279
281
282

100.6
99.4
99.3
106.8
100.9

92.7
96.1
100.6
109.7
100.0

96.7
103.6
112.0
109.7
107.5

91.4
98.7
115.3
105.6
112.0

89.0
105.4
111.0
102.3
125.3

92.5
108.7
116.7
109.3
128.3

90.8
114.5
126.2
110.1
125.3

92.2
114.2
123.3
116.8
135.4

104.1
116.5
126.7
145.8
142.2

109.3
123.8
121.5
148.5
148.6

Drugs...............................................................
Soaps, cleaners, and toilet goods.......................
Paints and allied products.................................
Industrial organic chemicals...............................
Agricultural chemicals........................................

283
284
285
286
287

103.8
103.8
106.3
101.4
104.7

104.5
105.3
104.3
95.8
99.5

99.5
104.4
102.9
94.6
99.5

99.7
108.7
108.8
92.2
103.8

104.6
111.2
116.7
99.9
105.0

108.7
118.6
118.0
98.6
108.5

112.5
120.9
125.6
99.0
110.0

112.4
126.4
126.4
111.3
119.8

104.3
122.7
126.8
105.7
118.0

105.6
114.8
122.7
120.6
104.6

1999

Mining

Copper ores.....................................................
Gold and silver ores..........................................
Bituminous coal and lignite mining......................
Crude petroleum and natural gas........................
Crushed and broken stone................................
Manufacturing

Knitting mills............................................................

90 Monthly Labor Review

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

April 2003

46. Continued - Annual indexes of output per hour for selected 3-digit SIC industries
_________

[1987=100]
Industry

SIC

Miscellaneous chemical products.............................
Petroleum refining.......................................................
Asphalt paving and roofing materials.......................
Miscellaneous petroleum and coal products...........
Tires and inner tubes..................................................

289
291
295
299
301

97.3
109.2
98.0
94.8
103.0

96.1
106.6
94.1
90.6
102.4

101.8
111.3
100.4
101.5
107.8

107.1
120.1
108.0
104.2
116.5

105.7
123.8
104.9
96.3
124.1

107.8
132.3
111.2
87.4
131.1

110.1
142.0
113.1
87.1
138.8

120.3
149.2
123.1
96.5
149.1

120.8
155.8
124.7
98.5
144.1

123.3
170.2
123.4
86.5
142.1

125.6
180.2
126.1
82.9
145.9

Hose and belting and gaskets and packing............
Fabricated rubber products, n.e.c............................
Miscellaneous plastics products, n.e.c....................
Footwear, except rubber............................................
Flat glass.......................................................................

305
306
308
314
321

96.1
109.0
105.7
101.1
84.5

92.4
109.9
108.3
94.4
83.6

97.8
115.2
114.4
104.2
92.7

99.7
123.1
116.7
105.2
97.7

102.7
119.1
120.8
113.0
97.6

104.6
121.5
121.0
117.1
99.6

107.4
121.0
124.7
126.1
101.5

113.5
125.3
129.9
121.4
107.6

112.7
132.3
133.8
110.9
114.0

110.6
136.9
140.9
132.6
129.4

115.4
144.7
145.4
146.2
140.4

Glass and glassware, pressed or blown..................
Products of purchased glass.....................................
Cement, hydraulic........................................................
Structural clay products.............................................
Pottery and related products.....................................

322
323
324
325
326

104.8
92.6
112.4
109.6
98.7

102.3
97.7
108.3
109.8
95.9

108.9
101.5
115.1
111.4
99.5

108.7
106.2
119.9
106.8
100.3

112.9
105.9
125.6
114.0
108.5

115.7
106.1
124.3
112.6
109.4

121.4
122.0
128.7
119.6
119.4

128.3
125.1
133.1
111.9
124.2

135.2
122.0
134.1
114.8
127.4

139.3
130.2
138.6
123.5
122.0

135.8
137.2
136.9
124.8
121.2

Concrete, gypsum, and plaster products.................
Miscellaneous nonmetallic mineral products.........
Blast furnace and basic steel products....................
Iron and steel foundries.............................................
Primary nonferrous metals.........................................

327
329
331
332
333

102.3
95.4
109.7
106.1
102.3

101.2
94.0
107.8
104.5
110.7

102.5
104.3
117.0
107.2
101.9

104.6
104.5
133.6
112.1
107.9

101.5
106.3
142.4
113.0
105.3

104.5
107.8
142.6
112.7
111.0

107.3
110.4
147.5
116.2
110.8

107.6
114.7
155.0
120.8
112.0

112.8
114.9
151.0
121.1
118.9

111.1
113.3
155.6
128.9
117.7

105.1
116.1
160.1
132.1
111.9

Nonferrous rolling and drawing.................................
Nonferrous foundries (castings)................................
Miscellaneous primary metal products....................
Metal cans and shipping containers.........................
Cutlery, handtools, and hardware............................

335
336
339
341
342

92.7
104.0
113.7
117.6
97.3

91.0
103.6
109.1
122.9
96.8

96.0
103.6
114.5
127.8
100.1

98.3
108.5
111.3
132.3
104.0

101.2
112.1
134.5
140.9
109.2

99.2
117.8
152.2
144.2
111.3

104.0
122.3
149.6
155.2
118.2

111.3
127.0
136.2
160.3
114.6

115.7
131.5
140.0
163.8
115.7

121.4
129.8
149.0
157.9
121.9

118.0
129.7
154.3
159.5
125.4

Plumbing and heating, except electric.....................
Fabricated structural metal products........................
Metal forgings and stampings....................................
Metal services, n.e.c....................................................
Ordnance and accessories, n.e.c.............................

343
344
346
347
348

102.6
98.8
95.6
104.7
82.1

102.0
100.0
92.9
99.4
81.5

98.4
103.9
103.7
111.6
88.6

102.0
104.8
108.7
120.6
84.6

109.1
107.7
108.5
123.0
83.6

109.2
105.8
109.3
127.7
87.6

118.6
106.5
113.6
128.4
87.5

127.3
111.9
120.2
124.4
93.7

130.5
112.7
125.9
127.3
96.6

125.7
112.8
128.3
126.1
91.0

132.2
112.8
129.8
135.7
92.8

Miscellaneous fabricated metal products................
Engines and turbines..................................................
Farm and garden machinery.....................................
Construction and related machinery........................
Metalworking machinery............................................

349
351
352
353
354

97.5
106.5
116.5
107.0
101.1

97.4
105.8
112.9
99.1
96.4

101.1
103.3
113.9
102.0
104.3

102.0
109.2
118.6
108.2
107.4

103.2
122.3
125.0
117.7
109.9

106.6
122.7
134.7
122.1
114.8

108.3
136.6
137.2
123.3
114.9

107.7
136.9
141.2
132.5
119.2

111.6
146.1
148.5
137.6
119.8

109.3
151.5
128.6
133.6
123.0

109.2
164.5
139.6
139.8
129.8

Special industry machinery........................................
General industrial machinery.....................................
Computer and office equipment................................
Refrigeration and service machinery........................
Industrial machinery, n.e.c.........................................

355
356
357
358
359

107.5
101.5
138.1
103.6
107.3

108.3
101.6
149.6
100.7
109.0

106.0
101.6
195.7
104.9
117.0

113.6
104.8
258.6
108.6
118.5

121.2
106.7
328.6
110.7
127.4

132.3
109.0
469.4
112.7
138.8

134.0
109.4
681.3
114.7
141.4

131.7
110.0
960.2
115.0
129.3

124.5
111.2
1356.6
121.4
127.5

Electric distribution equipment.................................
Electrical industrial apparatus...................................
Household appliances................................................
Electric lighting and wiring equipment.....................
Communications equipment.......................................

361
362
363
364
366

106.3
107.7
105.8
99.9
123.8

106.5
107.1
106.5
97.5
129.1

119.6
117.1
115.0
105.7
154.9

122.2
132.9
123.4
107.8
163.1

131.8
134.9
131.4
113.4
186.4

143.0
150.8
127.3
113.7
200.7

143.9
154.3
127.4
116.9
229.5

142.8
164.2
142.9
121.8
275.4

147.5
162.3
150.2
129.2
284.5

148.9
158.3
149.5
132.4
371.9

155.4
157.0
162.4
134.8
448.8

Electronic components and accessories.................
Miscellaneous electrical equipment & supplies...
Motor vehicles and equipment..................................
Aircraft and parts.........................................................
Ship and boat building and repairing.......................

367
369
371
372
373

133.4
90.6
102.4
98.9
103.7

154.7
98.6
96.6
108.2
96.3

189.3
101.3
104.2
112.3
102.7

217.9
108.2
106.2
115.2
105.9

274.0
110.5
108.8
109.5
103.8

401.5
114.1
106.7
107.8
98.1

515.0
123.1
107.2
113.1
99.3

613.4
128.3
116.3
114.7
105.5

768.6
135.3
125.2
140.1
102.5

1062.6
147.2
136.7
138.1
113.1

1440.1
156.0
127.1
132.2
121.6

Railroad equipment.....................................................
Motorcycles, bicycles, and parts...............................
Guided missiles, space vehicles, parts....................
Search and navigation equipment............................
Measuring and controlling devices...........................

374
375
376
381
382

141.1
93.8
116.5
112.7
106.4

146.9
99.8
110.5
118.9
113.1

147.9
108.4
110.5
122.1
119.9

151.0
130.9
119.4
129.1
124.0

152.5
125.1
114.9
132.1
133.8

150.0
120.3
116.9
149.5
146.4

148.3
125.5
125.1
142.2
150.5

184.2
120.4
133.6
149.5
142.4

189.1
127.7
138.9
149.1
143.5

212.8
122.4
156.1
149.6
152.4

218.4
119.4
113.3
163.7
158.5

Medical instruments and supplies............................
Ophthalmic goods........................................................
Photographic equipment & supplies........................
Jewelry, silverware, and plated ware.......................
Musical instruments....................................................

384
385
386
391
393

116.9
121.2
107.8
99.3
97.1

118.7
125.1
110.2
95.8
96.9

123.5
144.5
116.4
96.7
96.0

127.3
157.8
126.9
96.7
95.6

126.7
160.6
132.7
99.5
88.7

131.5
167.2
129.5
100.2
86.9

139.8
188.2
128.7
102.6
78.8

147.4
196.3
121.5
114.2
82.9

158.6
199.0
128.0
113.1
81.4

160.4
235.2
160.6
134.3
97.1

167.0
250.2
169.4
144.9
105.3

19 9 0

1991

199 2

199 3

199 4

19 9 5

1 99 6

1997

1998

19 9 9

2000

138.6 172.2
113.1
118.7
1862.5 2172.0
124.0 122.3
135.8 141.8

See footnotes at end of table.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Monthly Labor Review

April 2003

91

Current Labor Statistics:

Productivity Data

46. Continued - Annual indexes of output per hour for selected 3-digit SIC industries
[1987=100]
Industry

SIC

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

Toys and sporting goods....................................
Pens, pencils, office, and art supplies.................
Costume jewelry and notions.............................
Miscellaneous manufactures..............................

394
395
396
399

108.1
118.2
105.3
106.5

109.7
116.8
106.7
109.2

104.9
111.3
110.8
109.5

114.2
111.6
115.8
107.7

109.7
129.9
129.0
106.1

113.6
135.2
143.7
108.1

119.9
144.1
142.2
112.8

125.7
127.5
118.0
109.4

Transportation

Railroad transportation......................................

4011
Trucking, except local'......................................
4213
unitea states postal service -.............................
431
Air transportation.............................................. 4512,13,22(pts.)

1997

1998

131.6
132.5
131.2
108.5

1999

126.6
123.4
130.8
114.9

2000

140.4
124.9
145.3
115.9

118.5

127.8

139.6

145.4

150.3

156.2

167.0

169.8

173.3

182.5

195.8

111.1
104.0
92.9

116.9
103.7
92.5

123.4
104.5
96.9

126.6
107.1
100.2

129.5
106.6
105.7

125.4
106.5
108.6

130.9
104.7
111.1

132.4
108.3
111.6

129.9
109.8
108.4

131.6
110.9
109.1

131.2
113.6
110.7

481
483
484
491,3(pts.)
492,3(pts.)

113.3
104.9
92.6
110.1
105.8

119.8
106.1
87.6
113.4
109.6

127.7
108.3
88.5
115.2
111.1

135.5
106.7
85.3
24.1
121.8

142.2
110.1
83.4
50.5
125.6

148.1
109.6
84.5
80.8
137.1

159.5
105.8
81.9
116.8
145.9

160.9
101.7
84.7
150.0
158.6

170.1
104.5
86.1
159.6
144.4

186.3
108.4
85.0
162.0
147.2

201.3
109.9
87.6
169.6
160.6

Lumber and other building materials dealers........
Paint, glass, and wallpaper stores......................
Hardware stores...............................................
Retail nurseries, lawn and garden supply stores...
Department stores............................................

521
523
525
526
531

104.3
106.8
115.3
84.7
96.8

102.3
100.4
108.7
89.3
102.0

106.4
107.6
115.2
101.2
105.4

111.4
114.2
113.9
107.1
110.4

118.9
127.8
121.2
117.0
113.5

117.8
130.9
115.6
117.4
116.1

121.6
133.5
119.5
136.4
123.8

121.8
134.8
119.0
127.5
129.1

134.2
163.5
137.9
133.7
135.8

143.0
165.1
147.6
150.4
146.0

144.2
170.1
145.7
154.5
160.4

Variety stores...................................................
Miscellaneous general merchandise stores..........
Grocery stores..................................................
Meat and fish (seafood) markets.........................
Retail bakeries..................................................

533
539
541
542
546

154.6
118.6
96.6
98.9
91.2

159.0
124.8
96.3
90.8
96.7

173.9
140.4
96.5
99.2
96.5

191.9
164.3
96.0
97.7
86.5

197.9
164.8
95.4
95.7
85.3

212.4
167.4
93.9
94.4
83.0

240.4
167.7
92.1
86.4
75.9

260.1
170.4
91.7
90.8
67.6

271.2
185.9
92.2
95.7
68.1

315.0
199.6
95.3
97.4
83.1

330.9
224.3
96.1
110.0
88.4

New and used car dealers.................................
Auto and home supply stores.............................
Gasoline service stations...................................
Men's and boy's wear stores..............................
Women's clothing stores....................................

551
553
554
561
562

106.7
103.7
103.0
115.6
106.6

104.9
100.2
104.8
121.9
111.2

107.4
101.6
110.2
122.3
123.6

108.6
100.8
115.9
119.5
130.0

109.7
105.3
121.1
121.7
130.4

108.1
109.1
127.2
121.4
139.9

109.1
108.2
126.1
129.8
154.2

108.8
108.1
126.1
136.3
157.3

108.7
113.1
133.9
145.2
176.0

111.6
115.5
141.7
154.5
190.2

112.5
119.3
139.0
165.0
205.7

Family clothing stores........................................
Shoe stores......................................................
Furniture and homefurnishings stores.................
Household appliance stores...............................
Radio, television, computer, and music stores.....

565
566
571
572
573

107.8
107.9
104.6
104.6
120.8

111.5
107.8
105.4
107.2
129.3

118.6
115.5
113.9
116.1
139.3

121.5
117.3
113.3
118.7
153.8

127.7
130.7
114.7
122.4
178.2

141.8
139.2
117.4
139.6
198.1

146.9
151.9
123.6
142.2
206.6

150.2
148.4
124.2
155.2
216.8

153.1
145.0
127.3
184.2
258.3

155.9
152.9
134.5
186.4
309.1

160.4
160.2
141.1
209.3
359.4

Eating and drinking places.................................
Drug and proprietary stores...............................
Liquor stores.....................................................
Used merchandise stores...................................
Miscellaneous shopping goods stores.................

581
591
592
593
594

104.5
106.3
105.9
103.0
107.4

103.8
108.0
106.9
102.3
109.3

103.4
107.6
109.6
115.7
107.9

103.8
109.6
101.8
116.7
111.7

102.1
109.9
100.1
119.5
117.3

102.0
111.1
104.7
120.6
123.2

100.6
113.9
113.8
132.6
125.3

101.6
119.8
109.9
140.3
129.4

102.0
125.7
116.5
163.6
138.7

104.0
129.8
114.5
183.2
143.7

107.3
136.9
127.7
216.7
150.6

Nonstore retailers.............................................
Fuel dealers.....................................................
Retail stores, n.e.c............................................

596
598
599

111.1
84.6
114.5

112.5
85.3
104.0

126.5
84.3
112.5

132.2
91.9
118.1

149.0
99.0
125.8

152.5
111.4
127.0

173.5
112.5
140.2

186.8
109.1
147.8

208.3
105.8
157.4

220.6
115.2
162.5

263.2
117.3
168.1

Commercial banks............................................
Hotels and motels.............................................
Laundry, cleaning, and garment services.............
Photographic studios, portrait.............................
Beauty shops....................................................

602
701
721
722
723

107.7
96.2
102.3
98.2
97.5

110.1
99.3
99.9
92.1
95.8

111.0
108.0
99.3
95.8
100.9

118.5
106.5
99.9
101.8
97.0

121.7
109.9
105.0
108.3
101.1

126.4
110.5
106.6
116.2
104.8

129.7
110.0
109.8
110.7
107.6

133.0
108.2
109.0
114.1
108.5

132.6
108.2
116.0
121.6
110.5

135.9
109.9
120.8
107.7
113.4

143.2
114.1
123.6
112.0
114.5

Barber shops....................................................
Funeral services and crematories.......................
Automotive repair shops....................................
Motion picture theaters......................................

724
726
753
783

100.7
91.2
107.9
118.1

94.9
89.9
100.1
118.2

113.2
103.8
105.1
114.8

121.9
98.7
105.7
113.8

118.8
104.3
114.3
110.4

115.7
100.2
121.6
105.0

128.8
97.6
116.1
104.1

150.4
101.9
117.2
103.4

157.4
104.2
124.9
106.1

132.8
100.2
126.4
108.7

129.9
93.9
128.5
112.3

utilities

Telephone communications...............................
Radio and television broadcasting......................
Cable and other pay TV services........................
Electric utilities..................................................
Gas utilities......................................................
Trade

Finance and services

Meters to output per employee.
' Meters to output per tun-time equivalent employee year on tiscai Dasis.


92 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

April 2003

n.e.c. = not elsewhere classified


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

47. Unemployment rates, approximating U.S. concepts, in nine countries, quarterly data
seasonally adjusted
Annual average
Country

United States......
Canada..............
Australia.............
Jaoan1...............
France1..............
Italy1,2................
Sweden1.............
United Kinndom1..

2000

4.0
6.1
6.3
4.8
9.4
8.1
10.7
5.8
5.5

2001

4.8
6.4
6.7
5.1
8.7
8.0
9.6
5.0
-

2000
1

4.0
6.1
6.5
4.8
9.9
8.3
11.2
6.6
5.8

II

2001
III

4.0
6.1
6.4
4.7
9.5
8.1
10.9
6.0
5.5

' Preliminary for 2001 for Japan, France, Germany, Italy, Sweden,
and the United Kingdom.
2 Quarterly rates are for the first month of the quarter.
NOTE: Quarterly figures for France and Germany are calculated
by applying annual adjustment factors to current published data,
and therefore should be viewed as less precise indicators of
unemployment under U.S. concepts than the annual figures.

IV

4.1
6.1
6.1
4.7
9.3
8.0
10.5
5.6
5.4

4.0
6.1
6.2
4.8
9.0
7.8
10.1
5.2
5.3

I

II

4.2
6.2
6.5
4.8
8.6
7.9
10.0
5.1
5.1

III

4.5
6.3
6.9
4.9
8.5
8.0
9.7
5.0
5.0

IV

4.8
6.4
6.8
5.2
8.7
8.0
9.5
5.0
5.1

5.6
6.8
6.8
5.5
8.9
8.1
9.3
5.1
-

See "Notes on the data" for information on breaks in series. For
further qualifications and historical data, see Com parative Civilian
Labor Force Statistics, Ten Countries, 1959-2001 (B ureau of Labor
Statistics, Mar. 25, 2002), on the Internet at
h ttp ://w w w .b ls .g o v /fls /h o m e .h tm

Monthly and quarterly unemployment rates, updated monthly, are
also on this site. Dash indicates data not available.

Monthly Labor Review

April 2003

93

Current Labor Statistics:

International Comparison

48. Annual data: Employment status of the working-age population, approximating U.S. concepts, 10 countries
[Numbers in thousands]
Employment status and country

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

128,105
14,177
8,557
65,040
24,570
39,010
22,910
6,950
4,520
28,410

129,200
14,308
8,613
65,470
24,640
39,100
22,570
7,100
4,443
28,430

131,056
14,400
8,771
65,780
24,780
39,070
22,450
7,190
4,418
28,440

132,304
14,517
8,995
65,990
24,830
38,980
22,460
7,260
4,460
28,560

133,943
14,669
9,115
66,450
25,090
39,140
22,570
7,370
4,459
28,720

136,297
14,958
9,204
67,200
25,210
39,420
22,680
7,530
4,418
28,910

137,673
15,237
9,339
67,240
25,520
39,750
22,960
7,690
4,402
29,040

139,368
15,536
9,466
67,090
25,830
39,800
23,130
7,900
4,430
29,300

140,863
15,789
9,678
66,990
25,980
39,750
23,340
8,050
4,489
29,450

141,815
16,027
9,817
66,870

66.4
65.9
63.9
63.4
55.9
58.2
47.5
57.8
65.7
63.1

66.3
65.5
63.5
63.3
55.8
57.7
47.9
58.6
64.5
62.8

66.6
65.2
63.9
63.1
55.8
57.4
47.3
59.0
63.7
62.7

66.6
64.9
64.6
62.9
55.6
57.1
47.1
59.2
64.1
62.7

66.8
64.7
64.6
63.0
55.8
57.1
47.1
59.8
64.0
62.8

67.1
65.0
64.3
63.2
55.7
57.3
47.2
60.8
63.3
62.9

67.1
65.4
64.3
62.8
56.1
57.7
47.6
61.7
62.8
62.9

67.1
65.8
64.2
62.4
56.4
57.6
47.8
62.8
62.8
63.2

67.2
65.9
64.7
62.0
56.4
57.5
48.1
63.5
63.8
63.3

66.9
66.0
64.7
61.6
_

118,492
12,672
7,660
63,620
22,020
36,390
21,230
6,560
4,265
25,530

120,259
12,770
7,699
63,810
21,740
35,990
20,270
6,630
4,028
25,450

123,060
13,027
7,942
63,860
21,720
35,760
19,940
6,670
3,992
25,720

124,900
13,271
8,256
63,890
21,910
35,780
19,820
6,760
4,056
26,070

126,708
13,380
8,364
64,200
21,960
35,640
19,920
6,900
4,019
26,380

129,558
13,705
8,444
64,900
22,090
35,510
19,990
7,130
3,973
26,880

131,463
14,068
8,618
64,450
22,510
36,060
20,210
7,380
4,034
27,210

133,488
14,456
8,808
63,920
22,940
36,360
20,460
7,640
4,117
27,530

135,208
14,827
9,068
63,790
23,530
36,540
20,840
7,810
4,229
27,830

135,073
14,997
9,157
63,470
_

61.5
58.9
57.2
62.0
50.1
54.2
44.0
54.5
62.0
56.7

61.7
58.5
56.8
61.7
49.2
53.2
43.0
54.7
58.5
56.2

62.5
59.0
57.8
61.3
48.9
52.6
42.0
54.7
57.6
56.7

62.9
59.4
59.2
60.9
49.0
52.4
41.5
55.1
58.3
57.2

63.2
59.1
59.3
60.9
48.8
52.0
41.6
56.0
57.7
57.6

63.8
59.7
59.0
61.0
48.8
51.6
41.6
57.5
56.9
58.5

64.1
60.4
59.3
60.2
49.5
52.3
41.9
59.2
57.6
58.9

64.3
61.3
59.8
59.4
50.1
52.6
42.3
60.8
58.4
59.4

64.5
62.1
60.6
59.0
51.1
52.8
42.9
61.6
60.1
59.4

63.8
61.9
60.3
58.4
_

9,613
1,505
897
1,420
2,550
2,620
1,680
390
255
2,880

8,940
1,539
914
1,660
2,900
3,110
2,300
470
415
2,980

7,996
1,373
829
1,920
3,060
3,320
2,510
520
426
2,720

7,404
1,246
739
2,100
2,920
3,200
2,640
500
404
2,490

7,236
1,289
751
2,250
3,130
3,510
2,650
470
440
2,340

6,739
1,252
760
2,300
3,120
3,910
2,690
400
445
2,030

6,210
1,169
721
2,790
3,020
3,690
2,750
310
368
1,830

5,880
1,080
658
3,170
2,890
3,440
2,670
270
313
1,770

5,655
962
611
3,200
2,450
3,210
2,500
240
260
1,620

7.5
10.6
10.5
2.2
10.4
6.7
7.3
5.6
5.6
10.1

6.9
10.8
10.6
2.5
11.8
8.0
10.2
6.6
9.3
10.5

6.1
9.5
9.4
2.9
12.3
8.5
11.2
7.2
9.6
9.6

5.6
8.6
8.2
3.2
11.8
8.2
11.8
6.9
9.1
8.7

5.4
8.8
8.2
3.4
12.5
9.0
11.7
6.4
9.9
8.1

4.9
8.4
8.3
3.4
12.4
9.9
11.9
5.3
10.1
7.0

4.5
7.7
7.7
4.1
11.8
9.3
12.0
4.0
8.4
6.3

4.2
7.0
7.0
4.7
11.2
8.6
11.5
3.4
7.1
6.0

4.0
6.1
6.3
4.8
9.4
8.1
10.7
3.0
5.8
5.5

C iv ilia n la b o r fo rc e

United States.......................................................
Canada................................................................
Australia..............................................................
Japan.................................................................
France.................................................................
Germany.............................................................
Italy.....................................................................
Nethérlands..........................................................
Sweden...............................................................
United Kingdom....................................................

23,540
_
4,537
-

P a r t ic ip a tio n r a te 1

United States.......................................................
Canada................................................................
Australia..............................................................
Japan..................................................................
France................................................................
Germany.............................................................
Italy.....................................................................
Netherlands.........................................................
Sweden...............................................................
United Kinqdom....................................................

-

_
_
64.2
-

E m p lo y e d

United States........................................................
Canada................................................................
Australia..............................................................
Japan..................................................................
France.................................................................
Germany.............................................................
Netherlands.........................................................
Sweden...............................................................
United Kingdom....................................................

21,280
_
4,309
-

E m p lo y m e n t-p o p u la tio n ra tio 2

United States........................................................
Canada................................................................
Australia..............................................................
Japan..................................................................
France................................................................
Germany.............................................................
Netherlands.........................................................
Sweden...............................................................
United Kinqdom....................................................

_

_
61.0
_

U n e m p lo y e d

United States........................................................
Canada................................................................
Australia..............................................................
Japan..................................................................
France................................................................
Germany.............................................................
Netherlands.........................................................
Sweden...............................................................
United Kingdom....................................................

6,742
1,031
661
3,400
_
-

2,270
_
228
-

U n e m p lo y m e n t ra te

United States........................................................
Canada...............................................................
Australia..............................................................
Japan..................................................................
France................................................................
Germany.............................................................
Netherlands.........................................................
Sweden...............................................................
United Kingdom....................................................
1 Labor force as a percent of the working-age population.
2 Employment as a percent of the working-age population.

NOTE: See notes on the data for information on breaks in series.


94 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

April 2003

For further qualifications and historical data, see Comparative Civilian Labor Force
Statistics, Ten Countries, 1959-2001 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, Mar. 25,2002),
on the Internet at h ttp ://w w w .b ls .g o v /fls /h o m e .h tm
^ash indicates data are not available.

4.8
6.4
6.7
5.1
8.7
8.0
9.6

_

5.0
-

4 9 . A n n u a l in d e x e s o f m a n u fa c tu rin g p ro d u c tiv ity a n d r e la te d m easu re s, 12 coun tries

[1992 = 100]
1960 1970 1980 1990 1991 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001
Item and country
Output per hour
United States..............................................
70.5
96.9
97.9 102.1 107.3 113.8 117.0 121.3 126.5 135.3 142.9 145.6
Canada.....................................................
54.9
93.4
37.8
72.9
95.3 105.8 110.8 112.4 109.7 113.5 113.1 116.0 118.4 116.1
Japan.......................................................
13.8
63.2
94.4
37.5
99.0 101.7 103.3 111.0 116.1 121.0 121.2 126.9 134.1 128.1
Belgium.....................................................
18.0
32.9
65.4
96.8
99.1 102.5 108.4 113.2 117.0 127.0 129.2 129.5 133.4 134.1
Denmark...................................................
90.4
29.9
52.7
99.1
99.4 100.8
France......................................................
22.0
43.1
66.8
93.8
97.0 100.6 108.2 113.9 114.6 121.9 127.7 132.7 142.5 146.3
Germany...................................................
29.2
52.0
77.2
99.0
98.3 101.8 109.5 112.2 113.9 119.4 120.3 120.4 127.9 128.2
Italy..........................................................
74.2
23.6
44.3
95.8
95.9 101.4 104.9 108.0 108.1 109.9 110.0 109.9 113.0 115.0
Netherlands...............................................
18.5
37.9
68.8
98.5
99.6 101.6 113.2 118.2 120.2 122.3 125.0 128.5 133.8
Norway.....................................................
37.4
58.8
77.5
97.6
98.2
99.6
99.6 100.7 102.5 102.0
99.9 103.6 104.5 105.3
Sweden....................................................
27.3
52.2
73.1
94.6
95.5 107.3 119.4 121.9 124.5 132.3 139.5 149.7 158.0 160.4
United Kingdom..........................................
30.0
43.2
89.2
54.3
93.8 103.9 107.1 104.9 103.8 105.2 107.0 111.6 118.0 119.8
Output
United States..............................................
75.8 101.6
98.3 103.5 111.1 118.4 121.3 127.9 133.1 141.2 147.0 141.3
Canada.....................................................
33.4
58.9
83.6 106.0
99.0 105.9 114.1 119.6 119.6 127.7 132.8 141.0 148.8 143.9
Japan.......................................................
10.7
39.2
60.4
97.1 102.0
96.3
94.9
98.9 103.0 106.5 100.2 101.9 107.6
99.1
Belgium.....................................................
30.7
57.6
78.2 101.0 100.7
97.0 101.4 104.2 106.6 113.8 116.4 118.0 122.2 121.7
Denmark...................................................
40.8
91.4 102.8 101.5
68.0
95.6 105.6 111.6 106.7 115.2 115.7 115.1 122.9 126.7
France......................................................
31.0
64.1
88.7
99.1
99.8
95.7 100.3 104.9 104.6 109.7 115.0 118.7 124.1 126.3
Germany...................................................
41.5
70.9
85.3
99.1 102.3
92.4
95.2
95.7
95.1
92.5
97.2
95.8 101.7 101.8
Italy..........................................................
84.4
99.4
23.0
48.1
99.3
96.5 102.4 107.2 105.4 108.8 110.7 110.5 113.9 114.6
Netherlands...............................................
31.5
59.1
76.8
98.4 104.6 108.1 108.7 111.5 114.8 118.1 123.7
99.9 100.4
Norway.....................................................
57.4
90.6 104.4 100.9
99.0 101.7 104.6 107.3 110.3 114.2 113.7 113.6 110.2 108.9
Sweden.....................................................
45.9
80.7
90.7 110.1 104.1 101.9 117.1 128.4 131.1 138.0 147.6 157.8 168.7 167.4
United Kingdom..........................................
90.2
67.3
87.2 105.4 100.0 101.4 106.1 107.8 108.5 109.9 110.8 111.1 113.3 110.7
Total hours
United States..............................................
92.1 104.4 107.5 104.8 100.4 101.4 103.6 104.0 103.6 105.4 105.2 104.4 102.8
97.1
Canada.....................................................
88.3 107.1 114.6 113.5 103.9 100.1 103.0 106.4 109.0 112.4 117.5 121.5 125.6 123.9
Japan.......................................................
77.8 104.4
94.7
95.6 102.9 103.1
91.9
89.1
88.7
82.7
88.0
80.3
80.2
77.4
Belgium..................................................... 170.7 174.7 119.7 104.3 101.5
94.7
93.6
92.0
91.1
89.6
90.1
91.7
90.7
91.1
Denmark...................................................
136.5 129.0 101.1 103.7 102.1
94.8
France...................................................... 140.8 148.5 132.9 105.6 102.9
95.1
92.7
92.1
91.3
90.0
90.0
89.4
87.1
86.3
Germany................................................... 142.3 136.3 110.5 100.1 104.1
90.8
86.8
84.9
81.2
80.7
80.1
79.6
79.5
78.8
Italy..........................................................
97.6 108.5 113.8 103.7 103.6
95.2
97.6
99.3
97.5
99.0 100.6 100.5 100.7
99.7
Netherlands...............................................
170.5 156.1 111.7 101.4 100.9
96.8
92.4
90.4
91.1
91.5
91.8
92.0
92.5
Norway..................................................... 153.6 153.9 134.7 103.4 100.8 102.1 105.0 106.6 107.6 112.0 113.7 109.6 105.4 103.4
Sweden..................................................... 168.3 154.7 124.0 116.4 109.0
94.9
98.1 105.3 105.3 104.3 105.8 105.4 106.8 104.3
United Kingdom.......................................... 224.6 208.8 160.5 118.1 106.6
97.6
99.1 102.7 104.5 104.5 103.6
92.4
99.6
96.0
Compensation per hour
United States.............................................
23.7
14.9
55.6
90.8
95.6 102.7 105.6 107.9 109.4 111.5 117.4 122.1 131.1 133.1
Canada.....................................................
17.1
10.0
47.6
88.3
95.0 102.0 103.7 106.0 107.0 109.3 110.5 112.3 113.9 117.8
Japan............ ...........................................
16.4
4.3
58.5
90.5
96.4 102.8 104.9 108.3 109.2 112.9 115.8 115.2 114.5 115.0
Belgium.....................................................
5.4
13.7
52.5
90.1
97.3 104.8 106.1 109.2 110.9 114.9 116.6 118.3 121.1 125.9
_
Denmark...................................................
4.6
13.3
49.6
92.7
95.9 104.6
France......................................................
4.3
10.4
40.9
90.9
96.4 102.6 106.0 110.0 112.1 112.0 112.6 116.3 120.8 126.6
Germany...................................................
8.1
20.7
89.4
53.6
91.5 106.4 111.7 117.5 122.3 124.7 126.5 129.3 133.5 137.7
Italy..........................................................
1.8
5.3
30.4
94.2 105.7 106.8 111.3 119.0 123.0 122.2 124.6 127.8 132.6
87.6
Netherlands...............................................
6.4
64.4
20.2
90.9
95.3 103.8 108.2 110.7 113.0 115.8 120.6 124.0 131.0
Nonway.....................................................
4.7
11.8
39.0
92.3
97.5 101.5 104.4 109.2 113.6 118.7 125.7 133.0 140.0 147.6
Sweden.................................................... .
4.1
10.7
97.4 100.0 106.5 114.4 119.4 124.4 129.3 131.8 137.2
37.3
87.8
95.5
United Kingdom..........................................
3.0
6.1
32.1
82.9
93.8 104.6 106.7 107.9 109.5 113.9 120.5 129.6 135.2 140.4
Unit labor costs: National currency basis
United States.............................................
93.7
78.8
97.6 100.6
98.5
94.8
93.5
91.9
90.2
92.8
91.7
91.4
Canada.....................................................
26.4
31.1
65.2
94.6
99.6
96.4
93.6
94.3
97.5
96.2
97.7
96.8
96.1 101.5
Japan.......................................................
31.3
43.8
92.5
95.9
97.4 101.1 101.5
97.6
94.0
93.3
95.5
90.8
85.4
89.8
Belgium.....................................................
30.1
41.7
80.3
93.0
98.1 102.3
96.4
97.9
94.7
90.5
90.2
91.4
90.8
93.9
Denmark...................................................
15.4
25.2
54.9
93.5
96.4 103.7
96.5 103.7
96.2
99.7 102.9 105.4 101.8 101.7
France......................................................
19.4
24.0
61.3
96.9
99.3 101.9
97.9
96.6
88.2
97.8
91.9
87.7
84.8
86.5
Germany...................................................
69.4
27.8
39.8
90.3
93.1 104.5 102.0 104.7 107.4 104.4 105.2 107.4 104.4 106.6
Italy..........................................................
7.5
11.9
41.0
91.5
98.2 104.3 101.9 103.0 110.0 111.9 111.1 113.4 113.1 115.4
Netherlands...............................................
34.6
93.7
53.3
92.3
95.6 102.1
95.6
93.7
94.7
94.0
96.5
97.9
96.6
Norway.....................................................
12.7
20.1
50.3
94.6
99.2 101.9 104.8 108.4 110.8 116.4 125.7 128.4 134.0 140.1
Sweden.....................................................
15.0
20.6
51.0
92.9 100.0
90.8
87.4
83.8
91.9
90.2
89.2
86.3
83.4
85.5
United Kingdom..........................................
9.8
14.1
59.0
92.9 100.1 100.8
99.7 102.9 105.5 108.2 112.7 116.2 114.5 117.2
Unit labor costs: U.S. dollar basis
United States..............................................
93.7
78.8
97.6 100.6
98.5
94.8
93.5
91.9
92.8
90.2
91.7
91.4
Canada.....................................................
32.9
67.4
36.0
98.0 105.1
86.4
90.3
82.8
83.0
84.0
79.6
78.8
78.2
79.2
Japan.......................................................
11.0
91.7 115.4 125.9 131.7 109.6
15.5
51.8
83.8
97.7
92.4 101.2 100.4
93.6
Belgium.....................................................
19.4
27.0
88.3
89.5
92.3
95.1
94.2 105.2
98.4
81.2
79.9
77.6
66.8
67.0
Denmark...................................................
13.4
20.2
58.8
91.2
91.4 104.0 108.0
91.0
96.5
92.7
91.0
91.0
73.7
75.9
France......................................................
21.0
23.0
76.8
94.1
95.2
93.1
93.4 103.5 101.2
83.3
79.1
75.4
63.2
62.5
Germany...................................................
10.4
17.1
59.6
87.3
98.7
98.2 114.2 111.5
87.5
91.4
94.0
93.3
76.9
76.2
Italy..........................................................
94.1
15.0
23.3
59.0
97.5
81.6
77.9
77.9
87.9
66.4
80.9
78.8
76.9
65.7
Netherlands...............................................
16.1
25.9
92.4 102.7
82.9
89.1
89.9
96.6
98.1
85.3
85.5
82.1
72.1
Nonway.....................................................
11.1
17.5
63.3
94.0
95.0
89.2
92.3 106.4 106.6 102.1 103.5 102.2
94.5
96.8
Sweden.....................................................
16.9
23.1
70.2
91.3
96.3
67.8
63.2
71.3
79.8
68.8
65.3
60.8
53.0
48.2
United Kingdom..........................................
15.6
19.1
77.7
93.9 100.1
86.4
85.6
91.9
93.2 100.4 105.7 106.4
98.3
95.5
NOTE: Data for Germany tor years before 1991 are forthe former West Germany. Data for 1991 onward are for unified Germany. Dash indicates data not available.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Monthly Labor Review

April 2003

95

Current Labor Statistics:

50.

Injury and Illness

O c c u p a t io n a l in ju ry a n d illn ess ra te s b y in d u s try ,1 U n ite d S ta te s

Incidence rates per 100 full-time workers3
in d u s try a n a ty p e o f c a s e

1989 1

1990

1991

1992

1993 4 1994 4 1995 4 1996 4 1997 4 1998 4 1999 4 2000 4

P R IV A T E S E C T O R 5

Total cases.......................................................................
Lost workday cases.............................................................
Lost workdays..............................................................

8.6
4.0
78 7

8.8
4.1
84.0

8.4
3.9
86.5

8.9
3.9
93.8

8.5
3.8

8.4
3.8

8.1
3.6

7.4
3.4

7.1
3.3

6.7
3.1

6.3
3.0

6.1
3.0

10.9
5.7
100.9

11.6
5.9
112.2

10.8
5.4
108.3

11.6
5.4
126.9

11.2
5.0
-

10.0
4.7

9.7
4.3
-

8.7
3.9
-

8.4
4.1

7.9
3.9
-

7.3
3.4

7.1
3.6
-

8.5
4.8
137.2

8.3
5.0
119.5

7.4
4.5
129.6

7.3
4.1
204.7

6.8
3.9
-

6.3
3.9
-

6.2
3.9
-

5.4
3.2
-

5.9
3.7
-

4.9
2.9
-

4.4
2.7
-

4.7
3.0
-

14.3
6.8
143.3

14.2
6.7
147.9

13.0
6.1
148.1

13.1
5.8
161.9

12.2
5.5
-

11.8
5.5
-

10.6
4.9
-

9.9
4.5
-

9.5
4.4
-

8.8
4.0
-

8.6
4.2
_

8.3
4.1
_

13.9
6.5
137.3

13.4
6.4
137.6

12.0
5.5
132.0

12.2
5.4
142.7

11.5
5.1
-

10.9
5.1
-

9.8
4.4
-

9.0
4.0
-

8.5
3.7
-

8.4
3.9
-

8.0
3.7
_

7.8
3.9
_

13.8
6.5
147.1

13.8
6.3
144.6

12.8
6.0
160.1

12.1
5.4
165.8

11.1
5.1
-

10.2
5.0

9.9
4.8

9.0
4.3
-

8.7
4.3
-

8.2
4.1
-

7.8
3.8
-

7.6
3.7
-

14.6
6.9
144.9

14.7
6.9
153.1

13.5
6.3
151.3

13.8
6.1
168.3

12.8
5.8

12.5
5.8

11.1
5.0

10.4
4.8
-

10.0
4.7

9.1
4.1
-

8.9
4.4
-

8.6
4.3
-

13.1
5.8
113.0

13.2
5.8
120.7

12.7
5.6
121.5

12.5
5.4
124.6

12.1
5.3
-

12.2
5.5
-

11.6
5.3
-

10.6
4.9
-

10.3
4.8

9.7
4.7
-

9.2
4.6
-

9.0
4.5
-

14.1
6.0
116.5

14.2
6.0
123.3

13.6
5.7
122.9

13.4
5.5
126.7

13.1
5.4
-

13.5
5.7
-

12.8
5.6
-

11.6
5.1
-

11.3
5.1

10.7
5.0
-

10.1
4.8
_

_
_
_

18.4
9.4
177.5

18.1
8.8
172.5

16.8
8.3
172.0

16.3
7.6
165.8

15.9
7.6
-

15.7
7.7
-

14.9
7.0
-

14.2
6.8
-

13.5
6.5
-

13.2
6.8
-

13.0
6.7
-

12.1
6.1
_

16.1
7.2
-

16.9
7.8
-

15.9
7.2
-

14.8
6.6
128.4

14.6
6.5
-

15.0
7.0
-

13.9
6.4
-

12.2
5.4
-

12.0
5.8
-

11.4
5.7
-

11.5
5.9
-

11.2
5.9
-

15.5
7.4
149.8

15.4
7.3
160.5

14.8
6.8
156.0

13.6
6.1
152.2

13.8
6.3
-

13.2
6.5
-

12.3
5.7
-

12.4
6.0
-

11.8
5.7
-

11.8
6.0
-

10.7
5.4
_

10.4
5.5
_

18.7
8.1
168.3

19.0
8.1
180.2

17.7
7.4
169.1

17.5
7.1
175.5

17.0
7.3
-

16.8
7.2
-

16.5
7.2
-

15.0
6.8
-

15.0
7.2
-

14.0
7.0
-

12.9
6.3
_

12.6
6.3
-

18.5
7.9
147.6

18.7
7.9
155.7

17.4
7.1
146.6

16.8
6.6
144.0

16.2
6.7
-

16.4
6.7
-

15.8
6.9
-

14.4
6.2
-

14.2
6.4
-

13.9
6.5
_

12.6
6.0
_

11.9
5.5
_

12.1
4.8
86.8

12.0
4.7
88.9

11.2
4.4
86.6

11.1
4.2
87.7

11.1
4.2
-

11.6
4.4
-

11.2
4.4
-

9.9
4.0
-

10.0
4.1
-

9.5
4.0
-

8.5
3.7
_

8.2
3.6
_

9.1
3.9
77.5

9.1
3.8
79.4

8.6
3.7
83.0

8.4
3.6
81.2

8.3
3.5
-

8.3
3.6
-

7.6
3.3
-

6.8
3.1
-

6.6
3.1
-

5.9
2.8
-

5.7
2.8
-

5.7
2.9

17.7
6.8
138.6

17.8
6.9
153.7

18.3
7.0
166.1

18.7
7.1
186.6

18.5
7.1

19.6
7.8

18.6
7.9

16.3
7.0

-

-

-

15.4
6.6
-

14.6
6.6
-

13.7
6.4
_

13.7
6.3

-

5.6
2.5
55.4

5.9
2.7
57.8

6.0
2.7
64.4

5.9
2.7
65.3

5.6
2.5
-

5.9
2.7
-

5.3
2.4
-

5.1
2.3
-

4.8
2.3
-

4.0
1.9
-

4.0
1.8
-

4.5
2.2
_

11.1
5.1
97.6

11.3
5.1
113.1

11.3
5.1
104.0

10.7
5.0
108.2

10.0
4.6
-

9.9
4.5
-

9.1
4.3
-

9.5
4.4
-

8.9
4.2
-

8.1
3.9
-

8.4
4.0
-

7.2
3.6
-

A g r ic u lt u r e , fo r e s tr y , a n d fis h in g 5

Total cases.......................................................................
Lost workday cases.............................................................
Lost workdays....................................................................
M in in g

Total cases.......................................................................
Lost workday cases.............................................................
Lost workdays....................................................................
C o n s tr u c tio n

Total cases.......................................................................
Lost workday cases.............................................................
Lost workdays....................................................................
General building contractors:
Total cases.......................................................................
Lost workday cases.............................................................
Lost workdays....................................................................
Heavy construction, except buildinq:
Total cases.......................................................................
Lost workday cases.............................................................
Lost workdays..... :..............................................................
Special trades contractors:
Total cases.......................................................................
Lost workday cases.............................................................
Lost workdays....................................................................
M a n u fa c tu r in g

Total cases.......................................................................
Lost workday cases.............................................................
Lost workdays....................................................................
Durable goods:
Total cases.......................................................................
Lost workday cases.............................................................
Lost workdays....................................................................
Lumber and wood products:
Total cases.....................................................................
Lost workday cases..........................................................
Lost workdays..................................................................
Furniture and fixtures:
Total cases.....................................................................
Lost workday cases..........................................................
Lost workdays..................................................................
Stone, clay, and qlass products:
Total cases.....................................................................
Lost workday cases..........................................................
Lost workdays..................................................................
Primary metal industries:
Total cases.....................................................................
Lost workday cases..........................................................
Lost workdays..................................................................
Fabricated metal products:
Total cases.....................................................................
Lost workday cases..........................................................
Lost workdays..................................................................
Industrial machinery and equipment:
Total cases.....................................................................
Lost workday cases..........................................................
Lost workdays..................................................................
Electronic and other electrical equipment:
Total cases....................................................................
Lost workday cases..........................................................
Lost workdays..................................................................
Transportation equipment:
Total cases....................................................................
Lost workday cases..........................................................
Lost workdays..................................................................
Instruments and related products:
Total cases....................................................................
Lost workday cases..........................................................
Lost workdays..................................................................
Miscellaneous manufacturinq industries:
Total cases....................................................................
Lost workday cases..........................................................
Lost workdays..................................................................

96 Monthly Labor Review

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

April 2003

-

-

50. Continued—Occupational injury and illness rates by industry,1United States
Industry and type of case

Nondurable goods:
Total cases.....................................................................
Lost workday cases...........................................................
Lost workdays...........................................................
Food and kindred products:
Total cases..................................................................
Lost workday cases........................................................
Tobacco products:
Total cases..................................................................
Lost workday cases........................................................
Lost workdays.................................................
Textile mill products:
Total cases..................................................................
Lost workday cases........................................................
Lost workdays................................................................
Apparel and other textile products:
Total cases..................................................................
Lost workday cases........................................................
Lost workdays.....................................................
Paper and allied products:
Total cases..................................................................
Lost workday cases.........................................................
Lost workdays................................................................
Printing and publishing:
Total cases...................................................................
Lost workday cases.........................................................
Lost workdays................................................................
Chemicals and allied products:
Total cases...................................................................
Lost workday cases.........................................................
Lost workdays................................................................
Petroleum and coal products:
Total cases...................................................................
Lost workday cases.........................................................
Lost workdays................................................................
Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products:
Total cases...................................................................
Lost workday cases.........................................................
Lost workdays................................................................
Leather and leather products:
Total cases...................................................................
Lost workday cases.........................................................
Lost workdays................................................................
Transportation and public utilities
Total cases.....................................................................
Lost workday cases...........................................................
Lost workdays...................................................................
Wholesale and retail trade
Total cases.....................................................................
Lost workday cases...........................................................
Lost workdays...................................................................
Wholesale trade:
Total cases.....................................................................
Lost workday cases............................................................
Lost workdays...................................................................
Retail trade:
Total cases.....................................................................
Lost workday cases............................................................
Lost workdays...................................................................

In c id e n c e r a te s p e r 1 0 0 w o r k e r s 3

19891
11.6

5.5
107.8

1990

1991

11.7
56
116.9

18.5
9.3
174 7

2 0 2 .6

8.7
3.4
64.2

7.7
3.2
62.3

10.3
4.2
81.4

9.6
40
85.1

20 .0

99

11.5

1992

5,5

11.3
53

119.7

121.8

19.5
9.9
207.2

18.8
9*5
211.9

6.4

6.0

2.8

2.4
42.9

52.0

1993 4 19944 1995 4 1996 4 1997 4 1998 4

2000 4

7.8

_

13.6
7.5

12.7
7.3

12.4

5.9
2.7

6.4
3.4

5.5

6.2

2 .2

3.1

6.4

6.0

10.7
5.0

10.5
5.1

9.9
4.9

9.2
4.6

8.8

8.2

4.4

4.3

17.6
8.9

17.1
9.2

16.3
8.7

15.0

14.5

8.0

8.0

5.8
2.3

5.3
2.4

5.6

6.7

2 .6

2.8

9.9
42
87.1

9.7

8.7

8.2

44
88.3

7.8

6.7

7.4

10.1

1999 4

8.6

8.8

9.5
4.0
104.6

9.0
3.8

8.9
3.9

7.0
3.1

5.8

6.1

3.6

7.4
3.3

6.2

3.9
92.1

9.2
4.2
99.9

8.2

3.8
80.5

2 .6

2 .8

3.0

9.9
4.6
-

9.6
4.5
-

8.5
4.2
-

7.9
3.8
-

7.3
3.7
-

7.1
3.7
-

7.0
3.7
_

6.5
3.4
_

5.4

5.0

5.1

2 .8

2 .6

2 .6

4.2

2.2

12.7
5.8
132.9

12.1

11.2

11.0

5.5
124.8

5.0
122.7

5.0
125.9

6.9
3.3
63.8

6.9
3.3
69.8

6.7
3.2
74.5

7.3
3.2
74.8

6.9
3.1

6.7
3.0

6.4
3.0

6.0
2.8

5.7
2.7

7.0
3.2
63.4

6.5
3.1
61.6

6.4
3.1
62.4

6.0
2.8

5.9
2.7
-

5.7
2.8

4.8
2.4
-

4.8
2.3
_

2.1

-

5.5
2.7
-

-

4.4
2.3
_

5.2
2.5
-

4.7
2.3
-

4.8
2.4
-

4.6
2.5
-

4.3

3.9

4.1

2.2

1.8

1.8

64.2

4.2
_

6.6

6.6

6.2

5.9

3.3

3.1
77.3

2.9

2.8

68 .2

71.2

16.2
7.8
151.3

15.1
7.2
150.9

13.9
6.5
-

14.0
6.7
-

12.9
6.5
-

12.3
6.3
-

11.9
5.8
-

11.2

153.3

5.8
-

5.5
_

10.7
5.8
_

12.1

12.1

12.1

12.0

9.8
4.5
-

10.3
5.0
-

9.0
4.3
-

7.3
4.3
-

7.3
4.4
-

_
4.3
-

68.1

16.2
8.0

147.2

14.5
6.8

-

13.6
6.5
130.4

12.5
5.9
140.8

5.4
128.5

5.5
-

5.3
-

11.4
4.8
-

10.7
4.5
-

10.6

5.9
152.3

9.2
5.3
121.5

9.6
5.5
134.1

9.3
5.4
140.0

9.1
5.1
144.0

9.5
5.4
-

9.3
5.5
-

9.1
5.2
-

8.7
5.1
-

8.2

8.0

7.9
3.5
65.6

7.6
3.4
72.0

8.4
3.5
80.1

8.1

3.4
-

7.9
3.4
-

7.5
3.2
-

6.8

3.6
63.5

2.9
_

6.7
3.0
_

7.7
4.0
71.9

7.4
3.7
71.5

7.2
3.7
79.2

7.6
3.6
82.4

7.8
3.7
-

7.7
3.8
-

7.5
3.6
-

3.4
-

8.7
3.4
79.2

8.2

3.3
-

7.9
3.3
-

7.5
3.0
-

4.3
4.8
-

_

_

10.1

3.7
1.9
_

6.5

6.1

2 .8

-

2.7
_

_
_
_

6.5
3.2

6.5
3.3
_

6.3
3.3
_

5.8
_
_

6.9

6.8

2 .8

2.9
-

6.5
2.7
-

2.5
-

6.6

8.1

8.1

3.4
60.0

3.4
63.2

7.7
3.3
69.1

2 .0

2.4

2.4

2.9

2.9

2.7

.9
17.6

1.1

1.1

1.2

1.2

1.1

2.6
1.0

27.3

24.1

32.9

-

-

-

6.0
2 .8

6.2
2.8

7.1
3.0

6.7

6.5

6.4

2.8

2 .8

2.8

6.0
2.6

56.4

60.0

6 8.6

-

-

-

-

-

6.1

_

_
-

F in a n c e , In s u ra n c e , a n d re al e s ta te

Total cases.....................................................................
Lost workday cases........................... :...............................
Lost workdays...................................................................

2.4
.9
-

.9
-

.7
.5
-

5.6
2.5
-

5.2
2.4
-

2.2

1.8
.8

-

1.9
.8

-

S e rv ic e s

Total cases.....................................................................
Lost workday cases............................................................
Lost workdays...................................................................

5.5
2.7
51.2

Data for 1989 and subsequent years are based on the Standard Industrial Class­
ification Manual, 1987 Edition. For this reason, they are not strictly comparable with data
tor the years 1985-88, which were based on the Standard Industrial Classification
Manual, 1972 Edition, 1977 Supplement.
2 Beginning with the 1992 survey, the annual survey measures only nonfatal injuries and
illnesses, while past surveys covered both fatal and nonfatal incidents. To better address
fatalities, a basic element of workplace safety, BLS implemented the Census of Fatal
Occupational Injuries.
3 The incidence rates represent the number of injuries and illnesses or lost workdays per
100 full-time workers and were calculated as (N/EH) X 200,000, where:
1


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

•

4.9

4.9

2 .2

2.2

-

-

N= number of injuries and illnesses or lost workdays;
EH=total hours worked by all employees during the calendar year; and
200,000 = base for 100 full-time equivalent workers (working 40 hours per week, 50
weeks per year).
4 Beginning with the 1993 survey, lost workday estimates will not be generated. As of
1992, BLS began generating percent distributions and the median number of days away
fromwork by industry and for groups of workers sustaining similar work disabilities.
6 Excludes farms with fewer than 11 employees since 1976.
Dash indicates data not available.

Monthly Labor Review

April 2003

97

Current Labor Statistics:

51.

Injury and Illness

Fatal occupational injuries by event or exposure, 1996-2001
Fatalities

Event or exposure 1

Transportation incidents........................................................
Highway incident...................................................................
Collision between vehicles, mobile equipment........................
Moving in same direction..................................................
Moving in opposite directions, oncoming............................
Vehicle struck stationary object or equipment........................
Noncollision incident...........................................................
Jackknifed or overturned—no collision...............................
Nonhighway (farm, industrial premises) incident.......................
Overturned.........................................................................
Aircraft.................................................................................
Worker struck by a vehicle.....................................................
Water vehicle incident............................................................
Railway.................................................................. ..............
Assaults and violent acts.......................................................
Homicides............................................................................
Shooting............................................................................
Stabbing............................................................................
Other, including bombing....................................................
Self-inflicted injuries...............................................................
C o n t a c t w it h o b j e c t s a n d e q u ip m e n t .........................................................

Struck by object....................................................................
Struck by falling object........................................................
Struck by flying object.........................................................
Caught in or compressed by equipment or objects....................
Caught in running equipment or machinery...........................
Caught in or crushed in collapsing materials............................
F a ll s ..................................................................................................................................

Fall to lower level..................................................................
Fall from ladder..................................................................
Fall from roof......................................................................
Fall from scaffold, staging...................................................
Fall on same level.................................................................

1996-2000

20002

Average

Number

6,094
2,608
1,408
685
117
247
151
289
372
298
378

2001

Number

263
376
105
71
1,015
766
617

5,920
2,573
1,365
696
136
243
154
279
356
304
399
213
280
370
84
71
930
677
533

68

66

80
216
1,005
567
364
57
293
157
128
714
636
106
153
90
55
535
290
132
40

78

212

221

1,006
571
357
61
294
157
123
734
659

5,900
2,517
1,404
723
142
256
137
295
339
273
324
157
247
383
90
62
902
639
505
58
76
228
962
553
343
60
266
144

43
24
12
2

4
2

5
6

5
5
3
4
6
2
1

15
11

9
1
1

4
16
9
6
1

5
2
2

14
12

110

122

2

150
85
56
481
256
128
29

3

100

F ir e s a n d e x p l o s i o n s ..........................................................................................

57
92
73
196

48
94
75
177

O t h e r e v e n t s o r e x p o s u r e s 4.............................................................................

20

19

24

Oxygen deficiency.................................................................

100

808
698

112

Contact with electric current....................................................
Contact with overhead power lines.......................................
Contact with temperature extremes.........................................

Percent

122

159
91
84
499
285
124
35
96
49
83
59
188

E x p o s u r e t o h a r m f u l s u b s t a n c e s o r e n v ir o n m e n t s .........................

3

2
1
8

5
2
1
2

1
1
1

3

Based on the 1992 bls Occupational Injury and Illness
3 Total excludes 2,886 work-related fatalities resulting from
Classification Structures.
events of September 11.
2 The BLS news release issued Aug. 14, 2001, reported a total
4 Includes the category "Bodily reaction and exertion."
of 5,915 fatal work injuries for calendar year 2000. Since then, NOTE: Totals for major categories may include sub-categories
an additional five job-related fatalities were identified, bringing not shown separately. Percentages may not add to totals
the total job-related fatality count for 2000 to 5,920.
because of rounding. Dash indicates less than 0.5 percent.
1


98 Monthly Labor Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

April 2003

Labor Statistics
U.S. D epartm ent o f Labor
Bureau o f Labor Statistics

Free from BLS, to keep you informed
The Bureau’s series of issues papers provides you with succinct, up-to-the-minute background data in a readily digestible form.
They’re convenient, current, easy to read, and available free from BLS. To be added to the Is s u e s in L a b o r S tatis tic s mailing list
(No. J336), write to: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Office of Publications and Special Studies, Room 2850, 2 Massachusetts Ave.,
NE., Washington, DC 20212-0001, or fax the coupon below to (202) 691-7890.

Issues in Labor Statistics also are available in PDF format on the BLS Web site: http://www.bls.gov/opub/ils/opbilshm.htm

Here are some recent Issues.
2002
•
•
•
•
•

Twenty-first century moonlighters
Declining teen labor force participation
Consumer Spending Patterns Differ by
Region
Housing expenditures
Certification Can Count: The Case of Aircraft Mechanics

2001
•
•
•

New and emerging occupations
Who was affected as the economy started to slow?
Characteristics and spending patterns of consumer units in the lowest 10 percent of the expenditure distribution

2000
•
•
•
•
•
•
1999
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
1998
•
•
•

Unemployed Job Leavers: A Meaningful Gauge of Confidence in the Job Market?
Spending Patterns By Age
When one job is not enough
A comparison of the characteristics and spending patterns of Food Stamp recipients and nonrecipients
Labor Supply in a Tight Labor Market
Are Managers and Professionals Really Working More?
Occupational Stress
Expenditures on Public Transportation
Consumer Spending on Traveling for Pleasure
What the Nation Spends on Health Care: A Regional Comparison
What Women Earned in 1998
Computer Ownership Up Sharply in the 1990s
The Southeast is Maintaining Its Share of Textile Plant Employment
Auto Dealers are Fewer, Bigger, and Employ More Workers
Labor-Market Outcomes for City Dwellers and Suburbanites
Spending Patterns of High-income Households
New Occupations Emerging Across Industry Lines

Yes, please add my name to mailing list J336,

Is s u e s in L a b o r S tatistics.

Name_______________________________________________________________
Organization_______________ _________ ________________________________
Street ______________________________________________________________
C ity______________________________________

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

State________________

Zip

Monthly Labor Review is the principal journal of current data and analysis from the
Bureau of Labor Statistics. Economists, statisticians, and other experts from the Bureau
join with professionals in the private sector to provide you with a trustworthy source of solid
economic research on these crucial topics:
Employment and unemployment

Employer costs

Consumer prices
Producer prices

Labor-management relations
Labor market projections
Workplace injuries and illnesses
International data and developments

Productivity
Compensation

Also, whether it’s a number or a trend that you need, the Current Labor Statistics department
provides the statistical series you can use.
Subscribe to Monthly Labor Review today, and turn your tough decisions into informed decisions!

United States Government

INFORMATION
C r e d it c a rd o r d e r s a r e w e lc o m e !

Order Processing Code:

*5551

F a x y o u r o rd e rs (2 0 2 ) 5 1 2 -2 2 5 0
P h o n e y o u r o rd e rs

□

YES , please

(2 0 2 ) 5 1 2 -1 8 0 0

s e n d ________ subscriptions to:

Monthly Labor Review (MLR) at $45 each ($63.00 foreign) per year.
The total cost of my order is $ ____________ .

Price includes regular shipping &handling and is subject to change.
Name or title

(Please type or print)

Company name

Room, floor, suite

Street address

/

/
State

City

Check method of payment:

Zipcode +4

□

Check payable to: Superintendent of Documents

□

G PO Deposit Account

□

VISA

□ MasterCard

I

I

|

|

|

M a il t o :

S u p e rin te n d e n t of D o c u m e n ts , P.O. Box 371954,

Pittsburgh, PA 1 5 2 5 0 -7 9 5 4
Important: Please include this completed order form with your

remittance.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

(expirationdate)

Authorizing signature

[

□ Discover

Daytime phone including area code
Purchase ordernumber (optional)

I

“U”

Thank you for your order!

H I

O btaining inform ation from the Bureau of Labor Statistics
O f f i c e o r T o p ic

Bureau o f Labor Statistics
Information services

In te r n e t a d d r ess

http://www.bls.gov
http://www.bls.gov/opub/

E - m a il

blsdata_staff@ bls.gov

Em ploym ent and unem ploym ent

Employment, hours, and earnings:
National
State and local
Labor force statistics:
National
Local
Ul-covered employment, wages
Occupational employment
Mass layoffs
Longitudinal data

http://www.bls.gov/ces/
http://www.bls.gov/sae/

cesinfo@ bls.gov
data_sa@ bls.gov

http://www.bls.gov/cps/
http://www.bls.gov/lau/
http://www.bls.gov/cew/
http://www.bls.gov/oes/
http://www.bls.gov/lau/
http://www.bls.gov/nls/

cpsinfo@ bls.gov
lausinfo@ bls.gov
cewinfo@bls.gov
oesinfo@ bls.gov
mlsinfo@bls.gov
nls_info@ bls.gov

http://www.bls.gov/cpi/
http://www.bls.gov/ppi/
http://www.bls.gov/mxp/
http://www.bls.gov/cex/

cpi_info@bls.gov
ppi-info@bls.gov
mxpinfo@bls.gov
cexinfo@bls.gov

http://www.bls.gov/ncs/
http://www.bls.gov/ebs/
http://www.bls.gov/ect/
http://www.bls.gov/ncs/
http://www.bls.gov/iif
http://stats.bls.gov/iif/
http://www.bls.gov/cba/

ocltinfo@bls.gov
ocltinfo@bls.gov
ocltinfo@bls.gov
ocltinfo@bls.gov
oshstaff@ bls.gov
cfoistaff@bls.gov
cbainfo@bls.gov

http://www.bls.gov/lpc/
http://www.bls.gov/lpc/
http://www.bls.gov/mip/

dprweb@ bls.gov
dipsweb@ bls.gov
dprweb@ bls.gov

http://www.bls.gov/emp/
http://www.bls.gov/oco/

oohinfo@ bls.gov
oohinfo@ bls.gov

http://www.bls.gov/fls/

flshelp@ bls.gov

http://www.bls .go v/ro4/
http://www.bls.gov/ro 1/
http://www.bls.gov/ro5/
http ://www.bls.gov/ro6/
http://www.bls.gov/ro7/
http://www.bls.gov/ro2/
http://www.bls.gov/ro3/
http://www.bls.gov/ro9/

BLSinfoAtlanta@bls.gov
BLSinfoBoston@bls.gov
BLSinfoChicago@bls.gov
BLSinfoDallas@bls.gov
BLSinfoKansasCity@bls.gov
BLSinfoN Y @bls.gov
BLSinfoPhiladelphia@bls.gov
BLSinfoSF@bls.gov

P rices an d liv in g co n d itio n s

Consumer price indexes
Producer price indexes)
Import and export price indexes
Consumer expenditures
C om p en sation and w o rk in g cond itions

National Compensation Survey:
Employee benefits
Employment cost trends
Occupational compensation
Occupational illnesses, injuries
Fatal occupational injuries
Collective bargaining
Productivity

Labor
Industry
Multifactor
P ro jectio n s

Employment
Occupation
International
R eg io n a l cen ters

A tlanta
Boston
Chicago
Dallas
Kansas City
New York
Philadelphia
San Francisco
O th e r F ed era l sta tistica l a g en cies


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

http ://www. fedstats.gov/

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Bureau of Labor Statistics
Postal Square Building, Rm. 2850
2 Massachusetts Ave., NE
Washington, DC 20212-0001

Periodicals
Postage and Fees Paid
U.S. Department of Labor
USPS 987-800

Official Business
Penalty for Private Use, $300
Address Service Requested

M LR

STIER442K

KATRINA
FED

ISSDUE005R

STIERHOLZ

RESERVE

BANK

PO B O X 4 4 2
SAINT LOUIS

MO

LIB
OF

1

UNIT

ST

LOUIS

63166

Schedule of release dates for BLS statistical series
Release
date

Period
covered

Ju n e 6

M ay

1; 4 -2 4

Ju n e 12

M ay

3 8 -4 2

A p ril

Ju n e 13

M ay

2; 3 5 -3 7

M ay 16

A p ril

Ju n e 13

M ay

2 ;3 2 -3 4

M ay 16

A pril

Ju n e 17

M ay

1 4 -1 6 , 24

Release
date

Release
date

Period
covered

Employment situation

A p ril 4

M arch

U.S. Import and Export
Price Indexes

A p ril 10

M arch

Producer Price Indexes

A p ril 11

M arch

M ay 15

Consumer Price indexes

A p ril 16

M arch

Real earnings

A p ril 16

M arch

Employment Cost Indexes

A p ril 29

1st q u a rte r

Series

Productivity and costs


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

ffO

«;* ■ '
*'■ . ■-<
"M ay 2
m
„ I,

1*8'■***

M ay ^
; ••
Vi' -V
-'1'*

Period
, covered
APril

-

MLR table
number

1 -3 ; 2 5 -2 8

M ay 1

1 st q u a rte r

Ju n e 4

1 st q u a rte r

2 ;4 3 -4 6