The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW U.S. Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics December 1980 depository https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis In this issue: Special committee reports on family budgets Collective bargaining in 1981 Regional Commissioners for Bureau of Labor Statistics U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Ray Marshall, Secretary Region I — Boston: W endell D. M acdonald 1603 JFK Federal Building, Government Center, Boston, Mass. 02203 Phone: (617) 223-6761 Connecticut Maine Massachusetts New Hampshire Rhode Island Vermont BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS Janet L. Norwood, Commissioner The Monthly Labor Review is published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of Labor. Communications on editorial matters should be addressed to the Editor-in-Chief, Monthly Labor Review, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Washington, D.C. 20212. Phone: (202) 523-1327. Region II — New York: Sam uel M. Ehrenhalt 1515 Broadway, Suite 3400, New York, N.Y. 10036 Phone: (212) 944-3121 New Jersey New York Puerto Rico Virgin Islands Subscription price per year — $18 domestic; $22.50 foreign. Single copy $2.50. Subscription prices and distribution policies for the Monthly Labor Review (ISSN 0098-0818) and other Government publications are set by the Government Printing Office, an agency of the U.S. Congress. Send correspondence on circulation and subscription matters (including address changes) to: Superintendent of Documents, Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402 Region III — Philadelphia: A lvin I. M argulis 3535 Market Street P.O. Box 13309, Philadelphia, Pa. 19101 Phone: (215) 596 -11 54 Delaware District of Columbia Maryland Pennsylvania Virginia West Virginia Region IV — Atlanta: D onald M. Cruse 1371 Peachtree Street, N.E., Atlanta, Ga. Phone: (404) 881 -44 18 Alabama Florida Georgia Kentucky Mississippi North Carolina South Carolina Tennessee Make checks payable to Superintendent of Documents. 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. Use of funds for printing this periodical has been approved by the Director of the Office of Management and Budget through October 31, 1982. Second-class postage paid at Riverdale, MD., and at additional mailing offices. 30367 Region V — Chicago: W illiam E Rice 9th Floor, Federal Office Building, 230 S. Dearborn Street, Chicago, III. 60604 Phone: (312) 3 5 3 -18 80 Illinois Indiana Michigan Minnesota Ohio Wisconsin Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 15 - 26485 Region VI — Dallas: Bryan Richey Second Floor, 555 Griffin Square Building, Dallas, Tex. 75202 Phone: (214) 767-6971 Arkansas Louisiana New Mexico Oklahoma Texas Regions VII and VIII — Kansas City: E llio tt A. Brow ar 911 Walnut Street, Kansas City, Mo. 64106 Phone: (816) 374-2481 VII Iowa Kansas Missouri Nebraska VIII Colorado Montana North Dakota South Dakota Utah Wyoming Regions IX and X — San Francisco: D. Bruce H anchett 450 Golden Gate Avenue, Box 36017, San Francisco, Calif. 94102 Phone: (415) 556 -46 78 IX American Samoa Arizona California Guam Hawaii Nevada Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands X Alaska Idaho Oregon Washington December cover: Paper Workers, a 1934 oil painting by Douglas Crockwell, courtesy National Collection of Fine Arts, Washington, D.C. Cover design by Richard L. Mathews, Division of Audio-Visual Communications, U.S. Department of Labor. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis .r n MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW DECEMBER 1980 VOLUME 103, NUMBER 12 Henry Lowenstern, Editor-in-Chief Robert W. Fisher, Executive Editor Harold W. Watts 3 Panel suggests changes in BLS family budget program Committee proposes four budget levels applicable to six types of families, and based on median expenditures, rather than detailed commodity lists Howard N Fullerton 11 The 1995 labor force: a first look All three projections— high, middle, and low— indicate that women will account for two-thirds of the growth, most of which will be in the prime working-age group David Schlein 22 Contracts in six key industries scheduled to expire in 1981 New settlements will cover almost 2.5 million workers during a light bargaining year; unions are still formulating goals— top issues may include safety and job security A. Neef, P. Capdevielle 32 Productivity and labor costs abroad In 11 industrial countries, manufacturing productivity growth slowed after 1979; unit labor costs accelerated except in Germany, Japan, and the Netherlands Robert J. Prier 40 Labor requirements decline for public housing construction Each $1 billion spent in 1979 created 28,200 jobs, including 11,700 in other industries turnkey projects accelerated declines in the employee hours required on the site REPORTS C. Howell, W. Thomas, E. Lamb Lawrence J. Fulco Frank P. Stafford https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 45 52 57 Inflation slows in third quarter, although food prices soar Sixth consecutive productivity drop recorded for the second quarter Women’s use of time converging with men’s DEPARTMENTS 2 45 52 55 57 63 65 66 70 77 118 Labor month in review Anatomy of price change Productivity reports Family budgets Research summaries Significant decisions in labor cases Major agreements expiring next month Developments in industrial relations Book reviews Current labor statistics Index of volume 103 REFERENCE 0EP1. J A N 1 5 1931 Kalamazoo Public Library Labor M onth In Review UNDERSTANDING THE CPI. In an effort to promote better public under standing of Canada’s Consumer Price Index, the Economic Council of Canada has published an excellent booklet ex plaining the cpi in non-technical language. The booklet will be of interest to U.S. as well as Canadian readers because the Canadian and U.S. indexes, though different in some respects, share many concepts, uses, limitations, and problems, as the following excerpts demonstrate: Weights. Once Statistics Canada assigns weights to the many items of the cpi, the weights do not change until the index is revised on the basis of new family spend ing surveys. Thus, between revisions, the cpi “ basket” always measures the same quantity of whatever is surveyed, giving it the same importance, to make valid comparisons of price change over time. By holding the quantity and im portance of individual items “ con stant” —necessary for the sake of com parability—the cpi assumes that con sumers do not reallocate the elements of their budgets in response to price changes. Such an assumption breaks with reality, of course, but all consumer price indexes in the industrialized world give up a little realism in the interest of creating a useful measurement which give comparisons over time. The risk, naturally, is in losing touch with reality and for that reason Statistics Canada makes revisions, based on family spend ing surveys, to catch up with events and incorporate them into the cpi. Substitution. One difficulty inherent in the cpi is that it has no scope for substitution once weights are assigned to the contents of the “ basket.” However, consumer buying habits are continually in flux as technology improvements and taste changes bring new products on the market and as incomes rise or fall. The 2 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis faster these permutations in spending patterns, the more the cpi drifts away from reality. Trends such as eating more convenience foods are only incorporated at the time of revision—and then are held constant in the basket until the next revision. In the meantime, incomes tied to changes in a “ fixed” cpi will be over-compensated if, in practice, they have substituted cheaper products and services. The cpi measures rising energy prices but does not recognize un til the next revision that consumers may be using less energy through conserva tion or cheaper alternatives; as a result, consumers may have more income left over than what appears from a reading of the cpi. Housing. Statistics Canada’s treatment of housing in the cpi still does not solve the controversial issue—for index pur poses—of housing as an asset whose value is changing. But as the cpi measures only price changes in con sumption, increasing capital values can be ignored. Certainly this may not be true for individual owners who sell their houses and make a capital gain, but the purpose of the cpi is to reflect—not speculate on—changes in consumer prices. Deflator. Another widely used applica tion of the cpi is as a tool to calculate “ real” income, which provides a view of what happens once the effect of infla tion has been removed. Use of the cpi as a “ deflator” enables analysts to deter mine retail sales figures, average weekly wages, and personal expenditures with the inflation factor removed. But there are risks in using the cpi as a “ deflator” because, in some circumstances, it may present an inaccurate picture. For exam ple, some but not all taxes are included in the cpi and it may be inappropriate to use the index as a “ deflator” for pre-tax wages. Because income tax is not includ ed in the cpi, it is not affected by any changes which may occur in income tax payments. As a result, the cpi is best equipped to deflate after-tax income. Using the cpi to deflate other concepts of wage income may introduce biases. If governments choose to decrease sales taxes (included in the cpi) and increase income taxes (excluded from the index), then there appears to be an increase in real wages even though the consumer is no better off in real terms than before. In a similar vein, deflation of retail sales may produce incomplete conclusions about what appears to be happening in the economy. If, for instance, increases in energy prices drive up the CPI, it would appear to deflate retail sales even though energy may not be a significant component of those sales. Thus, the cpi as a “ deflator” would overcompensate for changes which had not occurred in retail sales. Limits. The index tells only of the rate of change, not of absolute price increases and will never match one person’s monthly shopping basket. However, as a guide to inflation at one level of prices, the cpi is a convenient and useful tool for all the economic partners: govern ment, business, labour, and consumers. In their search for an equitable ar bitrator for inflation, they have turned to the cpi because its features lend easily to annual or quarterly adjustments for inflation. As a result, however, the cpi increasingly is assumed to be the final word about inflation, when, in fact, it is only one word. The 32-page Toward a Better Understanding o f the Consumer Price Index, by M. C. McCracken and E. Ruddick, is available from the Canadian Government Publishing Centre, Supply and Services Canada, Hull Quebec, Canada K1A0S9. Price is $3.50 in Canada, $4.20 in other countries. □ Special panel suggests changes in BLS Family Budget Program Committee proposes four budget levels applicable to six different types of families , and based on median expenditures, rather than detailed commodity lists H arold W . W atts The Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Family Budget Program produces one of the most popular and widely publicized series in the repertoire of labor statistics. It provides an nual estimates of the cost of purchasing hypothetical “market baskets” of goods that represent “lower,” “in termediate,” and “higher” standards of living. The bud gets are styled for the traditional four-person family, and for a retired couple. For the worker’s family, they estimate a corresponding total income, which provides for taxes and expenses consistent with the three con sumption expenditure levels. These budgets are replicat ed for major cities and for regional averages. They provide the only available basis for inter-area compari sons of living costs or “real” income levels.1 In 1978, the Bureau of Labor Statistics contracted with the Wisconsin Institute for Research on Poverty to recommend revisions in the Family Budget Program. The Institute appointed the Expert Committee on Fami ly Budget Revisions, which embodied a wide range of experience related both to methods of developing bud get standards and to uses of the standards. The Bureau used similar outside expertise when it reviewed the bud gets in 1948 and 1967. The committee and staff, which included members of the Poverty Institute, reviewed the existing program in detail, analyzed new evidence on Harold W. Watts is a professor of economics at Columbia University and chairperson of the Expert Committee on Family Budget Revi sions. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis spending patterns based on the 1972-73 Consumer Ex penditure Surveys, and assessed the enlarged possibili ties provided by the projected continuous Consumer Expenditure Survey. The panel heard testimony from government experts familiar with the development of the current budgets and commissioned several papers by other experts. The committee recommended that four American Family Budget Standards be developed in place of the current three budgets. The revised standards have been designed to take advantage of the new information on family behavior collected in the new Consumer Expen diture Surveys. These recommendations have been sub mitted in the committee’s report to the Commissioner of Labor Statistics and are now being considered. This article explains the basic recommendations and the reasoning behind them. Although the proposed new standards are based on methods that diverge from past practices, they will yield budget totals that are very much in line with the existing series. But a more impor tant continuity— the aim to express normative and quantitative standards that can be used to evaluate rela tive levels of living among groups, between times and across regions— has been maintained. Because such comparisons yield valuable insights and are widely used in the design and implementation of policy, it is impor tant that they be based on clear and understandable principles. The committee, with only one dissenting vote, believes this report proposes a sound and improved basis 3 M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • B L S Family Budget Program for such comparisons and unanimously recommends a program to study the direct estimation of standards from household attitude surveys. Refinement and vali dation of the direct methods hold the promise of still further improvements in the Family Budget Program. Principal recommendations Budget levels. The committee recommends four levels to replace the existing three budgets: • • • • Prevailing Family Standard Social Minimum Standard Lower Living Standard Social Abundance Standard The Prevailing Family Standard, designed to reflect the level of living achieved by the typical family, is set at the median expenditure of two-parent families with two children. In the judgment of the committee, this standard affords a family full opportunity to participate in contemporary society, and to enjoy the basic options it offers. This level is the conceptual descendant of the intermediate budget, but it is also closely related to the traditional “modest but adequate” level of living or the “prevailing standards” of ordinary moderate living. The other three levels are determined in fixed propor tion to this basic standard; standards for other family sizes or types are also expressed relative to the arche typical four-person family. The Lower Living Standard, The committee members 4 Harold W. Watts (Chairperson) Columbia University Department of Economics Anne Draper American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations, Department of Economic Research; and member, Labor Research Advisory Council, Bureau of Labor Statistics Lawrence Gibson General Mills, Marketing Research; and member, Business Research Advisory Council, Bureau of Labor Statistics James E. Jones, Jr. University of Wisconsin Law School Bette Silver Mahoney System Development Corporation Human Systems Division Lee Rainwater Harvard University Department of Sociology Eugene Smolensky University of Wisconsin Department of Economics Barbara Starfield The Johns Hopkins University School of Hygiene and Public Health https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Table 1. Recommended equivalence scale and updated values of American family expenditure standards for 1979 Number of persons 1 aged ...................... 1 nonaged ............... 2 aged ...................... 2 nonaged ............... 3 ............................... 4 ............................... 5 ............................... 6 ............................... 7 ............................... 8 ............................... 9 ............................... 1 0 ............................... 1 1 ............................... 1 2 ............................... 13+ ........................... Equivalence scale Social Minimum Standard Lower Living Standard Prevailing Social Family Abundance Standard Standard .50 .54 .61 .67 .80 1.00 1.20 1.39 1.57 1.74 1.90 2.05 2.19 2.32 2.32 + .12 for each over 12 $ 4,032 4,355 4,919 5,403 6,452 8,064 9,677 11,210 12,661 14,032 15,322 16,532 17,661 18,710 18,710+ 967 for each over 12 $ 5,376 5,806 6,559 7,204 8,602 10,753 12,903 14,946 16,882 18,710 20,430 22,043 23,548 24,946 24,946 + 1,290 for each over 12 $ 8,064 8,710 9,839 10,806 12,903 16,129 19,355 22,419 25,323 28,064 30,645 33,064 35,323 37,419 37,419+ 1,935 for each over 12 $12,096 13,064 14,758 16,210 19,355 24,193 29,032 33,629 37,984 42,097 45,968 49,597 52,984 56,129 56,129 + 2,903 for each over 12 N ote: Assumes no real growth in m edian income from 1978 value for four-person household. set at two-thirds of the Prevailing Family Standard, is a successor to the current lower budget. It represents a level that the committee regards as requiring frugal and careful management, leaving little room for choice in achieving what Americans regard as an acceptable stan dard of living. The Social Minimum Standard is set at half of the Prevailing Family Standard and lies, in the committee’s judgment, in a boundary zone below which issues of deficiency and deprivation are appropriate matters of social concern. The Social Abundance Stan dard, set 50 percent higher than the Prevailing Family Standard (or three times the Social Minimum Stan dard), rounds out the set by providing a balancing view of a higher living standard. The committee regards this standard as marking the beginning of the expenditure range that increasingly affords choices in the luxury cat egories of consumption. The interfamily equivalence scales. To allow for different family sizes, the expenditure standards for the four-per son household are varied using an equivalence scale. The scale recommended has been adapted from the updated “poverty cut-offs” developed by Mollie Orshansky and Carol Fendler, which rely in turn on the relative cost of the “Thrifty Food Plans” provided by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.2 The proposed scale sets the current expenditure levels for an aged sin gle-person household at 50 percent of the four-person reference standard. A non-aged couple’s standard is set at 67 percent of a four-person standard, and that of a family of eight at 174 percent. Table 1 shows the equiv alence scale and the full set of levels evaluated for 1979. The following estimates, based on the 1972-73 Consumer Expenditure Survey, give some idea of the distribution of the population relative to the proposed standards. More than two-thirds of the population lives between the Social Minimum Standard and the Social Abundance Standard; 13 percent are below the Social Minimum Standard, and 18 percent are above the So cial Abundance Standard; more than one in four per sons live below the Lower Living Standard. The all-toofamiliar finding of lower incomes for black persons shows here as a rate of 36.1 percent below the Social Minimum Standard, in contrast to only 10.4 percent for nonblack persons. Children and older persons also show distinctly higher likelihood of living below the minimum and lower chances of living in abundance. Methods o f annual updating. A major objective in devel oping the recommendations was to provide continuous updating of the standards, based on current information and relatively free of discretionary choices. The recent BLS decision to conduct Consumer Expenditure Surveys on a continuous basis provides a way to keep the bud gets up to date that has not existed in the past. The committee recommends that the median expenditures for the reference family type be estimated directly from the annual waves of survey data (using adjacent size groups if needed to enhance precision). For the interim until the survey estimates are available, an estimated ex penditure can be obtained by adjusting annual income medians from the Current Population Survey. Linking the structure of expenditure standards to the median level of the four-person reference family assures that the standards will not be made obsolete by chang ing economic conditions. Short-run variations in median expenditure levels should not, however, be reflected in norms or standards that gain much of their usefulness from their stability. Consequently, the committee rec ommends that the expenditure standards be maintained at their previous peak in real terms until a higher real median level is observed. This feature is called a “ratch et.” The Consumer Price Index would be used for mak ing the required estimates of real expenditure, thus preventing any decline in the real level of the various standards. During periods of constant or declining real median expenditures the nominal standards would con tinue to rise in tandem with the general price level, thus staying constant in “real” terms. Detailed budgets and total income estimates. The new standards have been defined and expressed in terms of expenditure totals. But for many kinds of comparisons and to communicate the meaning of the standards more clearly, further detail is needed. An allocation of expen ditures among major categories can be derived from the Consumer Expenditure Surveys. Average allocation pat terns can be estimated for each of several types of fami lies at each of the expenditure standards. It must be noted that for any level of total expenditure apparently https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis identical families spend their money differently. These differences are surely due in part to different, but unobserved, circumstances, but there are also differences in tastes and preferences that lead a household to favor one line of consumption over another. Such differences have no apparent ill effect on the interests of the general public and are evidently preferred by the individuals concerned; consequently, the committee feels that to in vest the average, or any other allocation, with norma tive or prescriptive significance is unjustified. The average patterns recommended show plausible alloca tions because they are based on observed behavior. However, equally plausible allocations can be obtained by trading some expenditures for others, and within a wide range there is no basis for authorative judgment that one is better than another. The committee proposes that detailed allocations be developed and displayed for six different types of fami lies: • • • • • • Two parents and two children (the reference family) An aged couple 65 and over A non-aged single person A one-parent, two-child family A two-parent, five-child family An aged single person The budgets would be shown in detail for all four stan dards, except that the Social Abundance Standard should be omitted for the last three types. There are too few families of those kinds at that level to permit reli able estimation of allocation patterns. For the non-aged family types, it is also necessary to estimate the level of gross income that will enable a worker’s family to spend the amount specified for a giv en standard. Several adjustments apply here, but in come and payroll tax adjustments are the most important and vary from State to State. The committee proposes that calculations based on current Federal and State laws be carried out to determine the tax adjust ments needed to arrive at the appropriate equivalent gross income for each State. Interarea differentials. The committee recommends the introduction of an interarea price index program based on fixed-weight or market-basket procedures. This pro gram should provide price comparisons among all city and regional aggregates for which sufficient price data are regularly collected. While basic price comparisons are useful for many purposes, they do not show the cost of achieving equivalent living levels in different places. This second problem, the “true cost of living” question, cannot be directly resolved by reference to price data or to observed expenditure patterns. The committee urges continuing research on this problem, but for the imme5 M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • B L S Family Budget Program One committee member dissents The present BLS Family Budgets are based on detailed cost estimates of items necessary for a worker’s family to maintain or achieve specified living standards. Under the proposal of the majority of the Expert Committee on Fam ily Budget Revisions, these would be replaced by a set of declaratory judgments by the committee as to levels of to tal expenditure, tied to median consumption, that are des ignated as representing particular living standards. Even the committee appears rather uncomfortable with this. It produces an ultimate proposal for surveys, that would ascertain public opinion on what is needed to main tain various living standards. Such a project has many use ful possibilities as an adjunct to family budget research, and I support it. However, I do not believe it can substi tute for systematic budget cost calculations from custom ary statistical data. In any case the results of such explorations lie far in the future. The immediate question is whether to adopt the committee’s specific proposals, based on its judgments. Why should we accept the committee’s judgments? Its answer, in effect, is that the present budgets are equally based on judgments, although less obviously. Thus is discarded a history of Bureau budget-making and evolu tionary development that spans more than 70 years. Has the Congress, in commissioning, accepting, and using such budgets, been fooled all this time? The committee majority objects to the present budgets for their commodity lists, their use of scientific standards and expert opinion, and their elements of relativism. This fails to recognize the purpose of budget-making: estimating costs and making their nature explicit in terms of specific items of purchase, quantity, and price. Necessary costs for a given standard of living are not a mirror image of expen ditures taken from a Consumer Expenditure Survey. The Bureau’s work in budget-making, in accordance with Congressional directives, has been skilled and honest. diate future, it recommends that adjustments in fuel and clothing that can be explicitly related to climate differences be recognized as the only basis for interarea adjustments. It is likely that additional adjustments are warranted, but in the absence of consistent evidence of their direction or size, differentials that are based on conjecture may cause more mischief than no adjust ments at all. Measuring popular conceptions o f norms. The principles and basic notions that have inspired the new standards suggest the possibility of eliciting normative standards through general public surveys. Recent work in Europe and the United States suggests that people can be asked how much it takes to live comfortably, for example, or to just get along. Their answers can be related to their own income or expenditure levels. From these relation ships a consensus can be derived that directly reflects popular views about standard living levels. 6 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis I would have interpreted the mandate of the committee as that of recommending improvements in the methodologies for selecting goods and services to be priced for the worker budgets, not that of overturning the bases of the present budgets in their entirety. It would be difficult to describe the committee’s declara tory judgments on expenditure totals as “methodology.” The judgments were not, however, picked out of thin air. Essentially, they were arrived at by consulting the results of other people’s judgments, including those of the rejected BLS budget-makers, and converting them to percentage re lationships with median consumption figures. It was felt to be important not to have the dollar results diverge marked ly from existing numbers that have already been accepted. With acceptable “number” results, the methodology, or lack of it, would not matter. Thus, the choice of median consumption to represent the Prevailing Family Standard rests essentially upon the present Intermediate Family Budget, which the committee observes to have fallen historically “within the middle range of family incomes.” The establishment of the Lower Living Standard at two-thirds of median consumption is pegged at the consumption level of the existing Lower Budget, and is further buttressed by Gallup poll opinion data on “how much it takes to get along.” The Social Min imum Standard, set at 50 percent of the consumption me dian, is similar to other estimates for poverty threshold. When nonconsumption items and taxes are included, it will also be about 70 percent of the Lower Living Standard as referenced in the Comprehensive Employment and Train ing Act. The Social Abundance Standard, at 150 percent of the median, is simply the obverse of the Social Minimum and rests upon no particular observations or other refer ence data. The committee’s living standard lines essentially are de rivative judgments based on existing estimates, rather than Potentially, a measure of this kind could replace the median expenditure standard that forms the basis of the committee’s recommendations. All four standards might be estimated separately, for example, and the propor tional relationship among them validated or improved. The system of interfamily equivalence scales could also be examined in light of directly expressed requirements of differently composed households. Direct survey ques tions could also produce independent evidence of interarea differentials. But at present these approaches need further study and experimental implementation. The committee urges an extensive effort to evaluate these promising new methods. An experimental survey program is practical because the questions required could be added to both the new Consumer Expenditure Survey and other largescale surveys. The survey program should be carefully designed to identify the best form for the questions. A coordinated analytic program, inside or outside the Bu- resting upon independent findings or methodologies devel oped by the committee. The percentages arrived at are further mandated to re main indefinitely in the same fixed relationships. The Social Minimum is always to be 50 percent of the current year’s median, the Lower Living two-thirds, and so forth. The postulate that adequacy at prevailing levels of living is always at median consumption, and that other standards remain in fixed percentage relationships to the median, is inherently insupportable. In a very poor society, for exam ple, or even our own at different periods in history, median consumption may be the minimum of needed consumption. At other times, median consumption may be well above such a minimum. The committee’s formula is particularly troublesome to contemplate in what may become an era of falling real liv ing levels. There is no genuine safety net to protect what ever is represented in terms of necessary consumption, particularly at the Lower and Social Minimum levels. For the short term, the committee has devised a “ratchet” mechanism. This would obviate the problem by mandating that the median will always be at the real levels of 197273, or any subsequent higher real level, as determined through the Consumer Price Index. Under this specificat ion, the “formula” median can readily exceed the actual median, producing a need for complicated explanations. If real living levels are reduced over a long period, the Bu reau of Labor Statistics must drop the ratchet and presum ably revise the percentages. No guidance is offered concerning when to drop the ratchet or what to do about the percentages. Quantity-cost budgets would no longer be available for guidance. Regarding geographical or place-to-place variations for national median consumption, the logic of using expendi ture totals instead of calculated costs is questionable. Obvi ously the committee would not want area median expen ditures to be the basis for area variations from the national total. This is a problem the committee has not truly re solved, and on which it urges “continuing research.” It has endorsed development of an interarea fixed-weight price in dex, which would ignore local area usage differences for such items as fuel, transportation, clothing, and food pref erences. On a separate track, it suggests “climate adjust ments” for home fuel use (and possibly clothing) based on degree days in each State; this to represent “living cost” differences on a State basis. The recommendations are in complete and ad hoc. The production of equivalent consumption totals for families of different sizes through use of the Orshanky scales is not necessarily objectionable. But, as the commit tee itself recognizes, this entails no real advance over existing methodologies, all of which are tied to food con sumption. The main defect is the failure to detail what any of the budgets actually contain, in terms of tangible goods and services. In the committee formulations, “detail” con sists only of percentages allocated to different categories, such as food, clothing, and housing. In conclusion, I believe that abandonment of the Bu reau’s traditional quantity-cost budgets would be a grave loss. The budgets have made an independent and substan tial contribution to studies of income adequacy. The explic it lists they provide of the commodities and services that go into the budgets are a crucial part of their value. People can judge for themselves whether the lists are reasonably representative of living standards at specified levels. — A nne D raper Department of Economic Research, afl - cio, and Labor Research Advisory Council, Bureau of Labor Statistics reau of Labor Statistics, should also be developed in or der to explore all possible uses of directly elicited living standard estimates. on expenditure data and methodological articles on pos sible improvements to the Family Budget Standards Program. New socioeconomic report. The final recommendation calls for the design of a new report that can take advan tage of the evidence in the continuous Consumer Ex penditure Survey, as well as other major Federal surveys, to illuminate the condition of American fami lies and households as consumers. The new budget standards provide a framework in which the population of households and persons can be distributed and the latest information on spending patterns can also be displayed. Such a report would also explicate the annu ally updated living standards and combine them with revised tax and related adjustments in order to deter mine the income standards appropriate for each State. In addition to reporting on standard annual series, the report could offer interpretative analytical articles based Rationale for the changes https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis To the small and select group of individuals closely familiar with the Family Budgets Program, it will be ev ident that these recommendations depart sharply from existing practices. For readers who have used and followed the budget series, but are less familiar with the details of the series construction, this section will point out the main contrasts. The reasoning behind the changes is presented for both groups of readers. Dollar totals vs. shopping lists. A major and far-reaching departure is proposed in the basic formulation of the budget. The existing budget total can be regarded as the cost of a specific list of goods and services drawn from a variety of sources to characterize a “modest but ade7 M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • B L S Family Budget Program quate” standard of living. The proposed Prevailing Family Standard aims at the same general level, but ar rives at it by: (1) examining the living standards of a specified and familiar category of household spending a median number of dollars on current consumption rela tive to others of that type; and (2) taking that level as typifying the ordinary concept of prevailing living stand ards. Subtotals of expenditure for categories of con sumption such as food, shelter, or clothing can be based upon average patterns observed for households at the median level. Illustrative lists of quantities of goods af fordable within those totals can also be compiled on the basis of average price data. The critical difference is that the new procedure abandons the notion of a rigidly fix ed list of things that are interpretable as minimum needs in achieving a given level of living. Because of evidence that different families command ing the same set of choices select rather different com modities without apparent deterioration in health, vitality, or human dignity, the committee found mistak en the belief that there is a best or unique “recipe” for attaining a living standard. More important, careful ex amination showed that the existing lists of commodities were in fact not based on objective assessment of needs. The idea that there are experts who can prescribe what is necessary for a working family to live decently is both widespread and attractive. It promises a basis for claims to “just wages” or “fair treatment” that are apparently supported by the absolute authority of sci ence. Such claims are generally regarded as harder to refute than those based on relativistic standards such as the ones proposed by the committee. The committee might have embraced a set of well-authenticated needs that could be translated directly into costs. But no ex perts could be found who were willing to formulate such requirements. Nutritional experts can combine agreed-upon nutritional requirements (that can, in themselves, be satisfied at very low cost) with p a y a b ili ty limits and evidence related to food preferences to produce any number of need-filling food quantity lists. These lists have differing costs, and most people would prefer a higher cost “food plan” over a lower one. But the nutritional criteria provide no basis for choosing one plan over another, and the actual choice of a plan for the existing budget depends on relativistic measures that are no less arbitrary than the committee’s proposal to assign median total expenditure as a standard of comparison. Physical standards for housing have also been used in forming the budgets but, again, the standards do not determine a unique cost. The selection from among the wide range of values and prices of units that meet the standard is made by applying arbitrary and relativistic standards. Yet food and housing are usually considered the best cases for application of expert or scientifically 8 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis sanctioned standards. The same recourse to arbitrary and essentially relative criteria was apparent at all stages of development of the quantity lists currently used for the family budgets. The majority of the committee concluded that the main claimed advantage of lists of qualities of goods and services— that such lists assure the meeting of au thoritatively established needs— was in fact illusory. Any cost total derived from lists of commodities has perforce been based on a myriad of individual judg ments. Consequently, the committee majority, recog nizing that a judgment based on individual values and not on scientific requirements must be made at some stage whatever the method used, decided to exercise that judgment in the choice of an expenditure total rather than in several hundred item choices. It must be emphasized that the decision did not in volve rejection of scientific or expert-based cost of living criteria. What was rejected was a complex and often ob scure set of judgmental choices that has often and mis takenly been confused with scientific or expert-based standards. The theoretical and practical possibility of deriving genuine scientific quantity standards was also explored, but no promising new approach to determin ing detailed quantity lists was discovered. Finding no alternative to relying on its collective experience and judgment in assigning numerical totals to the more ab stract notion of living standards, the committee chose an alternative that makes the exercise of judgment both explicit and “out front.” The committee believes that family budgets based on its recommendations will be at least as useful as the current budgets but very much hopes that unsupportable claims will not be made by those who use them. However, the family budgets do need an explicit con ceptual base, and if the authoritative list of needs is abandoned, what is the alternative that informs the rec ommendations? The alternative is the notion of a popu lar or democratic consensus about norms or standards of comparison. The committee asserts that there is a general consensus about how much it takes for an ordi nary family to “get along” — perhaps not an exact fig ure, but rather a range or “band” of total expenditure levels that contains what most people would agree is the “get along” amount. Similar consensus may be de fined for thresholds for deprivation or abundance, and survey research, both in Europe and the United States, has been able to measure these levels.3 Assuming the existence of such norms as social facts, the committee addresses the task of finding acceptable ways of eliciting and expressing them in quantitative de tail. The majority of the committee believes the reason the existing practice has been acceptable is that the numbers arrived at are consistent with the popular norms, not that they were derived from expert judg- ment. If “experts” had decided that everyone must have new shoes every week, for example, resulting budgets would have been widely rejected as outside the consen sus for such norms. But it also follows that any method of establishing norms that succeeds in approximating the consensus will be reasonably well-received and found useful. But this view of norms also suggests that a more di rect way to elicit them would be to inquire about them in surveys. For this reason the committee recommends a major effort to evaluate and perfect the survey meth od so that it eventually may be considered in designing possible alternatives for the methods already recom mended in this report. In short, this report recommends a basic shift toward a more populist or democratic framework— the notion that ordinary people, not experts, know what they need in order to get along or to prosper. Thus, recommenda tions for new measurement are directed toward the task of finding stable and reproducible estimates of those levels. Related differences. There are several implications of the basic change. First of all, in order to determine the cost of the shopping list, the existing budgets require current price data on the listed items; the process of updating the cost, between list revisions, similarly depends on a continuous flow of appropriate price data. The proposed approach does not require price data to establish a “bottom line” total cost number, but it does require continuous survey data on household expenditure be havior both for the total cost and for the current alloca tion among different lines of expenditure. Since price data would no longer be needed for the Family Budget Program (except for the “ratchet” computation which prevents reductions in real budget levels), the committee recommends that fixed-weight price index numbers be developed for inter-city and inter-regional comparisons. The existing budgets provide cost differentials that are often used as price differentials. The committee urges that the price data be kept separate from the budgetary norms but recognizes that each has its legitimate use and urges that both be surveyed and published. Unlike the existing budgets which are shown only for specific cities and for regional aggregates that do not have homogeneous tax laws or climate, the new budget standards would be designed to cover all areas, State by State. In the event that dependable and consistent esti mates of differential living costs according to urbaniza tion can be formed, they could be added to the array of variations. But this should be done on a size or type-ofplace basis rather than for specific cities. Because price data are collected only for specific cities, the committee recommends that the price comparisons be limited to those same cities. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis The change in concept also implies a shift from an “absolute” to a “relative” standard, at least to the ex tent that the underlying, popularly conceived norms will be based on what the individuals are experiencing directly and on what they see going on around them. If the underlying norms can be faithfully reflected in the family budgets, they will automatically keep pace with the constantly changing levels and patterns of expendi ture that correspond to the different standards. The ab solute standards embodied in detailed lists of commodi ties must be overhauled periodically; only for a very short time do they approximate the patterns and items of actual current spending. (Pedal pushers, for example, are among the anachronistic items in the current bud gets.) Equivalence scales and fam ily types. The proposed ap proach to the family budgets allows for extension of the budget levels and allocations to as many family types as desired. The committee recommends only six, but it would be possible to prepare other budgets of the same type on short notice if needed for special purposes. The equivalence scale provides an adjustment factor for cal culating the appropriate budget total for any kind or size of family, and the most recently estimated expendi ture allocation system will yield average patterns of spending for each. Finally, the tax and “other expense” categories can be calculated and added to yield a total “gross income” requirement for maintaining the stan dard for each kind of family. With the existing system a whole new list of goods and services must be specified for each separately budgeted family type. Clearly the size of this task has been an obstacle to providing cov erage for a wider variety of family types. While the existing program has its own set of equivalence scales that can be used to adjust the four-person spending to tals, they have never been widely used or given promi nent attention. ALTHOUGH t h e c o m m i t t e e recommends substantial changes in the way family budgets are conceived, esti mated, and presented, the new standards are very much in line with the traditional ones. The levels that have been chosen provide essential continuity with those that have been developed and found useful in the existing program. Consequently, the typical user will not notice any sharp change in the overall appearance of the bud gets despite the sharp change in methodology. If the recommendations are accepted the committee believes that the broader coverage of the budgets, both as to family types and areas, will make the budgets useful for a wider range of users and that the proposed new Re port on Household Consumption will add an important dimension to our array of social indicators. □ 9 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • B L S Family Budget Program FOOTNOTES A large part of the estimates were based on analysis of the 196061 Survey of Consumer Expenditures. Given the availability of data from the 1972-73 Consumer Expenditure Survey and the mandate of the Comprehensive Employment and Training Act (CETA) of 1973 that “the Secretary (of Labor) shall develop methods to establish and maintain more comprehensive household and budget data at different levels of living, including a level of adequacy, to reflect the differences of household living costs in regions and localities, both urban and ru ral,” the Bureau of Labor Statistics began to plan for a comprehensive revision of the Family Budget Program. on Mortality and Disability Research: Selected Papers given at the 1979 Annual Meeting o f the American Statistical Association, Washington, D.C., August 1979. Social Security Administration, Office of Research and Statistics, pp. 161-68. See Denton Vaughn and S. Lancaster, “Income Levels and Their Impact on Two Subjective Measures of Wellbeing: Some Early Specu lation from Work in Progress,” 1979 Proceedings o f the Section on Survey Research Methods, American Statistical Association, Forthcom ing; and Frank M. Andrews and Stephen B. Withy, Social Indicators 2 See Carol Fendler and Mollie Orshansky, “Improving the Poverty o f Wellbeing: Americans’ Perceptions to Life Quality (New York, Ple Definition” in Statistical Uses o f Administrative Records with Emphasis num Press, 1976.) 10 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Inflation’s diffused pattern Inflation is characterized by a general and widely diffused rise in prices and costs. However, all prices and factors affecting prices do not begin to rise or fall at the same time. In part, this is due to the existence of more or less regular sequences in the movement of differ ent prices. Prices in some markets almost always begin to rise more promptly than in other markets. Similarly, some prices typically begin to fall sooner than others. Moreover, prices do not all move at the same pace, and in particu lar, they do not necessarily move at the same pace as wages or costs of production. Prices of some types of assets, such as common stocks or land, rise or fall, while the money price of other assets, such as savings accounts or debt instruments, may not change at all. These differences in price behavior have significant consequences. Real wages— money wages adjusted for price changes— may rise or fall, with vital effects on the wage earner and his family. Profit margins, dependent on the difference between prices and costs, may rise or fall, thereby encouraging or discouraging expansion of production, devel opment of investment plans, or shifts of resources from one activity to another. --------- G eoffrey H. M oore, Business Cycles, Inflation, and Forecasting (New York, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc., 1980), p. 214. The 1995 labor force: a first look All three projections— high, middle, and low— indicate that women will account for two-thirds of the growth, most of which will occur in the prime working-age group; the black labor force will grow twice as fast as the white force H o w a r d N F u l l e r t o n , Jr . By the mid-1980’s, persons in the labor force are pro jected to exceed those not in the labor force— including babies. This development reflects the changing age com position of the population which, in turn, is caused by the swings in births over the past 50 years. By 1995, this labor force would have a greater proportion of women and minorities; indeed, about two-thirds of the labor force growth would be generated by women, re flecting their continued labor force participation.1 The projections discussed in this article are part of a continuing program of economic projections made by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. As part of this program, every 2 years labor force projections are prepared, followed by projections of the economy, of employment by industry, of demand, and ultimately, of occupations by industry. The Bureau of Labor Statistics developed three labor force growth scenarios: a high-growth projection, which assumes rapid growth in the labor force participation of women in the 1980’s and the convergence of participa tion between black men and white men under age 65; a middle-growth scenario, with the expansion coming from women; and a low-growth path with only moderate inHoward N Fullerton, Jr., is a demographic statistician in the Office of Economic Growth and Employment Projections, Bureau of Labor Statistics. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis creases in the participation of women and with the diver gence in male participation between races continuing.2 In the intermediate scenario, the labor force is pro jected to reach 115 million by 1985 and 128 million by 1995. (See table 1.) This represents 1.8 percent growth per year from 1979 to 1985 and 1.0 percent per year from 1985 to 1995. (See table 2.) Under this scenario, labor force rates of women age 20 to 44 are assumed to rise at an increasing rate until 1983. For most age groups of men, participation is projected to decline, al though not as fast as it did in the 1970’s. Overall par ticipation is assumed to increase more rapidly for whites than for blacks.3 In the high-growth scenario, the labor force is pro jected to grow 2.3 percent per year between 1979 and 1985 and 1.1 percent per year between 1985 and 1995. Under this scenario, about 135 million persons would be in the labor force in 1995. The participation rates for women age 16 to 19 and 45 to 64 are projected to grow at an increasing rate until 1985, before tapering off in the 1990’s. The rates for white men age 25 to 39 are as sumed to rise, reversing a long-term drop since 1960. By the end of the century, the labor force participation ratio of black men are projected to converge to the ra tio of white men. (With the higher rate of black involve ment in the Armed Forces and higher rates of institutionalization, the civilian labor force rates for 11 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • The 1995 Labor Force some age groups of black men would exceed those of white men.) However, because blacks make up about 12 percent of the labor force, this assumption of the highgrowth scenario does not have a significant impact on the level of the overall labor force. In the low-growth scenario, the labor force is project ed to grow 1.1 percent a year from 1979 to 1985 and 0.8 percent from 1985 to 1995. By 1995, the civilian la bor force is projected to be only 122 million. The par ticipation rates of women age 20 to 44 are projected to rise over the entire period, but at a decreasing rate. For other age groups of women, participation is assumed to increase at a slower rate than in the middle-growth path, reflecting a longer run experience than that in the 1970’s. For men, labor force activity is projected to de crease more rapidly than in the middle-growth scenario, leading to an increased disparity in rates by race. Women provide most growth As a base for these projections, we used the popula tion projections prepared by the Bureau of the Census. Under the Series II (middle) projection, the population 16 and oldef grows steadily through 1995, although the decrease in births (which began around 1960) means slower rates of growth during the remainder of this cen tury.4 (See table 3.) Because of reduced birth rates dur ing the 1930’s and the 1970’s and the baby boom of the 1950’s, the age composition of the population and, thus, of the labor force will change significantly during the next 15 years.5 In the past, much of the increase in the labor force has been generated by the entrance of youth and wom en. The number of new labor force entrants could drop in the future because there will be fewer youths. This means that the labor force would consist of more expe rienced workers than now. By 1985, the small number of persons born during the Great Depression will begin to leave the prime working ages. They will be replaced Table 1. by the more populous baby-boom generation; the growth of the older population will be slowed. More than two-thirds of the 1980-95 labor force growth would come from women. (These projections do not yield estimates of new entrants and of re-entrants.) Women are expected to compose an additional 4 per cent of the labor force in 1995 under each of the three patterns of labor force growth. The increase in the pro portion of employed women in the prime working-age group would more than offset the decreasing propor tions of younger and older working women. On the oth er hand, the proportion of men in the labor force is assumed to be slightly less. Under the medium- and low-growth scenarios, the activity rates of men age 25 and over is expected to drop. Under the high-growth path, the rates for men age 40 to 64 are projected to re main constant and the rates for men age 25 to 39 will increase slightly. Rates for men and women under age 25 are moving up, but those for women are increasing faster. In the older age groups, where rates for men and women are dropping, those for men are dropping faster. Hence, women’s increasing share of the labor force re flects their own greater activity as well as the decrease in male participation. Until recently, labor force participation has been dropping for most age groups of black men, while their population has been increasing at a higher rate than that of whites. As the black population continues to grow at a faster rate, the black labor force also can be expected to grow at a faster rate. Thus, under all three projections, the black labor force is growing considera bly faster— at about twice the rate of whites. That the relatively rapid growth is related to population growth may be seen by comparing possible participation rates. Under middle and low scenarios, the overall rate is low er for blacks than for whites. Under the high-growth scenario, which assumes convergence of male total par ticipation ratios for blacks and whites, black civilian la- Civilian labor force based on three different growth paths to 1995 Annual percent change1 Growth path 1965 1975 1979 Total: ...................... Middle g ro w th ............. High growth ............... Low growth.................. 74.5 92.6 102.9 Men: ................................... Middle g ro w th ............. High growth ............... Low grow th.................. 48.3 Women:............................... Middle g ro w th ............. High growth ............... Low growth.................. 26.2 ’ Compounded continuously. 12 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 55.6 37.0 1985 1990 1995 115.0 118.3 111.7 122.4 128.1 117.4 127.5 134.7 121.7 63.6 64.8 62.5 65.9 68.2 63.9 67.6 70.8 64.9 51.4 53.4 49.2 56.5 59.9 53.5 59.9 63.9 56.8 59.5 1965 to 1975 1975 to 1979 2.2 2.7 1.4 43.4 3.5 Participation rate 1979 to 1985 1985 to 1990 1990 to 1995 1.9 2.4 1.4 1.3 1.6 1.0 0.8 1.0 .7 1.1 1.4 .8 .7 1.0 .4 .5 .8 .3 2.9 3.5 2.1 1.9 2.3 1.7 1.2 1.0 1.2 1.7 Actual 1975 1979 58.9 61.2 63.7 80.7 4.1 Projected 1965 39.3 77.9 46.3 1985 1990 1995 66.5 68.4 64.6 67.9 71.1 65.2 686 72.4 65.9 77.7 79.2 76.3 77.2 79.9 74.9 76.8 80.5 73.7 56.5 58.7 54.1 59.6 63.2 56.4 61.2 65.2 57.9 77.9 51.0 Table 2. Annual rate of growth of the civilian labor force by sex, age, and race, 1975-79 and projected to 1995 [In percent] Projected Actual Middle growth Age, sex, and race 1975 to 1979 Low growth High growth 1979 to 1985 1985 to 1990 1990 to 1995 1979 to 1985 1985 to 1990 1990 to 1995 1979 to 1985 1985 to 1990 1990 to 1995 Total, age 16 and o v e r............................... 2.67 1.86 1.25 .83 2.34 1.61 1.01 1.37 .99 .72 Men ......................................................................... 16 to 2 4 ............................................................ 16 to 19 ..................................................... 20 to 24 ..................................................... 25 to 5 4 ............................................................ 25 to 34 ..................................................... 35 to 44 ..................................................... 45 to 54 ..................................................... 55 and over ..................................................... 55 to 64 ..................................................... 65 and over ................................................. 1.70 3.15 1.39 2.72 1.83 3.32 2.45 -.91 -.91 .56 -6.96 1.11 -1.47 -2.25 -.06 2.06 2.18 3.88 -.41 .78 -.04 4.47 .70 -2.17 -.79 -2.94 1.88 .52 3.18 2.37 -1.20 -1.43 -.33 .52 -1.16 -.34 -1.66 1.10 -1.59 1.87 4.03 -.57 -.44 -1.04 1.43 -1.11 -1.76 .22 2.24 2.43 4.00 -.28 1.69 .58 6.51 1.01 -1.67 -.14 -2.53 2.04 .75 3.28 2.50 -.2 6 -.83 1.64 .76 -.63 .28 -1.21 1.23 -1.40 1.97 4.14 .14 .00 .58 .80 -1.67 -2.41 -.28 1.88 2.01 3.72 -.63 -.2 7 -.99 2.98 .45 -2.26 -.87 -3.04 1.72 .35 3.03 2.19 -2.30 -2.37 -2.01 .32 -1.19 -.3 8 -1.69 .96 -1.74 1.75 3.88 -1.48 -1.15 -2.80 W om en..................................................................... 16 to 2 4 ............................................................ 16 to 19 ..................................................... 20 to 24 ..................................................... 25 to 5 4 ............................................................ 25 to 34 ..................................................... 35 to 44 ................................................... 45 to 54 ..................................................... 55 and over ..................................................... 55 to 64 ..................................................... 65 and over ................................................. 4.06 3.30 2.63 3.73 4.88 7.19 5.78 .72 2.05 1.91 2.60 2.85 .49 -1.16 1.48 4.28 4.98 6.12 .52 .45 .44 .47 1.91 -.90 .08 -1.46 3.24 2.06 4.64 3.28 -.61 -.98 .78 1.18 -.21 .30 -.52 1.73 -.73 2.69 4.56 .01 .11 -.3 6 3.52 1.02 -.84 2.12 5.05 6.03 6.84 .80 .86 .83 1.02 2.33 -.24 .48 -.65 3.56 2.38 5.01 3.59 -.1 5 -.63 1.62 1.29 -.28 .73 -.88 1.86 -.60 2.85 4.75 .30 .29 .33 2.13 -.04 -1.55 .85 3.42 3.82 5.35 .12 .07 .13 -.13 1.67 -1.20 -.23 -1.76 3.04 1.93 4.41 2.96 -.85 -1.26 .72 1.18 -.4 6 .10 -.81 1.83 -.55 2.84 4.31 -.1 0 -.04 -.30 Total, age 16 and o v e r............................... 2.49 1.71 1.08 .63 2.10 1.37 .76 1.22 .84 .57 Men ......................................................................... 16 to 2 4 ............................................................ 25 to 5 4 ............................................................ 55 and over ..................................................... W om en..................................................................... 16 to 2 4 ............................................................ 25 to 5 4 ............................................................ 55 and over ..................................................... 1.56 2.07 1.68 .39 3.89 3.11 4.74 1.94 .96 -.97 1.88 -.22 2.72 .36 4.19 .28 .55 -2.28 1.72 -1.32 1.74 -1.07 3.11 -.88 .36 -1.25 .93 -.64 .96 -.57 1.55 -.16 1.20 -.91 2.04 .60 3.32 .68 4.92 .68 .77 -2.14 1.84 -.47 2.11 -.7 2 3.44 -.43 .52 -1.09 1.01 -.01 1.04 -.78 1.67 .09 .68 -1.16 1.75 -1.31 1.97 -.1 6 3.29 -.08 .32 -2.34 1.59 -2.47 1.49 -1.38 2.91 -1.12 .19 -1.26 .82 -1.60 1.02 -.59 1.68 -.29 Total, age 16 and o v e r............................... 3.97 2.97 2.39 2.02 4.01 3.14 2.46 2.42 2.05 1.65 Men ......................................................................... 16 to 2 4 ............................................................ 25 to 5 4 ............................................................ 55 and over ..................................................... W om en..................................................................... 16 to 2 4 ............................................................ 25 to 5 4 ............................................................ 55 and over ..................................................... 2.95 3.29 3.13 1.52 5.15 4.67 5.11 2.94 2.27 -.07 3.42 .46 3.71 1.35 4.85 1.77 1.85 -1.41 3.08 -.07 2.92 .13 3.96 1.25 1.58 -.5 6 2.29 .07 2.44 1.90 2.73 1.18 3.26 2.33 3.82 2.11 4.81 3.19 5.79 2.27 2.71 1.06 3.45 1.57 3.56 2.37 4.18 1.79 2.32 1.66 10.35 1.49 2.58 2.11 2.84 1.62 1.80 -.32 2.91 -.1 8 3.09 .72 4.20 133 1.40 -1.65 2.62 -.19 2.70 -.11 3.74 1.03 1.20 -.76 1.91 -1.02 2.08 .28 2.63 1.14 WHITE BU CK AND OTHER Note: Compounded continuously. bor force participation exceeds that of whites by 1995. (This reflects, for black women, an expected continua tion of higher participation and, for black men, higher rates of institutionalization and of participation in the Armed Forces.) Under the middle and low scenarios, the racial gap in male participation rates is projected to approximately double from the percentage point differ ence in 1979. The above description of population and labor force changes suggests that the discussion of future labor force trends should focus on two periods, 1979 to 1985, and 1985 to 1995. During 1979-85, the teenage and young adult population will decline in absolute numbers and the prime-age population will grow sharply. During 1985-95, the older adult population will grow at a https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis slower rate. Further, during the late 1980’s and early 1990’s, women of the baby-boom generation will pass their prime childbearing ages. The changing labor force, 1979-85 A look back to 1975 will help our gaze forward to 1985. In 1975, the total fertility rate was 1.8 children per woman; for 1985, the Census Bureau’s Series II population projection is for 2.0 children per woman.6 Because the total fertility rate adjusts for changing age composition, there would be an increase in births from the levels of the 1970’s. This increase in fertility rates, coupled with the increase in the labor force participa tion of women, means there would be more working mothers. 13 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • The 1995 Labor Force In 1975, 46 percent of all women were in the labor force. By 1985, this is projected to increase to 56.4 per cent under the middle-growth scenario. (See tables 4 and 5.) This dramatic increase reflects both the move ment of women of the baby-boom generation into the prime working-age group and the projection of in creased activity rates. In 1975, women represented 40 percent of the labor force— by 1985 they would repre sent about 45 percent. The percents do not vary much across scenarios. ing of the baby-boom cohort, the numbers of those age 16 to 24 almost certainly will decline so that, despite a projected increase in their labor force participation rates, the level of the youth labor force would fall. (Of course, the drop would not be as sharp as that for the population component.) The composition of the younger population will also be affected by the difference in fertility between blacks and whites. Although fertility for both groups has been falling, black fertility rates remain higher. As a conse quence, the black population is younger (the median age is lower), and the youth population will have a greater proportion of blacks than will the population age 25 and over. At the same time, black youths have lower labor force participation than do their white counterparts, so if other things remained the same, the Slow growth fo r youths. Since the early 1960’s, the youth population (age 16 to 24) has been growing at a faster rate than has the older population. However, 20 years have passed since the years of peak births, and the size of this age group has begun to fall. Thus, with the ag Table 3. Civilian noninstitutional population, by age, sex, and race, 1975-79 and projected to 1995 [Numbers in thousands] Actual population Projected population Net change Age, sex, and race Annual percent change1 1975 1979 1985 1990 1995 1975 to 1979 1979 to 1985 1985 to 1990 1990 to 1995 1975 to 1979 1979 to 1985 1985 to 1990 1990 to 1995 Total, 16 and o v e r ......... Men ............................................ 16 to 2 4 ............................... 16 to 19 ........................ 20 to 24 ........................ 25 to 5 4 ............................... 25 to 34 ........................ 35 to 44 ........................ 45 to 54 ........................ 55 and over ........................ 55 to 64 ........................ 65 and over .................... 151,268 71,403 16,793 8,046 8,747 36,617 14,537 10,756 11,324 17,994 9,215 8,779 161,532 76,449 17,669 8,155 9,514 39,381 16,552 11,838 10,991 19,399 9,782 9,617 172,850 81,889 16,364 6,920 9,444 44,707 18,988 14,947 10,772 20,818 10,217 10,601 180,129 85,285 14,695 6,521 8,174 49,224 19,574 17,510 12,140 21,366 9,819 11,547 186,034 88,031 13,983 6,403 7,580 52,190 18,122 19,236 14,832 21,858 9,738 12,120 10,264 5,046 876 109 767 2,764 2,015 1,082 -333 1,405 567 838 11,318 5,440 -1,305 -1,235 -7 0 5,326 2,436 3,109 -219 1,419 435 984 7,279 3,396 -1,669 -399 -1,270 4,517 586 2,563 1,368 548 -398 946 5,905 2,746 -712 -118 -594 2,966 -1,452 1,726 2,692 492 -81 573 1.65 1.72 1.28 .34 2.21 1.84 3.30 2.43 -.74 1.90 1.50 2.31 1.14 1.15 -1.27 -2.70 -.1 2 2.14 2.31 3.96 -.3 3 1.18 .73 1.64 0.83 .82 -2.13 -1.18 -2.85 1.94 .61 3.22 2.42 .52 -.7 9 1.72 0.65 .64 -.99 -.3 5 -1.50 1.18 -1.53 1.90 4.09 .46 -.8 2 .97 W om en........................................ 16 to 2 4 ............................... 16 to 19 ........................ 20 to 24 ........................ 25 to 5 4 ............................... 25 to 34 ........................ 35 to 44 ........................ 45 to 54 ........................ 55 and over ........................ 55 to 64 ........................ 65 and o v e r.................... 79,865 17,686 8,215 9,471 39,326 15,488 11,632 12,206 22,853 10,347 12,506 85,083 18,397 8,224 10,173 42,031 17,499 12,780 11,752 24,656 10,930 13,726 90,961 17,012 6,981 10,031 47,318 19,906 15,938 11,474 26,631 11,293 15,338 94,844 15,322 6,560 8,762 52,022 20,533 18,553 12,936 27,500 10,736 16,764 98,003 14,560 6,421 8,139 55,156 19,071 20,384 15,701 28,287 10,637 17,650 5,218 711 9 702 2,705 2,011 1,148 -454 1,803 583 1,220 5,878 -1,385 -1,243 -142 5,287 2,407 3,158 -278 1,975 363 1,612 3,883 -1,690 -421 -1,269 4,704 627 2,615 1,462 869 -557 1,426 3,159 -762 -139 -623 3,134 -1,462 1,831 2,765 787 -9 9 886 1.59 .99 .03 1.80 1.68 3.14 2.38 -.94 1.92 1.38 2.35 1.12 -1.30 -2.69 -.23 1.99 2.17 3.75 -.4 0 1.29 .55 1.87 0.84 -2.07 -1.24 -2.67 1.91 .62 3.06 2.43 .64 -1.01 1.79 0.66 -1.02 -.43 -1.46 1.18 -1.47 1.92 3.95 .71 -.1 9 1.01 Total, 16 and o v e r ......... Men ............................................ 16 to 2 4 ............................... 25 to 5 4 ............................... 55 and o v e r ........................ 133,501 63,385 14,526 32,569 16,291 141,614 67,493 15,175 34,816 17,501 150,085 71,632 13,796 39,151 18,685 155,029 73,982 12,154 42,788 19,040 158,791 75,770 11,418 45,002 19,350 8,113 4,108 649 2,247 1,210 8,471 4,139 -1,379 4,335 1,184 4,944 2,350 -1,645 3,637 355 3,762 1,788 -733 2,214 310 1.49 1.58 1.10 1.68 1.81 .97 1.00 -1.58 1.98 1.10 .65 .65 -2.50 1.79 .38 .48 .48 -1.24 1.01 .32 W om en........................................ 16 to 2 4 ............................... 25 to 5 4 ............................... 55 and o v e r ........................ 70,115 15,068 34,315 20,733 74,120 15,522 36,339 22,257 78,453 14,118 40,457 23,878 81,047 12,482 44,115 24,450 83,021 11,724 46,352 24,945 4,005 454 2,024 1,524 4,333 -1,404 4,118 1,621 2,594 -1,636 3,658 572 1,974 -758 2,237 495 1.48 .74 1.44 1.79 .95 -1.57 1.81 1.18 .65 -2.43 1.75 .47 .48 -1.25 .99 .40 Total, 16 and o v e r ......... 17,768 19,918 22,765 25,100 27,243 2,150 2,847 2,335 2,143 2.90 2.25 1.97 1.65 Men ............................................ 16 to 2 4 ............................... 25 to 5 4 ............................... 55 and over ........................ 8,018 2,267 4,048 1,703 8,955 2,493 4,564 1,897 10,257 2,568 5,556 2,133 11,303 2,541 6,436 2,326 12,261 2,565 7,188 2,508 937 226 516 194 1,302 75 992 236 1,042 -2 7 880 193 958 24 752 182 2.80 2.40 3.04 2.73 2.29 .50 3.33 1.97 1.96 -.2 9 2.98 1.75 1.64 .19 2.23 1.52 W om en........................................ 16 to 2 4 ............................... 25 to 5 4 ............................... 55 and over ........................ 9,750 2,618 5,011 2,120 10,963 2,873 5,691 2,399 12,508 2,894 6,861 2,753 13,797 2,840 7,907 3,050 14,982 2,836 8,804 3,342 1,213 255 680 279 1,545 21 1,170 354 1,289 -5 4 1,046 297 1,185 -4 897 292 2.97 2.36 3.23 3.14 2.22 .12 3.17 2.32 1.98 -.3 8 2.88 2.07 1.66 -.03 2.17 1.85 WHITE B U CK AND OTHER 'Compounded continuously. 14 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Table 4. Civilian labor force participation rate by sex, age, and race, 1975-79 and projected to 1995 [In percent] Projected Actual Middle growth Sex, age, and race 1975 1979 Total, age 16 and o v e r......... 61.2 Men ................................................... 16 to 2 4 ...................................... 16 to 19 ............................... 20 to 24 ............................... 25 to 5 4 ...................................... 25 to 34 ............................... 35 to 44 ............................... 45 to 54 ............................... 55 and over ............................... 55 to 64 ............................... 65 and over ........................... W om en............................................... 16 to 2 4 ...................................... 16 to 19 ............................... 20 to 24 ............................... 25 to 5 4 ...................................... 25 to 34 ............................... 35 to 44 ............................... 45 to 54 ............................... 55 and over ............................... 55 to 64 ............................... 65 and over ........................... Low growth High growth 1985 1990 1995 1985 1990 1995 1985 1990 1995 63.7 66.5 67.9 68.6 68.4 71.1 72.4 64.6 65.2 65.4 79.7 78.7 59.2 84.6 94.4 95.3 95.7 92.1 49.5 75.8 21.7 77.9 77.9 61.7 86.6 94.4 95.4 95.8 91.4 44.2 73.0 20.0 77.7 76.9 63.4 86.9 94.0 94.7 95.4 91.0 43.1 69.7 17.5 77.2 76.8 64.7 86.4 93.7 94.3 95.2 90.8 39.6 67.5 15.8 76.8 76.1 64.7 85.7 93.4 94.0 95.1 90.6 37.6 66.5 14.3 79.2 78.7 65.3 88.4 95.0 96.1 96.0 91.7 45.5 72.4 19.7 79.9 80.5 68.8 89.8 95.5 96.7 96.4 92.1 43.8 72.2 19.6 80.5 82.0 71.1 91.2 95.7 97.4 96.7 92.4 43.1 72.8 19.2 76.3 76.1 62.8 85.8 93.0 93.7 94.4 89.8 40.5 65.8 16.1 74.9 75.5 63.8 84.9 92.0 92.5 93.6 88.8 35.1 60.7 13.3 73.7 74.7 63.7 84.1 91.0 91.5 93.0 87.9 31.8 57.8 11.0 46.3 48.3 49.2 64.1 55.0 54.6 55.8 54.0 23.1 41.0 8.3 51.0 62.6 54.5 69.1 62.2 63.8 63.6 58.4 23.2 41.9 8.3 56.5 69.7 59.8 76.5 71.1 75.1 72.9 61.7 22.1 41.6 7.7 59.6 73.9 63.9 81.4 75.9 80.7 78.6 64.3 20.7 41.7 7.3 61.2 77.0 66.3 85.3 78.0 83.7 81.7 66.2 20.2 42.3 6.8 58.7 71.9 61.0 79.5 74.3 79.7 75.9 62.7 22.6 42.6 7.9 63.2 78.9 66.5 88.1 80.5 86.9 83.2 66.4 21.7 43.4 7.9 65.2 81.8 70.5 90.7 83.3 90.8 87.2 69.0 21.5 44.5 7.6 54.1 67.5 58.4 73.8 67.7 70.3 69.8 60.2 21.6 40.9 7.4 56.4 70.5 61.4 77.3 71.5 75.0 74.4 61.8 20.0 40.3 7.0 57.9 72.5 63.1 79.8 73.9 78.5 77.9 62.9 19.4 40.6 6.6 Total, age 16 and o v e r......... 61.5 64.0 66.8 68.3 68.8 68.4 70.9 7.19 65.0 65.6 65.9 Men ................................................... 16 to 2 4 ...................................... 25 to 5 4 ...................................... 55 and o v e r ............................... W om en............................................... 16 to 2 4 ...................................... 25 to 5 4 ...................................... 55 and over ............................... 78.7 74.3 95.1 49.8 45.9 59.0 56.2 22.8 78.6 77.2 95.1 47.1 50.6 64.8 61.6 22.9 78.5 80.1 94.6 43.6 56.2 72.8 70.8 21.7 78.1 81.0 94.3 40.0 59.3 78.0 75.7 20.3 77.7 80.9 93.9 38.1 60.7 80.6 77.8 19.7 79.6 80.4 95.5 45.8 58.2 74.2 73.8 22.2 80.1 81.9 95.7 43.9 62.5 80.9 80.2 21.2 80.3 82.5 79.9 43.1 64.3 82.8 83.0 20.9 77.2 79.2 93.8 40.8 53.8 70.5 67.2 21.2 76.0 79.8 93.0 35.3 56.1 74.4 71.2 19.6 74.9 79.7 74.0 32.1 57.6 76.9 73.6 18.9 Total, age 16 and o v e r......... 59.3 61.8 64.4 65.8 67.0 68.5 72.5 75.4 62.4 62.7 62.7 Mon ................................................... 16 to 2 4 ...................................... 25 to 5 4 ...................................... 55 and o v e r ............................... W om en.............................................. 16 to 2 4 ...................................... 25 to 5 4 ...................................... 55 and over ............................... 71.5 60.1 89.0 45.1 49.2 46.4 60.8 26.4 71.9 62.3 89.3 43.0 53.5 50.8 66.3 26.2 71.9 60.2 89.8 39.3 58.3 54.7 73.1 25.4 71.5 56.6 90.2 35.9 61.1 56.1 77.0 24.4 71.3 54.5 90.5 33.5 63.5 61.8 79.2 23.6 76.2 69.4 91.8 43.4 62.2 60.9 77.1 26.2 79.0 74.0 94.0 43.0 67.1 69.8 82.1 25.8 81.7 79.6 96.0 42.9 70.3 77.6 84.9 25.5 69.9 59.3 87.1 37.8 56.3 52.7 70.4 24.7 68.0 55.1 85.6 33.5 58.3 53.4 73.5 23.5 66.6 52.5 84.3 30.3 59.5 54.2 75.2 22.7 WHITE BLACK AND OTHER growth of the youth labor force would be slower. (See table 6.) The number of black youths should increase slightly while the number of whites should drop. Only black young men had lessening labor force participation during the 1970’s. Under the middle-growth projection, this drop is assumed to continue, although at a decreasing rate. The effects of greater labor force participation by black women and a proportionately larger youth popula tion would offset the decline in male participation, and black youths would constitute the same proportion of the labor force in 1985 as at present. Under both the middleand high-growth projections, the black youth labor force would be half men and half women. In the high-growth scenario, black youths represent an even greater propor tion of the labor force in 1985; the more pessimistic lowgrowth pattern yields a lower proportion. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Prime-age labor force. The prime-age workers (25 to 54 years) would be the fastest growing component of the labor force under each of the growth paths. The follow ing tabulation shows annual growth rates by major age group and race, 1975-79, and projected growth for 1979-85: Y o u th .......................... Prime .......................... Older .......................... White .......................... Black and other ......... .... .... .... ___ .... 1975-79 1979-85 3.2 3.0 .2 2.6 4.0 -0 .6 3.0 .7 1.7 3.0 In each scenario, the prime-age labor force of women would grow at a faster rate than that of men. Under the high projection, between 1975 and 1985, the female la15 M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • The 1995 Labor Force bor force is projected to grow at twice the male rate and at a pace faster than that experienced in the 1970’s. This is due to three factors: the movement of women of the baby-boom generation into this age group, a moder ate rise in fertility, and a continued growth in female la bor force participation. The high-growth scenario for women in this age group is an attempt to reflect the ac celeration in participation that was exhibited in the 1970’s. Under the high-growth scenario, prime-age men (par ticularly young men), are also expected to experience an increase in participation. Under the high-growth path, prime-age men would represent 78 percent of the total male labor force, a moderate increase from 1979. Under the middle-growth path, such trends would also be evi dent, although less significantly. For example, by 1985, prime-age male workers would represent only 75 per Table 5. cent of the male labor force. With the more pronounced drop anticipated under the low-growth scenario, the proportion of prime-age men would be less than in 1975, while their female counterparts would be more than 10 percentage points higher than in 1975. Older workers. Older people (age 55 and over) have the most on-the-job experience, although on average, they have the least formal education. From 1979 to 1985, older workers are expected to participate less intensively in the labor force. These projections do not indicate the extent of part-time labor force activity that this growing segment of the population might elect. Under the high-growth scenario, men age 55 to 64 are expected to have only a modest decrease in partici pation. This decrease, coupled with population growth, will result in an increase in their labor force. Under the Civilian labor force by sex, age, and race, 1975-79 and projected to 1995 [Numbers inthousands] Actual Projected Sex, age, and race Middle growth 1975 Total, agfe 16 and over High growth Low growth 1979 1985 1990 1995 1985 1990 1995 1985 1990 1995 92,613 102,908 114,985 122,375 127,542 118,252 128,123 134,753 111,706 117,394 121,684 M en.......................................... 16 to 2 4 ........................... 16 to 1 9 ...................... 20 to 2 4 ...................... 25 to 54 ........................... 25 to 3 4 ...................... 35 to 4 4 ...................... 45 to 5 4 ...................... 55 and over .................... 55 to 6 4 ...................... 65 and over ............... 55,615 12,158 4,760 7,398 34,569 13,854 10,288 10,426 8,888 6,982 1,906 59,517 13,769 5,031 8,239 37,180 15,792 11,337 10,051 8,568 7,140 1,428 63,600 12,592 4,387 8,205 42,029 17,976 14,252 9,801 8,979 7,122 1,857 65,880 11,282 4,216 7,066 46,147 18,453 16,672 11,022 8,451 6,625 1,826 67,611 10,641 4,144 6,497 48,758 17,029 18,297 13,432 8,212 6,479 1,733 64,825 12,873 4,521 8,352 42,473 18,239 14,353 9,881 9,479 7,393 2,086 68,174 11,833 4,489 7,344 46,988 18,934 16,873 11,181 9,353 7,090 2,263 70,835 11,463 4,553 6,910 49,950 17,645 18,604 13,701 9,422 7,092 2,330 62,458 12,445 4,344 8,101 41,584 17,796 14,116 9,672 8,429 6,725 1,704 63,888 11,099 4,158 6,941 45,287 18,113 16,393 10,781 7,502 5,963 1,539 64,918 10,450 4,078 6,372 47,507 16,583 17,880 13,044 6,961 5,626 1,335 Women ................................... 16 to 2 4 ........................... 16 to 1 9 ...................... 20 to 2 4 ...................... 25 to 5 4 ........................... 25 to 3 4 ...................... 35 to 4 4 ...................... 45 to 5 4 ...................... 55 and over .................... 55 to 6 4 ...................... 65 and over ............... 36,998 10,108 4,039 6,069 21,613 8,456 6,493 6,665 5,277 4,244 1,033 43,391 11,511 4,481 7,029 26,156 11,167 8,130 6,860 5,724 4,579 1,145 51,385 11,854 4,176 7,678 33,650 14,955 11,617 7,078 5,881 4,703 1,178 56,495 11,325 4,194 7,131 39,469 16,568 14,581 8,320 5,701 4,476 1,225 59,931 11,205 4,259 6,946 43,021 15,971 16,651 10,399 5,705 4,502 1,203 53,427 12,235 4,259 7,976 35,163 15,870 12,094 7,199 6,029 4,812 1,217 59,949 12,083 4,363 7,720 41,885 17,853 15,444 8,588 5,981 4,662 1,319 63,918 11,912 4,526 7,386 45,934 17,322 17,781 10,831 6,072 4,731 1,341 49,248 11,477 4,079 7,398 32,020 13,988 11,121 6,911 5,751 4,615 1,136 53,506 10,800 4,031 6,769 37,198 15,396 13,805 7,997 5,508 4,330 1,178 56,766 10,551 4,053 6,498 40,735 14,971 15,887 9,877 5,480 4,320 1,160 WHITE Total, age 16 and over M en.......................................... 16 to 24 ........................... 25 to 54 ........................ 55 and over .................... Women ................................... 16 to 24 ........................... 25 to 54 ........................... 55 and over .................... 82,084 90,602 100,316 105,867 109,292 102,667 109,930 114,208 97,496 101,661 104,604 49,881 10,795 30,965 8,121 32,203 8,890 18,595 4,717 53,074 11,718 33,105 8,251 37,528 10,051 22,382 5,095 56,228 11,047 37,041 8,140 44,088 10,271 28,635 5,182 57,800 9,843 40,342 7,615 48,067 9,731 33,379 4,957 58,871 9,242 42,256 7,373 50,421 9,453 36,052 4,916 57,014 11,090 37,370 8,554 45,653 10,472 29,872 5,309 59,245 9,953 40,939 8,353 50,685 10,100 35,391 5,194 60,817 9,421 43,051 8,345 53,391 9,710 38,462 5,219 55,287 10,923 36,742 7,622 42,209 9,952 27,187 5,070 56,197 9,699 39,775 6,723 45,464 9,284 31,389 4,791 56,752 9,103 41,447 6,202 47,852 9,013 34,118 4,721 10,529 12,306 14,669 16,508 18,250 15,585 18,193 20,545 14,210 15,733 17,080 5,734 1,363 3,602 768 4,795 1,216 3,091 560 6,443 1,552 4,075 816 5,863 1,460 3,774 629 7,372 1,545 4,988 839 7,297 1,583 5,015 699 8,080 1,439 5,805 836 8,428 1,594 6,090 744 8,740 1,399 6,502 839 9,510 1,752 6,969 789 7,811 1,783 5,103 925 7,774 1,763 5,291 720 8,929 1,880 6,049 1,000 9,264 1,983 6,494 787 10,018 2,042 9,899 1,077 10,527 2,202 7,472 853 7,171 1,522 4,842 807 7,039 1,525 4,833 681 7,691 1,400 5,512 799 8,042 1,516 5,809 717 8,166 1,347 6,060 759 8,914 1,538 6,617 759 BLACK AND OTHER Total, age 16 and over M en.......................................... 16 to 24 ........................... 25 to 54 ............................ 55 and over ...................... Women ..................................... 16 to 24 ............................. 25 to 54 ............................. 55 and over ...................... 16 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis other two scenarios, their participation is expected to drop more sharply, and the male labor force age 55 to 64 would actually decrease. Participation rates for wom en in this age group are expected to increase under both the moderate- and high-growth projections. The result would be an older labor force with proportionately more women. The scenarios in these projections for the age group 65 and over are the same for both sexes. For the high projection, recent legislation forbidding mandatory re tirement before age 70 is expected to hold participation constant. Under the moderate-growth scenario, the measured rate of decrease in participation is reduced somewhat, so that labor force activity drops at a slower rate than in the past. Under the low-growth projection, the measured declines in labor force participation are projected to continue. An experienced labor force, 1985-95 During 1985-95, the baby-boom generation will be in the prime working ages and the relatively small num ber of persons born in the Great Depression will begin retiring, easing pressures on retirement systems. To put the 1995 projections in context, it is useful to look back to 1965, a time of the buildup of forces in Vietnam and a period of lower inflation. The fertility rate was 2.9 children per woman, well above the Census Bureau’s Series II projection of 2.1 for 1995.7 In fact, 1965 was the first year in which births were below 4 million— after 11 years of high birth rates. In 1965, 40 percent of all women, 34 percent of all married women, and 23 percent of mothers with children under age 6 were in the labor force. Although comparable projec tions of the labor force by marital and parental status were not made by the Bureau of Labor Statistics for 1995, more than half of all married women were al ready in the labor force by 1979, as were 45.2 percent of mothers with preschool children. Both groups (which, of course, overlap) are projected to supply much of the labor force growth in the 1990’s. Youths. In 1965, youths were a relatively small propor tion of the labor force, 18 percent. By 1979, this num ber had climbed to 24.4 percent. The effects of changes in the composition of the labor force may be seen by looking at the median age of the labor force. In 1965, it was 40 years; by 1979, it had dropped 5 years, taking the effects of both greater retirement and the aging of the baby-boom generation into account; by 1995, the median age of the labor force is projected to be 37.5 years. Based on the Census Bureau’s Series II birth rate projection, the youth labor force would continue to de crease from 1985 to 1995, although a larger proportion of teenagers would participate in the labor force. Only https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis under the high-growth pattern would young men age 20 to 24 have a greater participation rate than in 1979. By 1995, the youth labor force would be a smaller propor tion of the labor force than in either 1979 or 1985. Prime-age workers. By 1995, more than 70 percent of the labor force would be in the prime working ages. For the middle- and high-growth scenarios, this is actually a lower proportion than in 1985. The projected growth for prime-age men is about the same under all three sce narios; consequently, even after the growth in female participation is taken into account, the prime-age labor force is still more stable over the scenarios than that of the younger and older age groups. (See table 6.) In the middle- and low-growth projections, it is assumed that the youth and the older labor force grow relatively slower than the prime-age labor force, so these scenar ios have a higher proportion of prime-age workers. However, the greatest number of prime-age workers would be attained under the high-growth pattern. Un der all projections, the labor force would have more women and more blacks than now: 47 percent of the la bor force would be women, and 14 to 15 percent of the labor force would be black. Following are selected an nual growth rates (in percent) of all persons in the la bor force, by major age group and race, 1965-79, and projected growth to 1995: 1965- 79 Y outh.......................... P rim e.......................... Older .......................... W hite.......................... Black and o th e r ......... ......... 3.9 ......... 2.2 .................... 4 ......... 2.3 ......... 2.8 1979- 95 -0 .9 2.3 - .2 1.2 2.5 Older workers. Under all scenarios, workers age 55 and older would continue to be a decreasing proportion of the workforce. The changes for the 25 years from 1970 are most dramatic in the low-growth projection— in 1995, older workers would constitute about two-thirds the proportion of the labor force that they did in 1970. This drop reflects both their expected continued drop in participation and the increase in the numbers of persons in the prime working ages, when participation is highest. The drop in the proportions for the middleand high-growth paths is less extreme, from 14 percent in 1979 to around 11 percent in 1995. How the projections were revised The uncertainty of the projection process is indicated by the changes from the 1978 set.8 (See table 7.) The difference between the high and low in 1985 and 1990 is about the same as that in the 1978 projections; the cur rent middle projection is midway between the previous middle and high. Each scenario, high, middle, and low was revised upw ard— the low one the most, to almost 17 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • The 1995 Labor Force Table 6. Labor force dis tribution by sex, age, and race, 1975 -79 and projected to 1995 [In percent] Actual Projected Sex, age, and race Middle growth 1975 High growth Low growth 1979 1985 1990 1995 1985 1990 1995 1985 1990 1995 Total, age 16 and o v e r......... 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Men ............................................ 16 to 2 4 ...................................... 16 to 19 ............................... 20 to 24 ............................... 25 to 5 4 ...................................... 25 to 34 ............................... 35 to 44 ............................... 45 to 54 ............................... 55 and over ............................... 55 to 64 ............................... 65 and over ........................... 60.0 13.1 5.1 7.9 37.3 14.9 11.1 11.2 9.5 7.5 2.0 57.8 13.3 4.8 8.0 36.1 15.3 11.0 9.7 8.3 6.9 1.3 55.3 10.9 3.8 7.1 36.5 15.6 12.3 8.5 7.8 6.1 1.6 53.8 9.2 3.4 5.7 37.7 15.0 13.6 9.0 6.9 5.4 1.4 53.0 8.3 3.2 5.0 38.2 13.3 14.3 10.5 6.4 5.0 1.3 54.8 10.8 3.8 7.0 35.9 15.4 12.1 8.3 8.0 6.2 1.7 53.2 9.2 3.5 5.7 36.6 14.7 13.1 8.7 7.3 5.5 1.7 52.5 8.5 3.3 5.1 37.0 13.0 13.8 10.1 6.9 5.2 1.7 55.9 11.1 3.8 7.2 37.2 15.9 12.6 8.6 7.5 6.0 1.5 54.4 9.4 3.5 5.9 38.5 15.4 13.9 9.1 6.3 5.0 1.3 53.3 8.5 3.3 5.2 39.0 13.6 14.6 10.7 5.7 4.6 1.0 W om en............................................... 16 to 2 4 ...................................... 16 to 19 ............................... 20 to 24 ............................... 25 to 5 4 ...................................... 25 to 34 ............................... 35 to 44 ............................... 45 to 54 ............................... 55 and o v e r ............................... 55 to 64 ............................... 65 and o v e r........................... 39.9 10.9 4.3 6.5 23.3 9.1 7.0 7.1 5.6 4.5 1.1 42.1 11.1 4.3 6.8 25.4 10.8 7.9 6.6 5.5 4.4 1.1 44.6 10.3 3.6 6.6 29.2 13.0 10.1 6.1 5.1 4.0 1.0 46.1 9.2 3.4 5.8 32.2 13.5 11.9 6.7 4.6 3.6 1.0 46.9 8.7 3.3 5.4 33.7 12.5 13.0 8.1 4.4 3.5 .9 45.1 10.3 3.6 6.7 29.7 13.4 10.2 6.0 5.0 4.0 1.0 46.7 9.4 3.4 6.0 32.6 13.9 12.0 6.7 4.6 3.6 1.0 47.4 8.8 3.3 5.4 34.0 12.8 13.1 8.0 4.5 3.5 .9 44.0 10.2 3.6 6.6 28.6 12.5 9.9 6.1 5.1 4.1 1.0 45.5 9.1 3.4 5.7 31.6 13.1 11.7 6.8 4.6 3.6 1.0 46.6 8.6 3.3 5.3 33.4 12.3 13.0 8.1 4.5 3.5 .9 88.6 88.0 87.2 86.5 85.6 86.8 85.8 84.7 87.2 86.5 85.9 53.8 11.6 33.4 8.7 34.7 9.5 20.0 5.0 51.5 11.3 32.1 8.0 36.4 9.7 21.7 4.9 48.9 9.6 32.2 7.0 38.3 8.9 24.9 4.5 47.2 8.0 32.9 6.2 39.2 7.9 27.2 4.0 46.1 7.2 33.1 5.7 39.5 7.4 28.2 3.8 48.2 9.3 31.6 7.2 38.6 8.8 25.2 4.4 46.2 7.7 31.9 6.5 39.5 7.8 27.6 4.0 45.1 6.9 31.9 6.1 39.6 7.2 28.5 3.8 49.4 9.7 32.8 6.8 37.7 8.9 24.3 4.5 47.8 8.2 33.8 5.7 38.7 7.9 26.7 4.0 46.6 7.4 34.0 5.0 39.3 7.4 28.0 3.8 Total, age 16 and o v e r......... 11.3 11.9 12.7 13.4 14.3 13.1 14.1 15.2 12.7 13.4 14.0 Men ................................................... 16 to 2 4 ...................................... 25 to 5 4 ...................................... 55 and over ............................... W om en............................................... 16 to 2 4 ...................................... 25 to 5 4 ...................................... 55 and over ............................... 6.1 1.4 3.8 .8 5.1 1.3 3.3 .6 6.2 1.5 3.9 .7 5.6 1.4 3.6 .6 6.4 1.3 4.3 .7 6.3 1.3 4.3 .6 6.6 1.1 4.7 .6 6.8 1.3 4.9 .6 6.8 1.0 5.0 .6 7.4 1.3 5.4 .6 6.6 1.5 4.3 .7 6.5 1.4 4.4 .6 6.9 1.4 4.7 .7 7.2 1.5 5.0 .6 7.4 1.5 7.3 .7 7.8 1.6 5.5 .6 6.4 1.3 4.3 .7 6.3 1.3 4.3 .6 6.5 1.1 4.6 .6 6.8 1.2 4.9 .6 6.7 1.1 4.9 .6 7.3 1.2 5.4 .6 WHITE Total, age 16 and o v e r......... Men ................................................... 16 to 2 4 ...................................... 25 to 5 4 ...................................... 55 and over ............................... W om en............................................... 16 to 2 4 ...................................... 25 to 5 4 ...................................... 55 and over ............................... * BLACK AND OTHER the level of the previous middle-growth path. The changes reflect the effects of two additional years of ob servations, as well as changes in the assumptions made for women age 20 to 44 mentioned earlier. They also re flect the general experience that it is more difficult to project an increasing phenomenon. In 1990, the projected number of women would be about 2.5 million higher under each scenario, but the proportion of the labor force in each major age group differs among scenarios. Under both the high and mid dle scenarios, the number of young women in the labor force would be smaller than in the previous projection, reflecting their slower participation growth. For women in the 20 to 44 age group, the 1978 projection included an adjustment to the high-growth scenario to reflect ac celerating participation rates; in the current projection, this assumption was formally introduced in both the 18 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis middle- and high-growth scenarios. The differences between the two sets of projections are less uniform for men. The number of men in the la bor force is essentially unchanged in the high-growth scenario; in the low and middle scenarios the number of men is projected to increase. The Bureau of Labor Sta tistics typically revised downward the number of men in the labor force with each succeeding labor force projec tion (while increasing the number of women). These changes reflect the slowing or ending of the decline in male participation rates. For the high-growth scenario, it is assumed that male participation rates will either rise or at least hold constant. To summarize, for each scenario, the number of women expected to be in the labor force was revised upward by about the same amount. For men, the highgrowth projection was approximately the same as the last projection, the middle-growth path was revised up ward slightly, and the low-growth path was revised up ward significantly. Possible consequences A number of questions could be asked about the possible consequences of the changes in the structure of the population and of the labor force in these projec tions. Would these changes affect the ability of society to maintain the responsibilities it has assumed, such as social security? Could the changing composition of the labor force make goals such as equal employment op portunity easier or more difficult to accomplish? Is there potential for changes in productivity? Will there be scarcities of certain kinds of workers? How would mi gration affect the composition of the labor force? Societal responsibilities. One of the implications of these projections is the change in the “economic dependency ratios” for both the high and middle projections. The economic dependency ratio is defined as all persons not in the labor force (including those under age 16) divid ed by the total in the labor force.9 This ratio should drop to below 100 non workers per 100 workers. Under the conditions of the middle-growth pattern, the depen Table 7. dency ratio would stabilize after 1990. Under the condi tions of the high-growth scenario, (which assumes higher participation), the dependency ratio drops signifi cantly; in fact, it shows no sign of leveling off in this century. Under the conditions of the low-growth projec tion, the dependency ratio would stabilize above the 100-nonworker-per-100-worker level, but well below historic levels. The following tabulation shows depen dency ratios for 1965-79 and projected ratios for the three scenarios, 1985-95: P ro jec ted A c tu a l 1965 1970 1975 1979 ............. ............. ............. ............. M id d le H ig h Low 98.8 95.6 94.5 93.5 87.0 84.4 104.5 103.4 104.1 151.8 138.5 125.4 110.1 1985 ............. 1990 ............. 1995 ............. These favorable ratios are a characteristic of the age of the baby-boom cohort and of the numbers of projected births. A large labor force is combined with low births to give low economic dependency ratios. As the baby- Comparison of the current and previous projections for 1985 and 1990 [Numbers in thousands] 1990 1985 Growth path, sex, and age Previous1 Current Difference2 Previous1 Current Difference2 112,953 63,007 12,465 41,824 8,718 49,946 11,934 32,432 5,580 114,985 63,600 12,592 42,029 8,979 51,385 11,854 33,650 5,881 2,032 593 127 205 261 1,439 -80 1,218 301 119,366 65,115 11,156 45,845 8,114 54,251 11,225 37,713 5,313 122,375 65,880 11,282 46,147 8,451 56,495 11,325 39,469 5,701 3,039 765 126 302 337 2,244 100 1,756 388 117,005 65,013 12,882 42,533 9,598 51,992 12,510 33,596 5,886 118,252 64,825 12,873 42,473 9,479 53,427 12,235 35,163 6,029 1,247 -188 -9 -60 -119 1,435 -275 1,567 143 125,603 68,220 11,879 47,056 9,285 57,383 12,054 39,630 5,699 128,123 68,174 11,833 46,988 9,353 59,949 12,083 41,885 5,981 2,520 -46 -46 -68 68 2,566 29 2,256 282 108,900 61,169 12,134 41,219 7,816 47,731 11,315 31,220 5,196 111,706 62,458 12,445 41,584 8,429 49,248 11,477 32,020 5,751 2,806 1,289 311 365 613 1,517 162 800 555 113,521 62,472 10,744 44,844 6,884 51,049 10,375 35,942 4,732 117,394 63,888 11,099 45,287 7,502 53,506 10,800 37,198 5,508 3,873 1,416 355 443 618 2,457 425 1,256 776 MIDDLE Total, age 16 and over .............................................. Men ............................................................................ 16 to 2 4 ............................................................................................. 25 to 5 4 ............................................................................................. 55 and over .............................................................. Women......................................................................... 16 to 2 4 ............................................................................................. 25 to 5 4 ............................................................................................. 55 and over............................................................. HIGH Total, age 16 andover .............................................. Men ............................................................................ 16 to 2 4 ............................................................................................. 25 to 5 4 ............................................................................................. 55 and over.............................................................. Women......................................................................... 16 to 2 4 ............................................................................................. 25 to 5 4 ............................................................................................. 55 ana over.............................................................. LOW Total, age 16 and over .............................................. Men ............................................................................ 16 to 2 4 ............................................................................................. 25 to 5 4 ............................................................................................. 55 and over.............................................................. Women......................................................................... 16 to 2 4 ............................................................................................. 25 to 5 4 ............................................................................................. 55 and over .............................................................. 1The previous projections were published in Paul O. Flaim and Howard N Fullerton, Jr., "Labor force projections to 1990: Three possible paths,” Monthly Labor Review, pp. 25-35, https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis December 1978. 2 A minus sign Indicates that the current projection is lower than the previous projection. 19 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • The 1995 Labor Force boom cohort leaves the prime working ages (after 2015), the dependency ratios should rise again, although the higher mortality of older people will prevent it from reaching the levels of the 1960’s. Differences in the number of older people are a consequence of past fertili t y— not improvements in m ortality— but if spectacular increases in longevity occur, this could change.10 Thus, the current difficulties of the social security system are not a result of the current age composition of the popu lation. This favorable age composition effect on social security almost certainly will reverse in the early part of the next century. Black-white differentials. One dilemma confronting labor force forecasters and policymakers concerned with em ployment and training programs has been the continued divergence of labor force participation between blacks and whites in the prime-age groups. As recently as the mid-1950’s, the rates for men were virtually the same; but since then, the participation rates for black men have dropped more rapidly than those for white men. The high-growth scenario projects a possible return to parity of their labor force rates. The extent to which black rates have to increase is a measure of the prob lems that have to be confronted. In numbers, about 1.3 million more black men would participate in the high than in the middle-growth path labor force. For wom en, the picture has been different; in 1979, the rate for prime-age black women was higher than that for their white counterparts (despite higher fertility among black women). Moreover, participation of women in both groups is increasing, although faster for whites. The differences in female participation reflect the greater family responsibilities of black women— more are single parents than are whites, although the number of such white women is increasing.11 The higher fertility of black women obviously translates into higher popula tion growth and then into higher labor force growth. Thus, the youth groups of the 1980’s and 1990’s will have a higher proportion of blacks. In the 1980’s and 1990’s, employers may have increasing difficulty finding young workers. The decline in the number of youths will be particularly important to the Armed Forces— the largest single employer of youths. Given the decrease in the youth labor force, those who employ unskilled workers may also experi ence difficulty— depending to some extent on the Na tion’s immigration policy. The growth of the prime-age labor force would exceed that of the overall labor force by 20 percent. Be cause this is the experienced component of the labor force, analysts who look for a shortage of skilled work ers must consider likely changes in the composition of the prime-age labor force. More than half (59 percent) of the growth is projected to be generated by women and 22 percent by blacks (black women are in both groups). Skilled and professional workers will have to come from these groups in greater numbers than in the past if there is not to be a shortage. In the U.S. labor market, there is a tradition of male occupations and of female occupations, and there has been little change in this pattern.14The growth in female participation has occurred largely in occupations tradi tionally held by women. What would happen if demand would no longer grow in those sectors? The argument has been presented that higher participation would be translated into greater continuity of work and, thus, into more capacity to retain skills and professional abil ities that diminish if not used. Given that much of the increase in female labor force activity will probably come from mothers, employers may have to review their personnel practices (such as provision of day care) to attract these workers.15 By 1995, the youngest of the baby-boom generation will be in their thirties. They may well face competition for career positions which may result in frustration for some and greater productivity for all. The older mem bers of the baby-boom generation will be in the pre retirement years and should be at the peak of their pro ductivity. Productivity. One question raised by these projections is the effect of a proportionally greater prime-age labor force on productivity. The proportion of prime-age workers will increase at least by 10 percentage points (with the low-growth projection having the greatest concentration in the prime ages). Analyses have cen tered on the relative size of the youth labor force (which will diminish) and on the likely impact this would have on productivity gains.12 The growing proportion of the prime-age labor force should have a favorable impact on productivity because of the greater continuity of par ticipation by women and because of the higher educa tional attainment of all age, sex, and ethnic compo nents.13 Immigration. Along with growth in the native adult population and increased labor force activity, immigra tion represents a possible source of labor force growth. For purposes of this discussion, migration can be divid ed into two groups, legal or “documented” migration and illegal or “undocumented” migration. The Bureau of the Census projects that “documented” net migration will average 400,000 persons a year, with bulges in a few years such as 1976 and 1980 when large numbers of refugees reached our shores. To estimate the proportion of the labor force growth that net migration represents, we can look at 1979. The labor force participation rate for those age 16 and older was 63.7 percent. If the com parable rate for the migrant population was about the 20 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis same, and ignoring the fact that there are proportion ately fewer older persons in the migrant population, some 173,000 would have been in the labor force in 1979, or about 7 percent of the actual labor force growth.16 Documented workers vary from those with high skills (the brain drain) and professional athletes to lower skilled agricultural and service workers. Undocumented workers also represent a variety of skills, from college graduates to unskilled workers. By their nature, we know little about these people as a group. The discussion that follows is based on a study conducted by Jacob S. Siegel, Jeffrey S. Passel, and J. Gregory Robinson for the Select Commission on Immi gration and Refugee Policy.17After a review of past esti mates, they concluded that there are 3 to 6 million undocumented workers in the United States. It is im portant not to confuse the stock of undocumented workers with the flow of documented workers discussed in the preceding paragraph. The only information avail able about flows of undocumented workers is for Mexi cans. There appears to be considerable movement in both directions netting to zero (with large seasonal fluc tuation). There is no way of ascertaining what portion of undocumented workers, if any, are currently account ed for in existing labor force data. Therefore, no chang es have been made to the projections to account for undocumented workers. Obviously, these last few paragraphs have raised rath er than answered questions about the implications of the changing structure of the labor force. The topics dis cussed here illustrate some uses for which these projec tions have been generated; there also are other uses. □ These projections replace those described by Paul O. Flaim and Howard N Fullerton, Jr. in “Labor force projections to 1990: three possible paths,” Monthly Labor Review, pp. 25-35, December 1978. 2 These scenarios are prepared by projecting the changes in the ra tio of the total labor force to the total population for each of 54 agesex-race groups; the levels of the anticipated labor force were calculat ed by applying the projected rates to the Bureau of the Census’ popu lation projections. The high and low scenarios do not represent “confidence intervals,” but rather different views of the future. A complete methodological statement is in preparation. 1 The term “blacks” refers to black and other races, which includes Negroes, American Indians, Eskimos, and others. At the time of the 1970 Census of Population, 89 percent of this population group was black. 4 Projections of the Population o f the United States: 1977 to 2050, Current Population Reports (Bureau of the Census, Series P-25, No. 704, 1977). For an analysis of recent fertility trends, see Arthur A. Campbell, “Baby Boom to Birth Dearth and Beyond,” Annals, Janu ary 1978, pp. 40-60. 5There is no standard definition of the baby-boom period; this arti cle uses the 1950’s, as described in Leon F. Bouvier, “America’s Baby Boom Generation: The Fateful Bulge,” Population Bulletin, Vol. 35, No. 1, 1980. 6 Projections o f the Population . . . , Table A-5. A moderate increase in fertility is plausable because the Series II population projections are tracking well at this time. 7Projections of the Population . . . , Table A-5. 8Flaim and Fullerton, “Labor force projections. . . . ” Projections were not published for 1995. 4 There is no standard definition of the “economic dependency ra tio.” See Henry S. Shryock, Jacob S. Siegel, and others, The Methods and Materials o f Demography (Bureau of the Census, 1973), p. 235. 10Jacob S. Siegel, “On the Demography of Aging,” Demography, forthcoming, and Nathan Keyfitz, Applied Mathematical Deomography (New York, John Wiley and Sons, 1977). " Elizabeth Waldman and others, “Working mothers in the 1970’s: a look at the statistics,” Monthly Labor Review, October 1979, pp. 39 -49. 12 George L. Perry, “Potential Output and Productivity,” Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 1977; J. R. Norsworthy, M. J. Harper, and K. Kunze, “The Slowdown in Productivity Growth: Analysis of Some Contributing Factors,” Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 1979; and the discussion by Martin Neil Baily, Edward F. Denison, and Michael L. Wachter in the same issue. 13 Edward F. Denison, Accounting for United States Economic Growth, 1929-1969 (Washington, The Brookings Institution, 1974), and Accounting for Slower Economic Growth (Washington, The Brookings Institution, 1979). 14Valerie K. Oppenheimer, “Demographic Influence on Female Em ployment and the Status of Women,” in Joan Hamber, ed„ Changing Women in a Changing Society (Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1973). 15 Peter F. Drucker, Managing in Turbulent Times (New York, Harper and Row, 1980). 1,1 Projections of the Population. . . . Table C-l contains the distribu tion of the immigrant population. 17 Jacob S. Siegel, Jeffery S. Passel, and J. Gregory Robinson, “Pre liminary Review of Existing Studies of the Number of Illegal Residents in the United States” (Washington, Select Commission on Immigration and Refugee Policy, 1980). https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 21 Contracts in six key industries scheduled to expire in 1981 New settlements are expected to cover almost 2.6 million workers in this light bargaining year; unions are still formulating goals, but several have indicated that safety and job security may be among the issues pressed D a v id Sc h l e in Following 2 years of relatively heavy bargaining activi ty, collective bargaining in 1981 will be light. About 2.6 million workers are covered by major agreements expir ing or reopening in 1981, compared with approximately 3.7 million in both 1979 and 1980.1 Except for the airline industry, which has negotiations scheduled throughout the year, most of the talks will occur before midsummer. Contracts in the railroad and coal indus tries expire in March; contracts in the maritime indus try expire in June; and those in the postal and West Coast longshore industries, in July. We do not know, of course, what economic condi tions will exist at the time of the negotiations. But, as the Nation entered the fourth quarter of 1980, some in dicators, such as gross national product, housing starts, and industrial production rebounded after declining in the first half of 1980.2The third quarter saw an increase in retail sales and a recovery in durable goods orders. Interest rates, although dropping from recent record levels, have remained high. Employment has remained relatively stable since the first of the year, but the un employment rate rose to 7.7 percent by midyear (from 6.2 percent in January), and remained at about that rate until it inched down to 7.6 percent in August, and to 7.5 percent in September. Double-digit inflation contin ued through the first half of 1980. However, in the third quarter, the Consumer Price Index, which had risen at David Schlein is an economist in the Office of Wages and Industrial Relations, Bureau of Labor Statistics. 22 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis an 18.7-percent annual rate in the first quarter, slowed to a 7.0-percent rate. The recent high rate of inflation may cause negotia tors to focus on cost-of-living adjustment ( c o l a ) claus es as a means of helping workers recoup lost purchasing power.3 About 42 percent of the workers under major agreements that either expire or are subject to reopen ing in 1981 have COLA protection. In recent years, there has not been a substantial increase in the prevalence of COLA provisions in major agreements, but there has been a tendency to liberalize existing formulas.4 Major contracts with COLA clauses have tended to provide for a larger total wage increase, as can be seen from the fol lowing tabulation, which shows the average annual wage change (in percent) of the expiring contracts:5 N e g o tia te d ch a n g e Contracts expiring in 1981 . . With cola .............................. Without cola ......................... 6.9 5.8 7.7 N e g o tia te d ch a n g e p l u s COLA 8.1 8.6 — Railroads Contracts expire on March 31, 1981, for 400,000 em ployees of the Nation’s class 1 railroads (rail carriers with operating revenues of more than $50 million a year). Proposals for changes in the agreements will be exchanged no earlier than January 1. Representatives of 13 railroad unions will conduct coordinated bargaining sessions with the National Railway Labor Conference, the bargaining agent for most of the rail carriers. Three organizations represent a majority of the workers— the United Transportation Union; Brotherhood of Mainte nance of Way Employes; and the Brotherhood of Rail way, Airline and Steamship Clerks, Freight Handlers, Express and Station Employees.6 The movement towards coordinated bargaining with common expiration dates began in 1973, when all of the major unions agreed to negotiate as a group with the conference. The parties are limited to negotiating on wages, cost-of-living adjustments, and health and wel fare benefits. Issues specific to individual unions are considered in separate negotiations between each union and the conference. In 1978, for the first time since it was formed in 1963, the conference did not represent all class 1 rail roads, as Conrail and several bankrupt railroads bar gained on their own.7 It is possible that one or more of the major rail carriers will not be represented by the conference in 1981. The last round of rail negotiations began in July 1977 and continued into the summer of 1979. The 39-month agreements, consummated by the various unions, gener ally provided for straight wage increases of 14 percent over the life of the contract;8 two cost-of-living adjust ments payable under the expired contracts; semiannual cost-of-living reviews, providing up to an 8-percent in crease per year; improved vacation, medical, and dental benefits; and some changes in work rules intended to cut labor costs. The parties also agreed to refer the is sue of the size of crews to local negotiations. The 1978 round of bargaining was conducted without a work stoppage. Only one emergency board was established, as specified in the Railway Labor Act, to hear the dispute between the conference and the Train Dispatchers.9 The board mediated a settlement within the required 30 days, the first such mediated agreement in a national railroad case. Information on 1981 union demands is not now available. However, negotiations will undoubtedly be in fluenced by the industry’s improved economic perfor mance and the recent deregulation, which has spurred merger proposals and increased competition among the major rail carriers. Bituminous coal The contract between the United Mine Workers of America ( u m w , Ind.) and the Bituminous Coal Opera tors Association ( b c o a ), covering about 125,000 min ers, mostly in the Appalachian region, expires March 26. Settlement terms for bituminous coal miners tradi tionally set the pattern for other agreements covering coal mine construction workers (14,000), western sur face miners (12,000), and anthracite coal miners (2,000). Before the discovery of vast western petroleum and natural gas fields, coal had been the primary energy https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Table 1. Calendar of major collective bargaining activity [Workers in thousands] Contract expirations1 Year and month Scheduled wage reopenings Principal industry Number Workers covered Number Workers covered All y e a rs ........... 1,979 9,311 41 137 Total 1981 .. 672 2,504 29 102 31 33 86 124 94 90 91 790 331 307 2 4 4 6 16 13 103 35 26 35 52 19 34 301 151 75 93 139 36 100 7 5 2 43 13 6 1 2 2 5 562 3,464 12 35 38 17 41 88 117 88 46 544 312 530 2 2 2 2 2 4 3 8 96 47 35 449 166 138 1 1 1 1 8 2 October ........... November......... December......... 32 23 18 10 1,023 54 79 35 1 6 Total 1983 . . 408 2,488 283 1,123 125 9 1,365 40 328 815 January ........... February........... M arch............... April .................. May .................. J u n e .................. July .................. August ............. September . . . . October ........... November......... December......... Railroads, mining Construction Construction Construction, maritime Retail food stores Airlines Total 1982 .. January ........... February........... M arch............... April .................. May .................. J u n e .................. July .................. August ............. September . . . . January-June .. July-December 1984 or later . . . Year unknown or in negotiation2 Oil refineries Trucking Construction, rubber Apparel, construction Electrical equipment, food and kindred products, and construction Electrical equipment Food production Automotive companies Construction, lumber, and food produc tion Telephone companies ' Eleven agreements covering 23,000 workers are excluded because they have no fixed expiration or reopening date. 2These include 55 major agreements, covering 178,000 workers, which are due to expire between November 1 and December 31, 1980; and 273 agreements, covering 637,000 workers, which expired prior to November 1, but for which necessary information had not been fully gathered. Note: Only bargaining units in the private nonagricultural economy affecting 1,000 work ers or more are considered for this table. Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals. source in the United States. After a long decline, annual coal production has risen steadily since 1961, spurred in recent years by soaring oil prices and intermittent short ages. However, a rapidly increasing proportion of coal production is coming from new western surface fields where the UMW is weak. During much of the 1970’s, the Appalachian deep mines, where the union has its princi pal strength, have been plagued by overproduction and unemployment. The 90 year-old UMW has been ridden by internal dis sent, financial problems,10 and competition of other unions for the miners in the prosperous western fields.11 During the 1980’s, however, continued oil price rises are 23 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • Contracts Expiring in 1981 likely to accelerate the demand for coal, and may help provide jobs for 20,000 UMW members now unem ployed.12 The expiration of the UMW-BCOA agreement in De cember 1977 marked the start of a bitter 111-day strike. The first agreement, negotiated by UMW President Arnold Miller, was rejected by the union’s bargaining council; a second agreement was rejected by the mem bership. In an attempt to get the miners back to work, President Jimmy Carter invoked the emergency dispute procedures of the Taft-Hartley Act, explaining that “at least a million more Americans will be unemployed if the walkout continues.” 13 A settlement, reached March 14, 1978, terminated the automatic cost-of-living adjustments but provided for an immediate $l-per-hour pay increase and addi tional 70-cent increases in 1979 and 1980. The miners also received increased shift differentials, additional va cation time, an improved health benefit program for employees and retirees, and an improved retirement plan. The coal operators were allowed to introduce pro duction incentive plans, if approved by a majority of the union members at individual mines.14 Strikes have been a chronic problem in the coal min ing industry; the last five rounds of national negotia tions have been marked by walkouts. Such strikes can idle workers in other industries, particularly those in railroads and primary metals. Local and regional dis putes, usually over noneconomic issues such as safety and mine administration, and often unauthorized by the UMW national leadership, occur more frequently in coal mining than in other industries. However, since the 1978 settlement, the incidence of “wildcat” strikes has declined by 90 percent, even though the BCOA did not secure the right to discipline the leaders of unauthorized strikes; hence, such walkouts may not be a major issue in the 1981 negotiations. According to UMW sources, major union demands in 1981 include a substantial wage increase, an “uncap ped” escalator clause, greater shift differentials and a shorter work week. The union is likely to seek addition al safety measures (including full-time safety inspectors and nurses at each mine, and the right to stop work over unsafe conditions), an expedited arbitration proce dure similar to that used in the primary metals indus try, and placement of arbitrators under contract which would help to avoid delays and fee raising. UMW President Sam Church has expressed optimism that negotiations will be peacefully concluded. Talks be gan in mid-September, although serious bargaining is not expected until early next year. Postal Service A national agreement covering 570,000 employees of the U.S. Postal Service is up for renewal July 20. Nego 24 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis tiating unions include the American Postal Workers Union, the National Association of Letter Carriers, the Mail Handlers’ division of the Laborers’ International Union of North America, and the National Rural Let ter Carriers Association (Ind.). Postal unions were primarily lobbying organizations until they gained some bargaining rights in the 1960’s, but most economic and job security issues were decided by the Congress. Employee dissatisfaction led to a post al strike in 1970, followed by passage of the Postal Re organization Act of 1970.15 The act established the Postal Service as an independent agency, and authorized collective bargaining similar to that in private industry. Unions representing the majority of postal workers set up a coordinated bargaining committee to negotiate with postal officials. Bargaining experience since 1970 has varied. The 1971 talks lasted 6 months and were marked by acrimo ny, deadlocks, and factfinding intervention. Negotia tions in 1973 went fairly smooth, but the 1975 settle ment required mediation, and 1978 negotiations were submitted to arbitration. Negotiations at the national level have been aggravated by intermittent postal bud get deficits; declining employment resulting from auto mation and private competition; the differing impact of inflation and automation on local postal facilities; and varying interpretations of the agreements at the local level. The initial agreement of the 1978 negotiations was ratified by the National Rural Letter Carriers but re jected by members of the other three unions. Further bargaining was unsuccessful, and an arbitrator decided the terms in dispute, awarding the workers an annual pay increase of $500, a 3-percent increase after 1 year, and $500 after 2 years; an “uncapped” escalator clause; and continuation of the job security clause, introduced in 1971. (The wage terms were similar to those awarded members of the National Rural Letter Carriers.) The ar bitrator ruled that regular employees on payroll as of September 1, 1978, were protected from layoff “during their worklife” and that employees hired later would gain the same protection after 6 years of qualifying ser vice. The postal talks are scheduled to start in early 1981 and are anticipated to be difficult. It has been men tioned that the unions will abandon coalition bar gaining, meaning that Postal Service management will have to conduct separate negotiations with each nation al union. Management, under pressure to cut labor costs, may seek to roll back union gains won in previ ous rounds, particularly the “uncapped” c o l a clause, and the “worklife” protection of employees from layoff. The unions almost certainly will resist such efforts, and additionally, may seek new gains, such as greater safety protection for employees working with automated mail Table 2. Major contract expiration and wage reopening dates, by industry [Workers in thousands] Total Industry 1981 Contracts Workers covered All industries ............................. 1,979 Manufacturing............. Food and kindred products . . . . Tobacco manufacturing ........... Textile mill products.................. Apparel and other finished products ............................... Lumber and wood products, except furniture .................... Furniture and fixtures............... Paper and allied products......... Printing, publishing and allied industries............................... Chemicals and allied products . Petroleum refining and related industries............................... Rubber and miscellaneous plastics ................................. Leather and leather products .. Stone, clay, glass and concrete products ............................... Primary metals industries......... Fabricated metal products . . . . Machinery, except electrical . . . Electrical machinery equipment and supplies ........................ Transportation equipment......... Instruments and related products Miscellaneous manufacturing industries............................... 941 99 8 17 Nonmanufacturing ......... Mining, crude petroleum and natural gas production ......... Construction ............................. Transportation, except railroads and trucking........................... Railroads ................................. Trucking ................................... Communications ...................... Utilities, gas and electric........... Wholesale trade ...................... Retail trade, except restaurants Restaurants............................... Finance, insurance and real estate ................................... Services, except hotels and health services...................... Hotels........................................ Health services ........................ 1982 Con tracts Workers covered 9,311 672 4,050 314 28 43 271 38 8 55 486 15 17 66 1984 or later 1983 Unknown or in negotiation2 Con tracts Con tracts Workers covered 102 12 35 21 5 4 10 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 6 Workers covered Workers covered Con tracts Workers covered Con tracts Workers covered Con tracts 2,504 562 3,464 408 2,488 9 40 328 815 29 585 88 2,108 164 1 9 195 16 7 3 974 33 26 17 2 2 204 14 381 28 9 3 14 269 31 1 4 2 3 1 7 8 26 40 444 7 17 66 28 98 2 4 27 2 5 36 2 8 13 4 14 13 11 2 12 59 3 26 3 14 6 23 1 2 33 36 63 65 18 17 35 29 4 8 11 13 5 9 11 21 6 2 6 2 1 2 19 37 4 7 15 29 15 16 83 38 10 22 12 2 78 12 2 2 3 3 1 2 1 2 36 118 59 93 91 476 116 289 12 17 19 25 22 30 51 40 5 12 12 21 8 17 22 142 12 35 5 18 42 330 7 55 7 53 23 28 19 98 36 51 103 107 16 448 1,209 49 22 32 5 45 120 9 44 25 3 264 833 14 21 29 4 111 203 21 16 21 4 13 23 3 4 7 15 2 3 1,038 5,261 401 1,920 293 1,356 213 1,514 16 489 217 1,588 3 212 163 648 1 149 1 402 7 108 23 477 66 18 20 42 77 26 155 25 287 432 476 734 224 44 678 80 35 18 1 6 33 5 41 7 163 432 2 17 79 7 211 22 7 37 11 16 5 24 8 48 9 469 18 60 12 182 24 2 27 8 2 38 4 21 126 10 45 5 40 45 21 17 151 126 97 16 7 7 46 52 33 10 5 6 37 16 57 2 3 1 1Eleven agreements covering 23,000 workers are excluded because they have no fixed ex- processing equipment. Although strikes against the Fed eral Government carry stiff penalties, such action is possible. Delegates to recent Letter Carriers’ and Postal Workers’ conventions adopted “no contract, no work” mandates, and the Postal Workers’ union has a new president, Morris Biller, who, reportedly, is more mili tant than his predecessor, Emmet Andrews. West Coast longshoring On July 1, 1981, the 3-year agreement between the International Longshoremen’s and Warehousemen’s Union (Ind.) and the Pacific Maritime Association is 1 1 1 1 Workers covered 1982 1981 Con tracts piration or reopening date. ‘ These Include 55 major agreements, covering 178,000 workers, which are due to expire between November 1 and December 31, 1980; and 273 agreements, covering 637,000 workers, which expired prior to November 1, but for which necessary information had not been fully https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Scheduled wage reopening Year of contract termination1 1 1 29 53 6 1 3 1 1 1 2 38 124 434 20 82 8 24 13 5 15 31 48 11 61 4 13 40 13 48 4 692 32 3 194 24 1 4 12 11 28 5 1 7 52 22 90 10 3 9 1 2 1 4 2 6 6 41 1 2 5 18 1 17 4 3 63 15 6 1 2 1 4 1 1 1 3 7 5 2 25 gathered, Note: only bargaining units in the private nonagrlcultural economy affecting 1,000 workers or more are considered for this table. Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equa| totals due to expire. Although the agreement covers only about 11,500 workers, it involves virtually all firms en gaged in longshoring operations at West Coast ports. Interruption of such operations can quickly affect ship ping, trucking, railroads, and eventually can spread to other industries. Until the 1950’s (except during World War II), West Coast dock negotiations usually were marked by im passes and strikes, and at times by violence.16 With the advent of the Pacific Maritime Association in 1949, la bor-management relations gradually improved. The Mechanization and Modernization Agreement of 1959, (Text continued on p. 29) 25 M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • Contracts Expiring in 1981 Table 3. Expiration and wage adjustment provisions of selected collective bargaining agreements [Contracts are listed in order of the Standard Industrial Classification Code] 1972 SIC Code Industry and employer1 Union2 Employees covered Contract term3 1981 provisions for automatic cost-ofliving review4 1981 provisions for deferred wage increases5 Manufacturing 20 Food and kindred products: Armour and Co. (Interstate)6 California Processors, Inc. John Morrell and Co. (Interstate) Kellogg Co. (Interstate) Nabisco, Inc. (Interstate)6 Sugar Cos., Negotiating Committee (Hawaii) Swift and Co. (Interstate)6 Wilson Foods Corp. (Interstate) 21 22 23 24 26 30 32 33 Tobacco manufacturers: Phillip Morris, U.S.A. (Richmond, Va.) Textile mill products: Fieldcrest Mills, Inc. (Virginia and North Carolina) Apparel and other finished products: Cotton Garment Manufacturers (Interstate)6 New York Coat and Suit Assn.; Affiliated Dress Manufacturers, Inc.6 United Knitwear Manufacturers League (New York, N.Y.)6 Lumber and wood products, except furniture:6 Western States Wood Products Employers Association (Boise Cascade Corp., Champion International Co., Crown Zellerbach Corp., Georgia-Pacific Corp., International Paper Co., ITTRayonier, Inc., Louisiana-Pacific Corp., Publishers Paper Co., Simpson Timber Co., and Weyerhaeuser Co.) 26 6,000 55,000 6,100 5,350 Sept. 1, 1979 to Aug. 31, 1982 July 1,1979 to July 1,1982 Sept. 1, 1979 to Sept. 1, 1982 Oct. 10,1978 to Sept. 26,1981 Bakery, Confectionery and Tobacco Workers Longshoremen and Warehousemen (Ind.) Food and Commercial Workers Food and Commercial Workers 11,000 Sept. 1,1979 to Aug. 31,1981 January and July July January and July April, thereafter quarterly Sept. 1: 25 cents July 1: 5.7 percent Sept. 7: 25 cents Apr. 1: 3 percent 7,000 Feb. 1,1980 to Jan. 31,1982 5,200 6,000 Sept. 1,1979 to Aug. 31,1982 Sept. 1,1979 to Aug. 31,1982 January and July May and November Sept. 1: Sept. 7: Bakery, Confectionery and Tobacco Workers 7,200 Feb. 1,1980 to Jan. 31,1983 January thereafter quarterly Feb. 1: Clothing and Textile Workers 5,000 Mar. 1, 1978 to Feb. 28, 1981 Clothing and Textile Workers Ladies’ Garment Workers 60,000 47,000 Sept. 1, 1979 to Aug. 31, 1982 May 1,1979 to May 31,1982 June 1: 7 percent Ladies’ Garment Workers 10,000 July 16,1979 to July 31,1982 June 1: 25 cents Woodworkers and Carpenters 37,000 June 1,1980 to May 31, 1983 June 1: 75 cents June 1: 4 percent to nearest 1/2 cent Feb. 1: January and March Paper and allied products: International Paper Co., Southern Kraft Division (Interstate) Paperworkers and Electrical Workers (IBEW) 8,000 June 1,1979 to May 31,1983 Rubber and miscellaneous plastic products: B. F. Goodrich Co. (Interstate)6 Rubber Workers 9,600 Apr. 20,1979 to Apr. 19, 1982 January, thereafter quarterly Firestone Tire and Rubber Co. (Interstate) Rubber Workers 15,250 Apr. 20, 1979 to Apr. 19, 1982 January, thereafter quarterly General Motors Corp., Inland Manufacturing Division (Dayton, Ohio) Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co. (Interstate) Rubber Workers 6,900 Sept. 15, 1979 to Sept. 14, 1982 Rubber Workers 22,300 Apr. 21,1979 to Apr. 20,1982 March, thereafter quarterly January, thereafter quarterly Uniroyal, Inc. (Interstate) Rubber Workers 8,300 June 18,1979 to Apr. 19,1982 Stone, clay and glass products: Anchor Hocking Glass Co. (Interstate)6 Brockway Glass Co., Inc. (Interstate) Owens-Illinois, Inc. (Interstate) Primary metal industries6 9 major basic steel companies: Allegheny Ludium Industries, Inc.; Armco Steel Corp.; Bethlehem Steel Corp.; In land Steel Co.; Jones and Laughlin Steel Corp.; National Steel Corp.; Republic Steel Corp.; United States Steel Corp.; Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel Co. Aluminum Co. of America (Interstate) Aluminum Co. of America (Interstate) Kaiser Aluminum and Chemical Corp. (Interstate) Reynolds Metals Co. (Interstate) 34 Food and Commercial Workers Teamsters (Ind.) Food and Commercial Workers Grain Millers Fabricated metal products: American Can Co. (Interstate) Continental Group, Inc. (Interstate) https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Glass Bottle Blowers Glass Bottle Blowers Glass Bottle Blowers Steelworkers 7,000 7,150 14,350 Apr. 1,1980 to Mar. 31,1983 Apr. 1,1980 to Mar. 31,1983 Apr. 1, 1980 to Mar. 31,1983 286,000 Apr. 15,1980 to July 31,1983 9,000 9,000 June 1,1980 to May 31,1983 June 1,1980 to May 31,1983 Steelworkers 10,000 June 2,1980 to May 31,1983 Steelworkers 8,100 June 2, 1980 to May 31,1983 Steelworkers Steelworkers 7,000 11,000 Nov. 1, 1977 to Feb. 15, 1981 Nov. 1,1977 to Feb. 15,1981 Aluminum Workers Steelworkers April April January, thereafter quarterly January, thereafter quarterly January, thereafter quarterly February February 55-75 cents 25 cents 25 cents 43 cents Apr. 20: 20 cents, plus 15 cents advance c o l a Apr. 20: 20 cents, plus 15 cents advance c o l a Sept. 14: 25-36 cents Apr. 20: 20 cents, plus 1 5 cents advance c o l a Apr. 20: 20 cents, plus 1 5 cents advance c o l a Apr. 1: Apr. 1: Apr. 1: 20-24 cents 55 cents 55 cents Aug. 1: 20-52 cents J une l: June l: 20-46 cents 20-46 cents J une l: 20-46 cents J une l: 20-46 cents Table 3. Continued — Expiration and wage adjustment provisions [Contracts are listed in order of the Standard Industrial Classification Code] 1972 SIC Code 35 36 Industry and employer1 Machinery, except electrical: Caterpillar Tractor Co. (Interstate) 373 374 38 39 25,000 Oct. 1,1979 to Sept. 30,1982 Oct. 5: 27-35 cents Oct. 5: 3 percent Oct. 5: 3 percent June 29: 15 cents hourly; $6 weekly salaried June 29: 15 cents hourly; $6 weekly salaried Sept. 14: 24 cents 32,000 Oct. 20, 1979 to Sept. 30, 1982 International Harvester Co. (Interstate) Auto Workers (Ind.) 32,100 Oct. 1, 1979 to Sept. 30, 1982 Electrical Workers (UE, Ind.) 16,400 July 1, 1979 to June 27, 1982 June and December General Electric Co. (Interstate) Electrical Workers (IUE) 70,000 July 1, 1979 to June 27,1982 June and December General Motors Corp. (New Jersey, New York, and Ohio) GTE Sylvania, Inc. (Interstate)6 Electrical Workers (IUE) 23,450 Sept. 18, 1979 to Sept. 14, 1982 January, thereafter quarterly Oct. 6, 1979 to Oct. 5, 1982 March and September 9,000 Sept. 7: 14.5 cents June and December January and July January and July January and July Dec. 7: July 13: July 13: July 13: 15 cents 15 cents 15 cents $6 weekly Feb. 17,1980 to Feb. 17,1983 January, thereafter quarterly Feb. 17: 15 cents Feb. 11,1980 to Mar. 4, 1983 March, thereafter quarterly 9,000 13,000 5,500 19,000 12,000 Sept. 3,1979 to Aug. 31,1981 Dec. 1,1979 to Dec. 1,1982 Sept. 4,1979 to July 11,1982 Sept. 4,1979 to July 11,1982 July 16, 1979 to July 26, 1982 5,300 Transportation equipment — motor vehicle and motor vehicle equipment: Budd Co. (P & M) (Interstate) Auto Workers (Ind.) 6,150 Chrysler Corp. (P & M) (Interstate)6 Dana Corp. (Interstate) Auto Workers (Ind.) Auto Workers (Ind.) 110,000 7,500 Oct. 25,1979 to Sept. 14, 1982 Dec. 3,1979 to Dec. 5,1982 Ford Motor Co. (Interstate) Auto Workers (Ind.) 158,000 Oct. 4,1979 to Sept. 14, 1982 General Motors Corp. (Interstate)6 Auto Workers (Ind.) 382,000 Sept. 17,1979 to Sept. 14,1982 Transportation equipment— aircraft: Beech Aircraft Corp. (Kansas and Colorado) Cessna Aircraft Co. (Wichita, Kans.) Machinists 6,550 Aug. 7,1978 to Aug. 2,1981 Machinists 6,000 Sept. 18, 1978 to Sept. 27, 1981 Hughes Aircraft Co. (California) Carpenters 8,000 Dec. 1, 1979 to Dec. 5, 1982 McDonnell-Douglas Corp. (St. Louis, Mo.) Rockwell International, Rockwell, Aerospace and Electronics Group (California and Oklahoma) United Aircraft Corp., Pratt Whitney Aircraft Div. (Connecticut) Machinists Auto Workers (Ind.) 9,300 8,000 May 8,1978 to May 10,1981 June 11,1978 to June 30, 1981 Machinists 9,700 Nov. 28, 1978 to Nov. 28, 1982 Transportation equipment — shipbuilding: Bethlehem Steel Corp., Shipbuilding Dept (Interstate) General Dynamics Corp., Electric Boat Division (Groton, Mass.)6 Litton Systems, Inc., Ingalls Shipbuilding Division (Pascagoula, Miss.) Transportation equipment — railway cars: Pullman, Inc. Pullman Standard Division (Interstate) Professional scientific and controlling instruments, photographic and optical goods; watches and clocks Honeywell Inc. (Minneapolis and St. Paul, Minn.) Miscellaneous manufacturing:6 National Association of Doll Manufacturers, Inc. & Stuffed Toy Manufacturers Associ ation, Inc. (New York, N.Y.) https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Marine and Shipbuilding Workers Metal Trades Council and Teamsters (Ind.) Metal Trades Council and Teamsters (Ind.) 1980 provisions for deferred wage increases5 January, thereafter quarterly March, thereafter quarterly January, thereafter quarterly January, thereafter quarterly Auto Workers (Ind.) Multi AFL-CIO unions and Teamsters (Ind.) Electrical Workers (IBEW) Electrical Workers (IBEW) Electrical Workers (UE, Ind.) Electrical Workers (IUE) Federation of Westinghouse Independent Salaried Unions (Ind.) Electrical Workers (IUE) May 1,1978 to May 3,1981 1980 provisions for automatic cost-ofliving review4 Diesel Workers’ Union (Ind.) Electrical machinery, equipment and supplies: General Electric Co. (Interstate) 6,700 Contract term3 Deere and Co. (Illinois and Iowa) Whirlpool Corp. (Evansville, Ind.)6 372 Auto Workers (Ind.) Employees covered Cummins Engine Co., Inc. (Columbus, Ind.) Raytheon Co. (Massachusetts) RCA Corp. (Interstate) Westinghouse Electric Corp. (Interstate)6 Westinghouse Electric Corp. (Interstate)6 Westinghouse Electric Corp. (Interstate)6 371 Union2 January, thereafter quarterly January, thereafter quarterly January, thereafter quarterly February, thereafter quarterly January, thereafter quarterly March, thereafter quarterly February January and April 5,000 Aug. 14,1978 to Aug. 13, 1981 11,700 July 1, 1979 to June 30, 1982 10,900 Jan. 29, 1978 to Feb. 1,1981 January January Steelworkers 8,800 Apr. 4, 1978 to Apr. 4, 1981 Teamsters (Ind.) 8,000 Feb. 1,1980 to Jan. 31,1982 Novelty and Production Workers 7,500 July 1,1979 to June 30,1982 Apr. 27: 21 -4 0 cents Jan.: 3 percent Sept. 14: 23-39 cents Sept. 14: 25-41 cents June 8: 76 cents Dec. 5: 18-30 cents May 5: 3 percent July 1: 55 cents Feb. 1: 11 percent July 1: $12 per week February, thereafter quarterly 27 M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • Contracts Expiring in 1981 Table 3. Continued — Expiration and wage adjustment provisions [Contracts are listed in order of the Standard Industrial Classification Code] 1972 SIC Code Industry and employer1 Union 2 Employees covered Contract term3 1981 provisions for automatic cost-oflivlng review4 1981 provisions for deferred wage increases5 Nonmanufacturing 12 40 Bituminous coal and lignite mining: Association of Bituminous Contractors, Inc. Bituminous Coal Operators Association, National Railroads:6 Class 1railroads: Operating unions Nonoperating unions: Shop craft Nonshop craft Conrail and Amtrak, Maintenance and Equipment employees Conrail, clerks Conrail, operating employees 42 44 Trucking and warehousing: Local Cartage, for Hire, and Private carriers agreement (Chicago, III.) National Master Freight agreements and supplements:6 Local Cartage Over-the-road United Parcel Service (Interstate) Water transportation: Dry Cargo Cos., Atlantic and Gulf coasts Dry Cargo Cos., Tankers, Atlantic and Gulf coasts Pacific Maritime Association (Interstate)6 48 49 53 28 Railway Carmen Firemen and Oilers Electrical Workers (IBEW) Machinists Maintenance of Way Employes Railway Clerks Railroad Signalmen Transport Workers Railway Clerks Transportation Union Chicago Truck Drivers (Ind.) Teamsters (Ind.) Teamsters (Ind.) Teamsters (Ind.) 25,150 91,500 44,000 13,800 11,400 18,000 37,000 105,000 8,000 10,000 Mar. 26,1978 to Mar. 27,1981 Mar. 26,1978 to Mar. 27,1981 Jan. 1, 1978 to Mar. 31,1981 Jan. 1,1978 to Mar. 31,1981 January January Jan. Jan. Jan. Jan. Jan. Jan. Jan. Jan. January January January January January January January 1,1978 1,1978 1,1978 1,1978 1,1978 1,1978 1,1978 1,1978 to to to to to to to to Mar. Mar. Mar. Mar. Mar. Mar. Mar. Mar. 31,1981 31,1981 31,1981 31,1981 31,1981 31,1981 31,1981 31,1981 20,000 22,250 Jan. 1, 1978 to Mar. 31,1981 Jan. 1,1978 to Mar. 31,1981 7,700 Apr. 1,1979 to Mar. 31,1982 April Apr. 1: 35 cents 200,000 100,000 73,000 Apr. 1,1979 to Mar. 31,1982 Apr. 1,1979 to Mar. 31,1982 May 1,1979 to Apr. 30,1982 May and November Apr. 1: Apr. 1: May 1: 35 cents 35 cents 35 cents October July 1: 5 percent Apr. 1: 10 percent 5,000 15,000 June 16,1978 to June 15, 1981 June 16,1978 to June 16,1981 Longshoremen and Warehousemen (Ind.) Seafarers 11,500 July 1,1978 to July 1, 1981 10,750 June 16,1978 to June 15, 1981 Seafarers 10,750 June 16,1978 to June 15,1981 Airlines:6 American Airlines, flight attendants Eastern Airlines, ground service Trans World Airlines, Inc., ground service United Airlines, Inc., flight attendants United Airlines, Inc., ground service United Airlines, Inc., pilots Independent Airline Union Machinists Machinists Air Line Pilots Machinists Air Line Pilots 6,200 11,500 12,000 9,100 18,600 5,000 Sept. 1,1978 to Aug. 31,1981 Jan. 1,1979 to Dec. 31,1981 Nov. 1,1978 to Oct. 31,1981 Apr. 1,1980 to Mar. 31,1982 Nov. 1,1978 to Oct. 31,1981 Feb. 1,1978 to Jan. 31,1981 Communications: General Telephone Co. of California GTE General Telephone Co. of Florida Western Union Telegraph Co. (Interstate)6 Electrical Workers (IUE) Electrical Workers (IBEW) Telegraph Workers 20,000 7,700 8,150 Mar. 5, 1980 to Mar. 4, 1983 Aug. 20, 1978 to Aug. 15, 1981 July 28,1979 to July 27, 1982 Electric, gas and sanitary services: Pacific Gas and Electric Co. (Calif.) Electrical Workers (IBEW) 13,850 Jan. 1,1980 to Dec. 30, 1982 Retail trade— general merchandise: R. H. Macy and Co., Inc. (New York, N.Y.) Woodward and Lothrop, Inc. (Maryland, D.C., and Virginia) 54 Locomotive Engineers (Ind.) Transportation Union 14,000 160,000 Masters, Mates, and Pilots Maritime Union Standard Freightship Agreement, Unlicensed personnel (Interstate) Standard Tanker Agreement, Unlicensed personnel (Interstate) 45 Mine Workers (Ind.) Mine Workers (Ind.) Retail trade— food stores: Chain and independent food stores (Illinois and Indiana)6 Chicago area grocery stores (Chicago, III.) Denver retail grocers (Colorado) Food Employers Council, Inc. Retail meat industry and independent retail meat operators (Los Angeles, Calif.) Food Employers Council, Inc. General Merchandise Agreement (Cali fornia) Food Employers Labor Relations Association of Northern California6 Food Industry Agreement (St. Louis, Mo.)6 Food Market Agreement of Minneapolis (Minnesota)6 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Mar, 5: 2.75 percent July 28: 3.162 percent Jan. 1: 3 percent 7,000 Feb. 1,1980 to Jan. 30,1982 Feb. 1: $15 per week 6,000 July 1,1979 to June 30,1982 Feb. 1: 8 percent Food and Commercial Workers 10,000 Aug. 8, 1979 to Sept. 7, 1982 Feb. 1: 20 cents Food and Commercial Workers Food and Commercial Workers Food and Commercial Workers 7,000 9,300 6,000 July 1,1979 to June 26, 1982 May 26,1979 to May 5, 1982 Nov. 5, 1979 to Nov. 4,1982 June 28 May 3: Nov. 2: $.768 50 cents 50 cents 50 cents and on Sundays Food and Commercial Workers 60,150 July 31,1978 to July 25, 1981 Food and Commercial Workers 17,000 Mar. 5, 1980 to Mar. 5, 1983 Food and Commercial Workers Food and Commercial Workers 8,500 7,200 May 6, 1979 to May 7,1982 Mar. 3, 1980 to Feb. 25,1983 Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Food and Commercial Workers May May and November Mar. 5: November 59 cents May 4: 50 - 70 cents Feb. 25: 11 percent Table 3. Continued — Expiration, reopening, and wage adjustment provisions [Contracts are listed in order of the Standard Industrial Classification Code] 1972 SIC Code 54 Industry and employer1 59 63 65 70 78 80 91 2 Employees covered Contract term3 1981 provisions for automatic cost-ofliving review4 1981 provisions for deferred wage increases5 Retail trade — food stores: (continued) Jewel Cos., Inc., Jewel Food Stores Division (Illinois and Indiana) Meijer, Inc. (Michigan) Pathmark and Shop Rite Supermarkets (New York and New Jersey) Philadelphia Food Stores (Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Delaware) Stop and Shop Cos., Inc. (New England states) 58 Union United Retail Workers Union (Ind.) 14,000 Sept. 23,1979 to Sept. 18,1982 Sept. 20: 70 cents Food and Commercial Workers Food and Commercial Workers 8,500 10,750 Nov. 5, 1978 to July 11, 1981 Apr. 10, 1978 to Apr. 5, 1981 Jan. 1: 20 cents January Food and Commercial Workers 5,000 Mar. 9,1980 to Mar. 5,1983 September Mar. 1: 45 cents Food and Commercial Workers 8,000 Feb. 11,1979 to Feb. 13,1982 Feb. 8: $20 per week 10,000 Mar. 16, 1979 to Mar. 15, 1983 Mar. 1: $1 -$2.44 per day Retail trade — eating and drinking places: Restaurant-Hotel Employers’ Council of Southern California Hotel and Restaurant Employees Retail trade — miscellaneous retail stores: Retail Drug Store Operators (Southern California) Food and Commercial Workers Insurance carriers: John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance Co. (Interstate) Prudential Insurance Co. of America (In terstate) Finance, insurance, and real estate: Bronx Realty Advisory Board, Inc. (New York, N.Y.) Building Managers Association of Chicago6 Realty Advisory Board of Labor Relations, Inc., Apartment Buildings (New York, N.Y.) Hotels, rooming houses, camps, and other lodging places: Hotel Association of New York City, Inc. (New York, N.Y.) Hotel Association of Washington, D.C. Hotel Industry (Hawaii) Motion pictures: Screen Actors Guild, Commercials Contract (Interstate) Television and Radio Commercial Announcement Agreement (Interstate) Medical and other health services: Kaiser Foundation Hospitals, Permanente Medical Group (California) Kaiser-Permanente Medical Program of Southern California (Los Angeles and Orange Counties, Calif.)6 Federal government: U. S. Postal Service national agreement 8,400 May 8, 1978 to Mar. 1,1981 Insurance Workers 6,000 June 29,1978 to June 30,1981 Insurance Workers 16,500 Sept. 29,1979 to Sept. 23,1981 Service Employees 11,000 Sept. 15, 1979 to Sept. 14, 1982 Service Employees Service Employees 12,500 20,000 Apr. 1,1980 to Mar. 31,1982 Apr. 21,1979 to Apr. 20,1982 New York Hotel Trades Council 25,000 June 1,1978 to May 31,1982 Hotel and Restaurant Employees Hotel and Restaurant Employees 10,000 10,000 Sept. 16,1978 to Sept. 15,1981 June 1,1977 to May 31,1982 Actors 39,000 Feb. 7,1979 to Feb. 6,1982 5,000 May 1, 1979 to Apr. 30,1981 Musicians Service Employees 7,800 Nov. 11, 1979 to Oct. 31, 1981 Service Employees 9,000 Apr. 1,1980 to Mar. 31, 1982 571,000 July 21,1978 to July 20, 1981 Postal Workers; Letter Carriers; Rural Letter Carriers’; and Laborers 1Geographical coverage of contracts is interstate unless specified. 2 Unions are affiliated with AFL-CIO, except where noted as independent (Ind.). 3 Contract term refers to the date contract is to go into effect, not the date of signing. Where a contract has been amended or modified and the original termination date extended, the effec tive date of the changes becomes the new effective date of the agreement. For purposes of this listing, the expiration is the formal termination date established by the agreement. In gener al, it is the earliest date on which termination of the contract could be effective, except for spe cial provisions for termination as in the case of disagreement arising out of wage reopening. Many agreements provide for automatic renewal at the expiration date unless notice of termina which allowed companies to introduce labor-saving technology to the docks in exchange for guarantees of employee income, is considered a major innovation in labor relations. However, the only significant coastwide strike since the 1940’s centered on a labor-saving tech nology— cargo containerization. The walkout began July 1, 1971, and ended February 21, 1972, although it was temporarily halted by a Taft-Hartley injunction and by an agreement to resume work for a limited period. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Sept. 15: $11 per week March Mar. 31: 50 cents Apr. 21: $15 per week Apr. 1: 8.5 percent January and July tion is given. The Labor Management Relations Act of 1947 requires that a party to an agree ment desiring to terminate or modify it shall serve written notice upon the other party 60 days prior to the expiration date. 4 Dates shown indicate the month in which adjustment is to be made, not the month of the Consumer Price Index on which adjustment is based. 5 Hourly rate increase unless otherwise specified. 6 Contract terms are not on file with the Bureau of Labor Statistics, information is based on newspaper accounts. Workers at Eastern and Gulf Coast ports joined in the strike, making it the first nationwide longshore strike in U.S. history. The terms of the 1978 settlement provided for an 85-cent-per-hour increase in each of the 3 years, greater skill differentials, added holidays, a sixth week of vaca tion at 25 years of service, and improved medical, life insurance, and retirement benefits. The association agreed to the concept of seniority in the selection of 29 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • Contracts Expiring in 1981 “steady men” (highly-skilled employees who work al most exclusively for a single employer), as well as a fair distribution of work and training opportunities for such workers. The 1978 agreement included, for the first time, a union security clause, requiring all fully-regis tered employees to become union members within 30 days. The Longshoremen’s union formulates contract de mands at a biennial caucus of representatives from its locals. Major objectives in the 1981 talks have not been announced, but job security is likely to continue as a significant issue for the union. Maritime industry In June, 3-year agreements covering 50,000 seamen in dry cargo and tanker operations will expire. The four unions involved are AFL-CIO affiliated— the National Maritime Union, the Seafarer’s International Union, the Marine Engineers’ Beneficial Association, and the Mas ters, Mates and Pilots of the International Longshore men’s Association. The bargaining structure in shipping is relatively complex. Most licensed officers are represented primari ly by four nationwide labor organizations that have sep arate bargaining units on each coast— the Marine Engineers’ Beneficial Association; International Organi zation of Masters, Mates and Pilots; American Radio Association; and Radio Officers’ Union. In addition, three small coastal unions also represent licensed offi cers. On the East and Gulf Coasts, two rival unions— the National Maritime Union and the Atlantic, Gulf, Lakes and Inland Waters District of the Seafarers’ In ternational Union— represent deck, engine, and steward department seamen. On the Great Lakes, these two ri val unions negotiate for most of the unlicensed seamen. On the West Coast, unlicensed seamen in deck, engine and steward departments are represented by the Pacific District of the Seafarers’ International Union. Several associations negotiate with the unions, depending on geographic area. On the East and Gulf Coasts, two committees conduct negotiations. The Maritime Service Committee bargains for subsidized passenger and dry cargo ship operators, and the Tanker Service Committee bargains for tanker companies. Both committees negotiate with the National Maritime Union and all of the East Coast licensed officers’ organiza tions. Shipping operators who are not eligible for Gov ernment subsidies are represented by the American Maritime Association. This association negotiates with the Seafarers’ International Union and the unions of li censed officers. The two committees and the association are not empowered to bind its members to the terms of the contract; instead, each operator member concurring in the agreement signs an individual contract with the unions. If a member disagrees with the terms, it negoti 30 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis ates its own pact with the union involved. On the West Coast, the Pacific Maritime Association, which represents many steamship companies, negotiates with the Seafarers’ International Union and the West Coast licensed officers’ unions. The tanker companies, which do not belong to the association, bargain sepa rately with the West Coast unions. In addition, several large companies, such as Exxon Corp. and Mobil Oil, conduct separate negotiations with independent labor associations. Despite heavy subsidies enjoyed by some U.S. com panies engaged in foreign trade, the U.S. merchant ma rine has suffered a marked decline since World War II and presently accounts for only a small percentage of the vessels engaged in U.S. foreign trade. Employment in the industry has suffered from competition from for eign vessels, alternative modes of transportation, auto mation, and containerization of cargo. Efforts to revitalize the industry, particularly a dwindling fleet, are being made under the Omnibus Maritime Bill, which would set a goal for the 1980’s of transporting 50 per cent of this country’s exports and imports in U.S. ships. The bill is now pending in the Congress. Unions have not yet announced 1981 demands. Im portant items of discussion are likely to be wages, im proved vacation and health and medical benefits, and retiree protection against inflation. Airlines Contracts held by unions representing employees of trunk line carriers will be up for renewal throughout 1981.17The large number of contracts reflects the collec tive bargaining structure in the industry. Like the rail roads, the airlines’ collective bargaining relations are governed by the Railway Labor Act. Unlike the rail roads, each carrier generally bargains separately with each craft. Most airline workers are organized on a craft basis, with each craft represented in a separate bargaining unit and, frequently, by a different union. Of the various crafts or classes, only the mechanics, pilots, and flight attendants will be heavily involved in 1981 negotiations. The Air Line Pilots Association will bargain throughout the year for 21,000 pilots at Braniff, Continental, Delta, Eastern, Trans World, United, and Western. The Allied Pilots Associations’s (Ind.) con tract at American, covering 3,300 pilots, expires No vember 1. Contrary to other airline unions, the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (Ma chinists), which bargains for most of the industry’s unionized ground service employees, has a common contract expiration date with several of the larger carri ers. Contracts covering approximately 52,000 mechanics and related employees represented by the Machinists will terminate at Braniff, Northwest, Trans World, and United on November 1, and at Eastern on December 31.18The only other mechanic unit bargaining in 1981 is at Western, where the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America (Teamsters, Ind.) will negotiate for 1,800 me chanics, whose contract expires January 1. Unlike the pilots and mechanics, the flight attendants are represented by various labor organizations. N orth west’s contract covering 2,200 members of the Team sters union terminates on January 1. The Independent Union of Flight Attendants’ contract for 5,200 employ ees at Pan American comes up for renewal on May 1. The 5,600-member International Federation of Flight Attendants’ contract at Trans World terminates on Au gust 1, and the Association of Flight Attendants, an af filiate of the Air Line Pilots Association, will rene gotiate for 2,000 employees at Braniff in January. Unlike the last major round of negotiations, bar gaining in 1981 will take place in a more uncertain economic environment, as the industry is experiencing the competitive effects of deregulation and sagging prof its, and layoffs as a result of mergers and a sluggish economy. The unions’ bargaining goals are still being formulated, but it is likely that the mechanics units will concentrate on job protection, wage issues, and im provements in pension benefits and cost-of-living adjust ments. Notwithstanding potential money demands, the crew size issue should be a major one for the pilots, with the impending introduction of the new B -757 and B -767 aircraft. If history repeats itself, flight attendant groups will probably propose numerous changes involv ing all major contract provisions. □ within 30 days. During this period and for 30 days thereafter, strikes and changes in employee working conditions are prohibited. 10 In 1972, Arnold Miller defeated W. A. “Tony” Boyle for presi dent of the umw . Miller was unable to control pro-Boyle and other 2The economy entered a recession in January 1980; some econo factions, dropped many reforms, and alienated many of his support mists have argued that this downturn ended in July or August. 5 For more detailed information about escalators offsetting inflation, ers. In ill health, he stepped down in 1979 and was succeeded by then union vice president Sam Church. The union’s financial problems are see Victor Sheifer, “Cost-of-living adjustment: keeping up with infla discussed briefly in Mary A. Andrews, “Mine Workers’ new president tion?” Monthly Labor Review, June 1979, pp. 14-17. wins dues increase, right to name VP,” Monthly Labor Review, March 4 For an analysis of how 1979 contracts compared with prior con 1980, pp. 48-50. tracts see Edward J. Wasilewski, “Inflation again outpaces wage and " The International Union of Operating Engineers and the Interna package gains in 1979,” Current Wage Developments, July 1980, pp. tional Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, both a fl - cio affiliates, 41-60. have actively organized western miners. The Progressive Mine Work 5 Data are through October 1980. Thus, additional cola amounts ers and the Southern Labor Union, independents, have membership in may be added until the contracts expire in 1981. the Midwest and South. A minority of coal miners work in unorga "The 10 other unions participating in the negotiations are the nized mines. American Train Dispatchers Association; Brotherhood of Locomotive 12 See Harold Wool, “Coal industry resurgence attracts a variety of Engineers (Ind.); International Association of Machinists and Aero new workers,” Monthly Labor Review, forthcoming. space Workers; Railroad Yardmasters of America; Sheet Metal Work 13 See “Developments in Industrial Relations,” Monthly Labor Re ers International Association; Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen; view, April 1978, pp. 55-56. International Brotherhood of Firemen and Oilers; International 14 See “Developments in Industrial Relations,” Monthly Labor Re Brotherhood of Electrical Workers; Brotherhood of Railway Carmen view, May 1978, pp. 69-70. of the United States and Canada; and International Brotherhood of 15At its peak, the strike disrupted the processing and delivery of Boilermakers, Iron Ship Builders, Blacksmiths, Forgers and Helpers. mail in 15 States and numerous cities. Federal troops were called in This increase in unions represented at the bargaining table reflects the to maintain service in some areas. Since 1970, work stoppages have dissolution of the Railway Employees’ Department, which bargained been minor. See Stephen C. Shannon, “Work stoppage in Govern for four of six shop craft unions in the 1978 negotiations. ment: the postal strike of 1970,” Monthly Labor Review, July 1978, 1Amtrak, a class 1 carrier, has never been represented by the con pp. 14-22. ference in negotiations. 16 Pacific Coast dockworkers still observe “Bloody Thursday” as a ‘ See The New York Times, July 15, 1978, p. 1. holiday to commemorate July 5, 1934, when two strikers were killed 4Collective bargaining in the railroad industry is governed by the and many were injured by police. At the time, the workers were rep Railway Labor Act which provides an elaborate set of dispute settle resented by the International Longshoremen’s Association. ment procedures. The party wishing to reopen the contract must give 17Trunk line air carriers include American Airlines, Braniff Interna the other party 30 days’ notice of such intent, within which time ne tional, Continental Airlines, Delta Air Lines, Eastern Air Lines, gotiations must begin. If an agreement is not reached, either or both Northwest Airlines, Pan American World Airways, Trans World Air parties may request the assistance of the National Mediation Board, lines, United Air Lines, and Western Airlines. the agency that administers the act; or the board itself may proffer its 18 Besides the mechanics, the Machinists bargains for stock and services. If mediation fails to bring about a settlement, the board stores and flight kitchen employees at Eastern and Northwest; stock proffers arbitration. If arbitration is rejected, the board terminates its and stores, flight kitchen employees, and guards at Trans World; and services, and a 30-day status quo period begins. If the dispute remains communications, fleet service, stock and stores, flight kitchen employ unresolved and is of a sufficient magnitude, the President may create ees, and dispatchers at United. an ad hoc emergency board to investigate and make a report 1Major agreements are those that cover 1,000 workers or more. The Postal Service is not included in the 2.6 million workers covered by major expiring contracts. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 31 International comparisons of productivity and labor costs As in the United States, manufacturing productivity growth slowed after 1973 and unit labor costs accelerated in most major industrial countries; aggregate hours rose only in the US. A rthur N eef a n d P a t r ic ia C a p d e v ie l l e In the United States, the average annual rate of growth of manufacturing productivity after 1973 (1.4 percent) was less than half that from 1960 to 1973 (3.1 percent). Manufacturing productivity growth also slowed in the 10 other industrial countries studied, but the magnitude of the slowdown varied— from more than 85 percent in the United Kingdom to only about 15 percent in France and Belgium and less than 5 percent in Germany. This article describes developments in manufacturing productivity (output per hour), hourly compensation, and unit labor costs from 1973 to 1979 for the United States, Canada, Japan, France, Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom, and four smaller European countries — Belgium, Denmark, the Netherlands, and Sweden.1,2 In all 11 countries, the average rate of growth of manufacturing output decelerated after 1973. In the Eu ropean countries and Japan, the output slowdown was greater than that of manufacturing productivity, reflect ing declines in labor input. From 1973 to 1979, overall, Arthur Neef is chief of the Division of Foreign Labor Statistics and Trade, Bureau of Labor Statistics, and Patricia Capdevielle is an econ omist in the same division. 32 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis aggregate hours of manufacturing employees rose only in the United States, and manufacturing employment increased only in the United States, Canada, and Italy. Manufacturing unit labor costs in the United States accelerated four-fold from less than 2 percent per year during 1960-73 to about 8 percent per year from 1973 to 1979, because of significantly larger annual gains in hourly compensation in conjunction with the productiv ity slowdown. For like reasons, 7 of the 10 foreign countries also experienced sharply higher rates of in crease in unit labor costs after 1973. The exceptions were: Germany, where annual gains in both productivi ty and hourly compensation were similar in the two pe riods, and Japan and the Netherlands, where average annual increases in hourly compensation were smaller in 1973-79 than in the pre-1974 period. Measured in U.S. dollars, however, even these three countries had signifi cantly higher average annual increases in unit labor costs during 1973-79. Although the productivity measure relates output to the hours of persons employed in manufacturing, it does not measure the specific contributions of labor as a single factor of production. Rather, it reflects the joint effects of many influences, including new technology, capital investment, the level of output, capacity utiliza tion, energy use, and managerial skills, as well as skills and efforts of the work force. Productivity and output slow From 1973 to 1979, manufacturing productivity, as measured by output per hour, increased at annual rates of 1.4 percent in the United States, .5 percent in the United Kingdom, 2 to 2.5 percent in Canada and Swe den, 4 to 6 percent in the other European countries, and 7 percent in Japan. In contrast, the average annual rates of growth of manufacturing productivity from 1960 to 1973 were about 3 percent in the United States, 4 to 4.5 percent in the United Kingdom and Canada, 5.5 to 7.5 percent in the continental European coun tries, and more than 10 percent in Japan. (See table 1.) In the United States, 1973 was the year of a business cycle peak, and in the other countries economic activity peaked in that year or the first half of 1974. The reces sion which followed in 1974-75 was on average the steepest economic decline in the last 30 years and, for most countries, the productivity trend during the reces sion and recovery was markedly weaker than in previ ous periods. The slowdown in productivity, as measured by the difference in growth rates between the two periods, was greatest in Sweden (minus nearly 4.5 percentage points), followed by Italy, Japan, and the United Kingdom (mi nus 3.5 points). However, in proportion to the average rate prior to 1974, the slowdown was by far the greatest in the United Kingdom, where the productivity growth rate for 1973-79 was less than 15 percent of the Table 1. 1960-73 average rate, followed by Sweden, the United States, Canada, and Italy— about 35 to 50 percent of the 1960-73 average rate. According to either measure, the productivity slowdown was modest in France and Belgium, and growth in the two periods was almost unchanged in Germany. During the 1974-75 recession, output per hour de clined or rose significantly less than the average trend in most countries. Only in Germany and Denmark were the average productivity gains over the 2 years close to their long-term rates. After large advances during the post-recession recovery, annual productivity increases have generally been below average 1960-73 rates. The major exception was Italy, which achieved a productivi ty gain of 9.5 percent in 1979. Manufacturing output dropped sharply in most countries during the recession. The largest declines oc curred in the United States, Italy, and the United King dom, and the smallest in France. Output posted a strong recovery in 1976 in most countries, but subse quent growth has been sluggish— particularly in most of the European countries. From 1973 to 1979 overall, manufacturing output declined slightly in the United Kingdom and remained virtually unchanged in Sweden. Output increased at annual rates of around 1 to 3 per cent in the other European countries, the United States, and Canada, while it increased more than 5 percent per year in Japan. Employment and hours decline In 6 of the 8 European countries, the 1973-79 pro ductivity gains largely reflected significant decreases in Annual percent change1in manufacturing productivity and output, 11 countries, 1960-79 United States Year Canada Japan France Germany Italy United Kingdom Belgium Denmark2 Netherlands Sweden Eight European countries Ten foreign countries Output per hour 1960-79 1960-73 1973-79 .. .. .. 1973-74 1974-75 1975-76 1976-77 1977-78 1978-79 . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.6 3.1 1.4 -5.0 5.1 4.4 3.0 0.4 0.8 3.8 4.6 2.2 9.2 40.3 6.9 5.5 5.8 4.8 5.4 5.5 5.3 6.1 7.2 3.7 2.9 4.0 .5 6.7 7.0 6.0 6.1 7.0 4.4 6.7 7.4 5.3 5.3 6.7 2.4 5.2 5.8 4.0 6.0 6.5 4.8 1.6. -2 .6 4.9 5.1 3.1 1.2 4.1 4.0 9.4 8.8 6.8 8.1 3.4 3.1 8.2 4.5 4.9 4.7 6.0 4.8 6.3 5.6 3.6 5.2 5.3 -4.2 8.6 1.1 3.1 9.3 - .3 -2.2 3.1 - .4 1.2 1.7 5.5 5.7 9.3 5.6 5.4 4.6 3.3 7.8 7.5 2.1 4.4 1.2 8.3 -1 .7 12.7 4.1 5.1 4.1 3.4 -1.3 .7 -2 .0 6.0 8.2 3.9 1.5 6.7 2.8 3.5 5.3 4.0 2.0 7.3 4.7 4.6 6.0 Output 1960-79 1960-73 1973-79 .. .. .. 1973-74 1974-75 1975-76 1976-77 1977-78 1978-79 . . . . . . . . . . . 3.8 4.7 2.0 5.1 6.4 2.2 10.4 12.8 5.3 5.4 6.7 2.6 4.2 5.2 1.9 5.8 7.0 3.2 1.8 3.0 - .7 5.0 6.7 1.4 4.8 6.1 2.0 4.6 6.0 1.6 3.8 5.5 .3 4.3 5.5 1.8 5.7 7.0 2.9 -6.7 -5.1 9.5 7.3 4.8 3.1 3.8 -6.3 5.5 1.4 5.7 3.8 - .4 -3.8 13.3 9.0 6.3 8.4 3.2 -2.1 7.0 3.1 2.3 2.2 0.3 -5 .2 7.2 3.1 1.7 5.0 6.7 -9.5 12.6 2.1 1.8 7.0 -1 .2 -7 .0 2.1 1.8 .4 .1 4.3 -6.4 7.5 -0.2 1.2 2.4 1.9 -5.6 8.7 1.3 2.7 3.4 4.4 -6.7 8.0 .9 1.8 1.8 4.7 -2.3 -1.2 -6.2 .4 6.6 1.9 -5.2 6.8 2.2 1.7 3.8 1.4 -4 .9 8.6 4.2 3.3 5.2 1Average annual compound rate of change. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 2 Excluding manufacturing handicrafts. 33 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • Productivity and labor costs abroad labor input— the aggregate hours of manufacturing em ployees. Declines in hours accounted for 90 percent of the productivity rise in Sweden, for 60 to 75 percent in Belgium, Netherlands, and Germany, and for 40 to 50 percent in Denmark and France. In Italy, however, fall ing hours accounted for less than 15 percent of the pro ductivity increase. The small British productivity gain reflected an overall decline in hours somewhat greater than the decrease in output. In Japan, declines in labor input accounted for 20 percent of the gain in productiv ity. In contrast, aggregate hours rose in the United States. Productivity gains during 1960-73 were not as de pendent on falling hours. Hours declined overall in most of the European countries, but accounted for no more than one-fourth of any country’s productivity rise. From 1973 to 1979, aggregate hours of manufactur ing employees declined 3 to 4 percent per year in Ger many, Belgium, and the Netherlands; 1 to 2 percent in France, Denmark, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and Japan; and .5 percent in Italy. Hours were unchanged in Canada and increased about .5 percent per year in Table 2. Annual percent change1in manufacturing employment and hours, 11 countries, 1960-79 United States Year the United States. In the latter three countries, manu facturing employment increased over the 6-year period. Total hours remained unchanged in Canada and fell in Italy because of reductions in average hours. In most other countries, the decreases in aggregate hours were attributable mostly to declines in employment, with the largest employment losses occurring in Belgium, the Netherlands, Denmark, and Germany. However, aver age hours also fell significantly in France, Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Sweden, in part because the standard workweek was shortened or annual vaca tions increased. (See table 2.) During the 1974-75 recession, total hours declined as much as 15 percent— the largest decreases occurring in the United States, Japan, Germany, Belgium, and Den mark. In the United States and Denmark, employment losses accounted for most of the decline, while in Japan and several European countries, short-time work pro grams were used more extensively to adjust total hours. Total hours regained 1973 levels in 1978 in the United States and in 1979 in Canada. In Japan and most Euro pean countries, employment and hours continued to Canada Japan France Germany Italy United Kingdom Belgium Denmark2 Netherlands Sweden Eight European countries Ten foreign countries Aggregate hours 1960-79 1960-73 1973-79 ... ... ... 1.2 1.6 .6 1.2 1.7 .0 1.1 2.3 -1.5 -.1 .9 -2.1 -1.2 -.3 -3.2 -.3 -.2 -.5 -1 .0 -1.0 -1 .2 -1 .6 - .3 -4.4 -1 .3 - .8 -2.3 -2 .0 -1 .3 -3 .5 -1 .5 -1.1 -2.1 -.9 -.3 -2.1 -.3 .5 -1.8 1973-74 1974-75 1975-76 1976-77 1977-78 1978-79 ... ... ... ... ... ... -1 .9 -9.7 4.9 4.2 4.4 2.2 2.1 -3.9 .6 -3.5 2.5 2.6 -4.3 -7.6 3.6 .1 -.5 .2 -.3 -5.0 -1.1 -1.3 -2.4 -2.4 -5.4 -9.6 0.8 -2.4 -1.8 -.2 1.4 -5.5 3.8 1.0 -1.3 -2.2 -.9 -4.8 -1 .0 2.1 -.8 -1.6 -1.1 -11.4 -1 .7 -5.5 -4 .0 -2 .2 -1 .4 -12.5 1.1 -.8 -1 .6 2.2 -3 .6 -5.1 -4.2 -3 .0 -3.1 -2 .2 1.3 -1 .0 -1.8 -4.3 -5.3 -1.5 -1.9 -6 .6 .1 - .7 -1.8 -1.5 -2 .5 -6.8 1.1 -.5 -1.2 -.8 Employment 1960-79 1960-73 1973-79 ... ... ... 1.2 1.4 .8 1.5 1.9 .6 1.9 3.3 -1.1 .6 1.4 -1.1 - .2 .6 -2.1 1.2 1.6 .3 -.6 -.5 -.7 -.5 .8 -3.3 -.1 .8 -2 .0 - .7 .1 -2.5 - .2 .1 - .7 .0 .6 -1 .2 .5 1.3 -1.1 1973-74 1974-75 1975-76 1976-77 1977-78 1978-79 ... ... ... ... ... ... -0.4 -8.6 3.7 3.6 4.2 2.7 2.0 -2.5 .1 -2.2 2.5 3.9 .2 -5.1 .4 -.2 -1.1 -.8 1.3 -2.7 -1.0 -.4 -1.8 -2.0 -2.7 -6.7 -2.4 - .8 -.4 .4 2.5 -.4 .2 .1 -1.0 .5 1.9 -3.8 -1.3 1.2 -.6 -1.4 1.1 -6.1 -4.1 -3.9 -4.1 -2.2 -3.3 -9.5 .6 .1 -.5 1.0 -.4 -3.3 -3.9 -2.7 -2.8 -1.6 2.3 .7 -.4 -3.4 -3.0 -.4 .3 -3 .9 -1.4 -.4 -1.1 -.7 .4 -4 .2 -.9 -.4 -1 .0 - .5 Average hours 1960-79 1960-73 1973-79 ... ... ... .1 .2 -.2 -.3 -.1 - .6 -.8 -1.0 -.3 -.6 -.5 -1 .0 -1 .0 - .9 -1.1 -1 .5 -1.8 -.8 -.5 -.5 -.5 -1.1 -1.1 -1.1 -1.2 -1 .6 -.3 -1.3 -1 .3 -1.1 -1 .3 -1 .3 -1 .4 - .9 - .9 - .9 -.8 -.8 -.7 1973-74 1974-75 1975-76 1976-77 1977-78 1978-79 ... ... ... ... ... ... -1.5 -1.2 1.2 .6 .2 -.4 .1 -1.4 .5 -1.3 .0 -1.2 -4.5 -2.6 3.2 .3 .6 1.1 -1.5 -2.3 -.1 -.9 -.7 -.4 -2.8 -3.1 3.3 -1 .6 -1.4 -.6 -1.1 -5.1 3.5 .9 -.2 -2 .6 -2.8 -1.1 .3 1.0 -.2 -.2 -2.1 -5.7 2.5 -1.7 .2 .1 2.0 -3.2 .4 -.9 -1.2 1.2 -3.2 -1.8 - .3 - .3 - .3 - .6 -1 .0 -1 .7 -1.4 - .9 -2.4 -1.1 -2.2 -2.8 1.5 - .3 - .7 - .8 -2.8 -2.7 2.0 -.1 -.3 -.2 1Average annual compound rate of change. 34 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 2 Excluding manufacturing handicrafts. fall, as manufacturing employment was rationalized and working hours shortened. In most European countries, this process had begun before the recession, but the rate of decline was more rapid after 1973. Hourly compensation gains From 1973 to 1979, hourly compensation in manu facturing increased at annual rates of 9 to 11 percent in the United States, Germany, and the Netherlands; around 13 percent in Canada, Japan, Belgium, and Denmark; 15 percent in France and Sweden; 19 percent in the United Kingdom; and 21 percent in Italy. For the United States and Canada, these increases were about double the average compensation gains made in 1960-73; in the United Kingdom, more than double; and in France, Italy, and Sweden, they were approxi mately 50 percent higher. On the other hand, in Bel gium and Denmark, 1973-79 annual rates of growth were not much higher than those for the previous peri od; and in Japan, Germany, and the Netherlands, they were about the same or lower. (See table 3.) Hourly compensation increases peaked at around 30 percent in Japan, Italy, and the United Kingdom and at Table 3. about 20 percent in France and the four smaller Euro pean countries in 1974 or 1975. U.S. annual compensa tion gains peaked at 12 percent in 1975, and in Canada and Germany, the high was 15 percent in 1974. By 1978 or 1979, compensation increases had moderated considerably in most of the countries. It was greatest in Japan where increases for 1978 and 1979 were only about 6 percent, one-fifth of the 1974 increase. Compen sation gains also slowed significantly in Belgium, Ger many, the Netherlands, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. (In the United Kingdom, however, the smallest annual increase occurred in 1977, and by 1979 the rate of growth was up again to 17 percent.) By comparison, hourly compensation increases diminished much less in Canada, France, Italy, and especially in the United States, and were higher in 1979 than 1978. Unit labor costs accelerate National currency basis. From 1973 to 1979, unit labor costs increased at average annual rates of about 8 per cent in the United States, 7 percent in Belgium, 9 to 12 percent in Canada, France, Denmark, and Sweden, and 17 to 19 percent in Italy and the United Kingdom, but Annual percent change1in hourly compensation and unit labor costs in manufacturing, 11 countries, 1960- 79 United States Year Canada Japan France Germany Italy United Kingdom Belgium Denmark2 Netherlands Sweden Eight European countries Ten foreign countries Hourly compensation 1960-79 1960-73 1973-79 ... ... ... 6.3 5.0 9.4 8.1 6.2 12.4 14.4 15.1 12.8 11.7 9.8 15.8 10.1 10.2 10.0 16.0 13.6 21.2 11.8 8.6 19.2 11.7 10.9 13.5 12.2 11.5 13.5 12.6 13.1 11.5 11.8 10 4 15.0 11.6 10.4 14.1 11.6 10.6 13.7 1973-74 . . . 1974-75 . . . 1975-76 . . . 1976-77 . . . 1977-78 . . . 1978-79 . . . 10.4 12.0 8.3 8.4 8.1 9.1 15.1 14.8 14.3 12.8 7.5 9.9 31.4 17.1 7.2 10.2 6.3 6.3 20.2 19.7 14.5 13.9 12.9 13.9 15.3 12.7 7.3 9.8 8.4 6.5 24.6 28.9 19.8 18.8 14.6 21.2 23.4 31.8 17.2 11.2 15.5 16.9 22.1 20.9 12.0 11.1 7.1 8.7 20.4 18.9 11.4 10.2 10.3 10.5 19.2 14.4 12.4 8.6 7.7 7.0 16.6 21.2 19.9 12.2 12.5 7.9 18.1 18.8 12.8 11.6 11.3 12.3 21.2 18.3 11.3 11.2 9.8 10.7 Unit labor costs 1960-79 1960-73 1973-79 ... ... ... 3.7 1.8 7.9 4.1 1.5 10.0 4.7 4.4 5.5 5.9 3.8 10.5 4.4 4.4 4.5 9.3 5.9 16.9 8.7 4.4 18.6 4.8 3.7 7.1 5.7 4.3 8.8 5.5 5.3 5.8 6.1 3.4 12.2 6.0 4.3 9.8 5.3 3.8 8.5 1973-74 1974-75 1975-76 1976-77 1977-78 1978-79 .. ... ... ... ... ... 16.1 6.6 3.8 5.3 7.7 8.2 13.3 17.8 9.0 7.3 4.3 8.6 26.2 12.5 -2 .0 1.3 -.5 -1.7 16.2 16.1 5.8 9.0 7.6 8.8 8.7 7.5 .9 4.0 4.6 1.2 18.4 34.6 10.4 17.5 11.2 10.9 23.7 34.8 13.6 11.6 14.2 14.9 15.8 14.4 2.4 5.2 1.6 3.8 16.5 10.3 3.6 7.9 5.7 9.3 10.0 16.4 - .3 4.3 2.5 2.8 12.8 22.9 19.1 14.5 6.1 - .3 13.7 17.1 5.7 8.5 7.5 6.6 16.6 15.9 3.7 6.2 5.0 4.4 Unit labor costs in U.S. dollars 1960-79 1960-73 1973-79 ... ... ... 1973-74 1974-75 1975-76 1976-77 1977-78 1978-79 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.7 1.8 7.9 3.1 1.3 7.1 7.5 6.7 9.4 6.7 4.6 11.3 9.0 8.1 11.1 7.6 6.5 10.1 7.1 3.3 15.7 7.7 5.8 12.2 7.2 5.4 11.3 9.0 7.8 11.7 7.2 4.8 12.5 8.0 6.4 11.6 7.3 5.8 10.6 16.1 6.6 3.8 5.3 7.7 8.2 15.8 13.3 12.5 -.4 -2.8 5.7 17.3 10.6 -1 .9 12.1 27.9 -6.1 7.3 30.3 -5.1 5.9 17.5 15.1 11.5 13.1 -1 .6 12.8 21.1 10.8 5.9 34.2 -13.3 10.5 15.6 13.3 18.1 28.0 -7.7 7.9 25.5 27.2 15.5 21.3 -2 .6 13.3 15.8 11.3 15.4 17.0 -1.7 8.6 15.2 14.4 13.9 23.8 -4.8 12.3 16.4 10.7 10.8 31.5 13.3 11.6 5.0 5.1 11.1 20.7 -3.5 10.8 19.0 13.2 12.8 17.8 -2 .7 10.2 20.0 7.2 1Average annual compound rate of change. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 2 Excluding manufacturing handicrafts. 35 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • Productivity and Labor Costs Abroad only 4.5 percent in Germany and 5.5 percent in Japan and the Netherlands. These growth rates were 2 to 7 times higher than the average rates of increase from 1960 to 1973, except in Germany, Japan, and the Neth erlands. (See table 3.) For the United Kingdom and Italy, the higher rates of increase in unit labor costs after 1973 mostly reflect ed larger hourly compensation gains. This accounted for 70 to 75 percent of the change in their unit labor cost growth rates, and the productivity slowdown for only 25 to 30 percent. Also, for the United States, Canada, France, and Belgium larger gains in hourly compen sation rather than the magnitude of the productivity slowdown accounted for most of the larger increases in Table 4. unit labor costs. However, for Denmark and Sweden" the slowdown in productivity contributed a greater pro portion— 50 to 60 percent. In Germany, unit labor costs in manufacturing in creased at practically the same rate both before and after 1973 because output per hour and hourly compen sation both increased in line during the two periods. In the Netherlands, unit labor costs rose at nearly identical rates in the two periods because hourly compensation and productivity slowed at a like rate. In Japan, moder ation in compensation gains offset most productivity slowdown. The magnitude of the difference in the average annual rate of growth of unit labor costs in each country is Indexes of manufacturing output per hour, hourly compensation, unit labor costs, and related data, 1970-79 [1967 = 100] Year United States Canada Japan France Germany Italy United Kingdom Belgium Denmark1 Netherlands Sweden Eight European countries Ten foreign countries Output per hour 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. 105.0 110.5 115.7 118.9 113.0 118.8 124.0 127.7 128.2 129.2 114.7 122.9 128.3 135.0 137.2 133.7 140.2 147.3 151.9 153.7 146.6 152.9 168.0 187.3 195.0 202.9 221.9 241.5 258.0 279.0 121.2 127.6 135.1 142.5 147.3 151.9 164.3 171.7 180.2 188.7 116.1 121.3 128.7 136.4 144.7 151.6 161.3 170.2 176.3 185.5 . 121.7 125.2 135.3 151.7 159.7 152.9 166.0 167.8 173.0 189.1 110.1 113.9 121.9 128.9 128.6 125.7 129.6 129.1 130.7 132.9 129.5 136.7 152.2 167.8 176.9 186.9 204.4 215.9 227.6 238.1 129.3 138.7 150.7 159.8 165.1 178.0 191.4 195.4 204.0 206.3 134.0 143.0 154.4 170.2 184.3 181.1 204.2 212.5 223.4 232.5 123.5 130.3 138.7 148.9 153.9 151.9 152.9 149.9 158.9 172.0 120.2 126.2 135.0 143.7 149.3 151.5 161.7 166.3 172.2 181.3 125.7 131.7 141.7 152.7 158.7 162.0 173.9 182.1 190.4 201.9 131.3 136.3 147.1 161.2 168.1 157.4 169.2 168.8 170.9 175.0 127.7 132.2 142.5 148.2 151.0 142.5 154.9 156.9 161.0 166.6 129.1 134.3 138.1 147.2 153.6 143.3 154.8 156.2 159.1 161.9 121.1 123.2 125.5 134.0 140.4 137.1 135.5 127.1 127.6 136.1 126.1 129.0 134.0 143.7 146.5 138.9 148.3 151.6 154.1 159.9 131.3 135.2 142.5 156.1 158.2 150.5 163.5 170.2 175.9 185.1 101.4 99.7 96.7 96.1 95.0 84.2 82.8 78.2 75.1 73.5 98.8 95.3 94.6 92.7 91.5 80.1 80.9 80.3 79.0 80.7 96.4 93.9 89.5 86.5 83.3 79.1 75.8 73.5 71.2 69.6 98.1 94.6 90.4 90.0 91.2 90.3 88.6 84.8 80.3 79.1 104.9 102.2 99.3 100.0 98.1 91.7 91.7 91.1 89.5 88.2 104.5 102.6 100.6 102.2 99.7 92.9 94.0 93.5 92.4 91.7 145.0 157.2 176.1 203.4 244.9 291.2 324.5 357.5 394.3 435.8 146.2 167.1 191.5 228.4 272.2 311.3 349.8 379.8 409.1 437.8 130.3 146.4 167.4 183.1 213.5 258.9 310.3 348.3 391.8 422.9 136.2 154.4 173.9 199.0 235.1 279.3 315.2 351.7 391.3 439.3 139.8 158.3 178.4 206.7 250.5 296.4 329.9 366.9 403.0 446.0 Output 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. 102.6 104.0 113.7 123.2 114.9 109.1 119.5 128.2 134.5 138.6 112.6 119.2 127.7 140.2 145.5 136.2 143.7 145.7 154.0 159.9 153.0 159.4 174.0 200.3 199.6 191.9 217.4 236.9 252.0 273.1 123.7 131.5 139.8 149.4 154.2 151.0 161.5 166.5 170.4 174.1 131.6 133.4 137.1 145.5 145.9 138.3 148.2 152.8 155.3 163.1 125.6 126.0 131.1 145.3 155.0 140.3 158.0 161.4 164.3 175.7 111.7 110.4 113.1 123.5 122.0 113.5 115.9 117.9 118.4 118.5 Aggregate hours 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. 97.7 94.1 98.3 103.6 101.7 91.8 96.4 100.4 104.9 107.3 98.2 97.0 99.6 103.8 106.0 101.9 102.5 98.9 101.4 104.1 104.4 104.3 103.6 106.9 102.3 94.6 980 98.1 97.7 97.9 102.0 103.0 103.5 104.9 104.6 99.4 98.3 97.0 94.6 92.3 113.4 109.9 106.5 106.7 100.9 91.2 91.9 89.7 88.1 87.9 103.3 100.7 96.9 95.8 97.1 91.8 95.2 96.2 95.0 92.9 101.5 97.0 92.8 95.8 94.9 90.3 89.4 91.3 90.6 89.2 Hourly compensation 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 36 ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. 122.3 129.9 136.6 146.5 161.7 181.1 196.1 212.7 229.9 250.8 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 124.0 133.5 143.8 158.0 181.9 208.8 238.6 269.1 289.3 317.9 164.0 189.4 218.6 269.2 353.8 414.1 444.0 489.4 520.3 553.2 131.6 147.1 164.0 188.0 226.0 270.4 309.6 352.6 398.1 453.5 133.5 150.9 168.6 191.5 220.8 248.8 266.9 293.2 317.7 338.4 145.7 168.1 192.7 243.9 303.9 391.7 469.2 557.6 639.0 774.8 132.3 151.1 169.8 188.3 232.4 306.4 359.0 399.3 461.3 539.3 131.2 150.2 174.6 202.4 247.1 298.8 334.7 371.9 398.4 432.9 shown in the following tabulation, with the relative ac celeration measured according to both proportion of the pre-1974 growth rate and percentage-point difference: C anada d if fe r e n c e . . . U n it e d K in g d o m 6 .7 8 .5 4 .4 6.1 1 4 .2 . 4 .2 ..................... 3 .6 8 .8 ............................ 2 .9 1 1 .0 Sw eden F rance P e r c e n ta g e - p o in t to 1 9 6 0 - 73 ..................... U n it e d S ta t e s I t a ly R a tio : 1 9 7 3 - 79 ........................ D enm ark 2 .8 6 .7 ................. 2 .0 4 .5 B e l g i u m ..................... 1 .9 3 .4 J a p a n ............................ 1.3 1.1 N e t h e r la n d s 1. 1 .4 1.0 .1 G erm an y . . . . .................. The acceleration in the average rate of growth of unit labor costs was greatest in the United Kingdom and It aly, when measured in terms of percentage points. However, in proportion to the average rate before 1974, the increase was most rapid in Canada. The countries with little acceleration were the same— Germany, the Netherlands, and Japan— according to both methods of measurement. During the 1974-75 recession, unit labor cost in creases peaked at annual rates of nearly 9 percent in Germany, 15 to 18 percent in the United States, Cana da, France, Belgium, Denmark, and the Netherlands, about 25 percent in Japan and Sweden, and 35 percent in Italy and the United Kingdom. With the post-reces sion recovery and moderation in hourly compensation gains in 1976 and 1977, manufacturing unit labor costs either declined or the increases diminished significantly. In 1979, costs fell or rose only about 1 percent in Ja pan, Germany, and Sweden; but in all of the other countries except Belgium and the Netherlands, they were still rising or had accelerated to much higher rates — more than 8 percent— than in the pre-1974 period. In terms o f U.S. dollars. When measured in U.S. curren cy, with relative changes in foreign exchange rates taken into account, unit labor costs increased at annual rates of about 9.5 percent in Japan, 10 to 13 percent in the continental European countries, and 16 percent in the United Kingdom from 1973 to 1979, compared with 8 percent in the United States and 7 percent in Canada. (See table 3.) Table 4. Continued — Indexes of manufacturing output per hour, hourly compensation, unit labor costs, and related data, 1970-79 [1967 = 100] Year United States Canada Japan France Germany Italy United Kingdom Elelgium Denmark1 Netherlands Sweden Eight European countries Ten foreign countries Value of foreign currency relative to the U.S. dollar 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 103.4 106.8 108.9 107.9 110.3 106.1 109.4 101.5 94.6 92.1 101.1 104.2 119.5 133.7 124.2 122.1 122.2 135.2 173.8 166.0 89.0 89.3 97.5 110.9 102.4 114.9 103.0 100.1 109.3 115.7 109.3 114.7 125.0 150.5 154.4 162.4 158.4 171.7 198.8 217.5 99.5 100.9 106.9 107.3 95.9 95.7 75.2 70.7 73.5 75.1 87.1 88.9 90.9 89.1 85.1 80.0 65.6 63.4 69.7 77.2 100.1 102.4 112.9 128.0 127.8 135.4 128.8 138.7 158.1 169.4 93.1 94.3 100.4 115.9 114.8 121.7 115.5 116.3 126.7 132.7 99.6 103.2 112.2 129.6 134.3 142.8 136.3 146.8 166.7 179.6 99.5 101.1 108.5 118.6 116.5 124.6 118.5 115.5 114.3 120.4 100.3 103.4 111.5 126.8 123.8 127.6 116.5 119.0 131.8 139.9 100.6 103.7 113.0 127.3 123.2 125.2 117.5 121.8 139.2 142.9 112.2 113.3 116.8 127.3 148.4 163.6 169.5 182.9 193.3 211.2 109.1 116.9 124.1 134.2 147.7 171.9 171.3 178.7 183.1 188.3 105.5 112.4 120.6 123.0 138.7 170.4 203.0 232.4 246.6 245.9 113.3 122.4 128.8 138.5 157.5 184.4 194.9 211.4 227.2 242.3 111.3 120.2 125.9 135.3 157.8 183.0 189.7 201.5 211.7 220.9 104.4 106.8 117.3 147.6 170.3 199.2 195.8 212.7 245.0 280.3 108.7 120.6 139.2 174.0 198.3 245.4 233.6 262.4 305.3 338.1 105.0 113.6 130.9 145.8 161.5 212.4 240.6 268.5 281.8 296.0 113.6 126.5 143.6 175.6 195.1 235.3 227.1 251.6 299.5 339.0 111.9 124.6 142.2 172.3 194.4 229.1 222.8 245.5 294.7 315.8 Unit labor costs in national currency 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. 116.5 117.6 118.1 123.2 143.1 152.4 158.2 166.6 179.4 194.1 108.1 108.6 112.1 117.0 132.5 156.2 170.2 182.7 190.5 206.9 111.9 123.9 130.1 143.7 181.4 204.1 200.1 202.7 201.7 198.3 108 6 115.2 121.4 132.0 153.4 178.0 188.4 205.3 220.9 240.4 115.0 124.4 130.9 140.4 152.6 164.1 165.5 172.2 180.2 182.4 119.8 134.3 142.4 160.8 190.4 256.2 282.7 332.3 369.5 409.7 120.3 132.7 139.3 146.1 180.8 243.8 277.0 309.2 353.0 405.7 101.4 109.8 114.7 120.7 139.7 159.8 163.7 172.2 175.1 181.8 Unit labor costs in U.S. dollars 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. 116.5 117.6 118.1 123.2 143.1 152.4 158.2 166.6 179.4 194.1 111.7 116.1 122.1 126.2 146.2 165.6 186.2 185.5 180.3 190.6 113.1 129.1 155.5 192.1 225.4 249.2 244.5 274.1 350.5 329.1 96.7 102.9 118.4 146.4 157.0 204.6 194.1 205.5 241.5 278.0 125.7 142.7 163.7 211.3 235.6 266.4 262.2 295.8 358.3 396.8 119.2 135.6 152.2 172.5 182.6 245.1 212.5 234.9 271.7 307.8 104.8 117.9 126.7 130.2 153.8 196.9 181.8 196.2 246.2 313.1 101.4 112.4 129.4 154.4 178.5 216.4 210.9 238.9 276.7 308.0 ' Excluding manufacturing handicrafts. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 37 M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • Productivity and Labor Costs Abroad The overall effects of the exchange rate movements during this period were to offset Italy’s annual rate of growth of unit labor costs in national currency by near ly 6 percentage points, those in Canada and the United Kingdom by nearly 3 points. On the other hand, chang es in the value of their currencies added 5 to 7 percent age points to the annual growth of unit labor costs for Germany, Belgium, and the Netherlands, about 4 points for Japan, 2.5 for Denmark, and less than 1 for France and Sweden. Exchange rate movements were irregular during the 1973-79 period, with one or more large increases or de clines in the currencies of each country. (See table 4.) The more significant movements were the depreciations of the British and Italian currencies versus the dollar in 1976 (down 19 and 21 percent, respectively) and the 1978 appreciations of the currencies of Japan (up 29 percent), Germany (16 percent), Belgium (14 percent), and the Netherlands (14 percent). Even France and Sweden, which had little overall exchange rate shifts, ex perienced significant currency value changes in specific years. □ ' Percent changes in productivity, labor costs, and other related measures for selected periods and each year from 1973 are shown in tables 1 to 3. Annual indexes for 1970 to 1979 are shown in table 4; those from 1950 are available upon request. Data sources are summa rized in the appendix. 2See Keith Daly and Arthur Neef, “Productivity and unit labor costs in 11 industrial countries, 1977,” Monthly Labor Review, No vember 1978, pp. 11-17; and “International Comparisons of Manu facturing Productivity and Labor Costs: 1978,” Summary 80 -1 , February 1980. APPENDIX: Data Sources Output per hour, hourly compensation, and unit la bor costs are compiled from basic series on manufactur ing output, employment, average hours, and compen sation. The latter three relate to all employed including self-employed persons in the United States and Canada and all employees in the other countries. Hours refer to hours paid in the United States, hours worked in the other countries. In general, the measures relate to total manufactur ing. However, manufacturing handicrafts are excluded from all basic series for Denmark (see below) and from the employment and hours measures for Germany. Handicraft workers in Germany account for nearly 17 percent of manufacturing employment, but preliminary BLS calculations indicate that their inclusion would have little effect on the average trend over time. The output measures are gross product originating in manufacturing in constant prices from the national ac counts of each country— except those for Japan for 1950 to 1970 and the Netherlands for 1969 to 1979, which are indexes of industrial production. (For Canada Appendix table 1. Comparative rates of change in output, output per hour, and unit labor costs, 1970-1978 Output Period Output per hour Unit labor costs National Production National Production National Production accounts index accounts index accounts index 1970- 7 8 ’ . . . . 6 .4 3 . 8k 7 .3 4 .6 7 .6 10.4 1973- 7 8 ’ . . . . 4 .7 1 .0 6 .6 2 .9 7 .0 1 0 .9 2 .8 1 9 7 0 -7 1 .............. 10 .7 12 .3 1 9 7 1 -7 2 .............. 9.1 7 .4 9 .9 8.1 5.1 6 .7 1 9 7 2 -7 3 .............. 15.1 15 .9 1 1.5 1 2 .2 10 .4 9 .7 1 9 7 3 -7 4 ............. -.4 - 3 .9 4.1 .4 2 6 .2 3 0 .9 1 9 7 4 - 7 5 ............. 1 9 7 5 - 7 6 ............. - 3 .8 4 .2 2 .7 4 .3 - 1 1 .0 4 .0 - 3 .8 12 .5 2 1 .6 1 3 .3 11 .2 9 .4 7 .4 - 2 .0 - .1 1 9 7 6 -7 7 ............. 9 .0 4 .0 8 .8 3 .9 1.3 6.1 1 9 7 7 -7 8 ............. 6 .3 6 .3 6 .8 6 .8 - .5 - .5 1Average annual compound rate of change. 38 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis and the United Kingdom, the index of industrial pro duction is identical to the national accounts measure of manufacturing output at constant prices.) The produc tion index for Japan excludes about 6 percent of manu facturing value added; national accounts real output measures are not yet available for years before 1970. For the Netherlands, a production index is used in or der to eliminate gas extraction from the manufacturing sector; the national accounts output data for recent years include gas extraction in manufacturing, which would distort the Dutch productivity series. The compensation measures are also from national accounts— except those for Belgium and for France for 1967 to 1979, which are BLS estimates. Compensation is defined as all payments made by employers directly to their employees, before deductions of any kind, plus employer contributions to legally required insurance programs and contractual and private welfare plans for the benefit of employees. Labor costs include, in addi tion to compensation, employer expenditures for recruit ment and training; the cost of cafeterias, medical facilities, and various other plant facilities and services; and taxes (other than social security taxes, which are part of compensation) that are levied on payrolls or em ployment rolls. Annual data are not available for total labor costs. Labor costs, as used in this article, approxi mate more closely the concept of compensation. How ever, compensation has been adjusted to include all significant changes in taxes that are regarded as labor costs, and the omitted items represent no more than 4 percent of total labor costs in any country. Selfemployed workers are included in the U.S. and Canadi an figures by assuming that their hourly compensation is equal to the average for wage and salary employees. The employment data are official estimates published with the national accounts or other comprehensive em ployment series; average hours are either from official aggregate hours series or BLS estimates of hours worked. For Belgium, France, and the Netherlands, the hours worked estimates may not reflect all random hours changes, such as time lost because of industrial disputes. For all countries, preliminary estimates for recent years are generally based on current indicators of manu facturing output, employment and hours, and hourly compensation until national accounts and other statis tics used for the long-term measures become available. Furthermore, national accounts statistics for the most current years are subject to revision as more informa tion is received. To compute the series for 8 European countries and 10 foreign countries, the data have been combined by aggregating the output, compensation, and hours figures for each year, adjusting where necessary for compatibil ity of coverage and concept. The average exchange rates for 1974-79 are used to aggregate the output and com pensation data. The use of average 1974-79 exchange rates, however, does not imply that these rates reflect the comparative real value of currencies for manufactur ing output. Also, the use of exchange rates for a differ ent time period would have little effect on the combined indexes. United States. The U.S. data in this article do not re flect a benchmark revision being made in the national income and product accounts incorporating the 1972 economic census and other new information. The cur rent schedule calls for completion of the benchmark re vision by this winter. All series will be revised back to at least 1967. Japan. In this article, new national accounts constant price measures of gross product originating in manufac turing are introduced for Japan for the period 1970 to 1978. Previously, the index of industrial production was used as the manufacturing output measure for those years. For the years before 1970, the industrial produc tion index will continue to be used until constant price measures of gross product originating become available. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis The national accounts measure of gross product origi nating in manufacturing shows a much smaller decline in output during the 1974-75 recession and larger gains in most other years than does the production index. Appendix table 1 shows comparative rates of change in output, output per hour, and unit labor costs based on the two output series. Gross product originating in con stant prices provides a measure of changes in value add ed— or gross output minus inputs of materials, fuels, and purchased services— while the index of industrial production for Japan measures base year value added extrapolated using quantity indicators of gross output only. According to the Japanese Economic Planning Agency, which produces the national accounts, their measure better reflects the structural changes which have occurred in Japanese manfacturing since the 1973 oil shock. Denmark. Manufacturing establishments classified as handicrafts are not covered by the series for Denmark because relevant data by industrial sector are not avail able. The output and compensation figures used to con struct the Danish productivity and labor cost measures are from the Danish national accounts, while the em ployment and hours figures are from an establishment survey. The Danish national accounts are currently un dergoing a major revision, including the classification of handicrafts by industrial sector and the development of consistent data on employment. However, revised data are now available only for the period 1966-73. These figures indicate a significantly slower rate of productivi ty growth and, consequently, a larger increase in unit labor costs for that period. The following are average annual rates of change for 1966-73 based on the re vised data, with the presently used data in parentheses: Output per hour, 6.9 percent (8.4); hourly compensa tion, 13.3 percent (12.3); and unit labor costs, 6.0 per cent (3.6). BLS does not know how much of the change is the result of including handicrafts, because the revi sions also include a new system of industrial classifica tion, new statistical data, and revised methods of cal culation. 39 Labor requirements decline for public housing construction Onsite and offsite spending in 1979 created about 28,200 jobs for each $1 billion, including about 11,700 in other industries; turnkey projects, born during the 1960's, have accelerated declines in onsite employee-hour requirements R obert J. P r ie r Each $1 billion of expenditure for public housing con struction during 1979 generated an estimated equivalent of 16,500 full-time jobs in the construction industry, 13,800 onsite and 2,700 offsite, according to a Bureau of Labor Statistics survey.1 The Bureau also estimates that for each $1 billion spent during 1979 about 11,700 jobs were generated in other industries: 6,000 in manu facturing; 4,400 in trade, transportation, and services; and 1,300 in mining and other industries. For each $1,000 (constant 1960) spent during 1979, 23 worker hours were generated in other industries: 12 in manufac turing; 8 in trade, services, and transportation; and 3 in mining and other industries. Data from the survey, which covered public housing projects completed in 1975, indicate that labor require ments for public housing construction have decreased.2 The number of employee hours generated in the con struction industry for each 1,000 constant dollars of contract cost fell from 128.3 in 1960, to 99.4 in 1968, to 76.5 in 1975. For onsite work (activity performed at the construction site) the respective figures for the 3 years were 113.7, 87.6, and 62.7. (See table 1.) The average annual rate of decline in onsite employ ee-hour requirements has accelerated in recent years largely because of a shift in the types of projects. In constant dollars, the number of onsite employee hours per $1,000 decreased at an average rate of 3.9 percent per year during 1960-75. The rate was 3.2 percent per Robert J. Prier is an economist formerly in the Office of Productivity and Technology, Bureau of Labor Statistics. 40 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis year during 1960-68, but advanced to 4.7 percent dur ing 1968-75. This trend reflects the inclusion of turn key projects in the 1975 survey and the increasing use of prefabricated components, more efficient building methods, and more productive onsite workers. The current survey represents the first time that turn key projects have been included in the sampling uni verse. These projects, built and completed by private contractors, and then turned over to local housing au thorities, are an im portant component of public housing construction in the United States today. Because turn key projects were not started until the late 1960’s, and were not a factor in public housing construction until the 1970’s, the 1960 and 1968 surveys dealt with con ventional projects only; that is, projects built under the direct supervision of local housing authorities. To pres ent data representative of all public housing, both con ventional and turnkey projects will be included in fu ture surveys of public housing construction. It is estimated that turnkey projects currently account for two-thirds of public housing construction. This propor tion will-probably not change significantly in the near future. Onsite labor requirements For both turnkey and conventional public housing projects surveyed in 1975, 62.7 employee hours were generated at the construction site for each 1,000 con stant dollars of expenditure. Onsite employment re quirements declined at an average rate of 4.7 percent a year during 1968-75, a significant portion of which can be attributed to the presence of turnkey projects. By project type. Turnkey projects require substantially fewer employee hours than do conventional ones, 27.4 employee hours per $1,000 of contract cost, while con ventional projects required 41.1. For both types of proj ects completed in 1975, 33.2 employee hours were generated at the construction site for each $1,000 of construction expenditure. (See table 2.) For conventional projects only, the rate of decline in onsite employee-hour requirements was considerably lower than that for all public housing construction. Be tween 1968 and 1975, the number of employee hours re quired by each $1,000 of cost declined from 87.6 to 77.6, an average annual rate of 1.7 percent. Because only a few turnkey projects were completed in 1968 (and were not included in the survey), a comparable figure for them is not available. However, when conven tional projects completed in 1968 are compared with both kinds of projects for 1975, the average annual rate of decline for onsite employee hours was 4.7 percent. By region. Public housing construction in the South re quired more labor than any other region. Construction wage rates generally are lower in the South where there is more unskilled labor, facilitating substitution of labor for capital. The North Central States had the lowest employee-hour requirements, 26.8, followed closely by the Northeast and Western regions. Increases in costs of materials, equipment, and labor caused the average cost per square foot of public hous ing construction to rise from $15.22 in 1968, to $25.21 in 1975, representing an average increase of 7.5 percent a year. During the same period, the average cost per building unit rose from $12,300 to $21,700. Projects in the Northeast region were the most ex pensive in 1975; the cost per square foot was $30.35, or 20 percent higher than the national average. The North Central and Western regions ranked second and third, Table 1. Employee hours per $1,000 of construction cost for public housing construction, and projections for 1979, and rates of change, selected years Year 1960 ............................. 1968 ............................. 1975 ............................. 1979’ ........................... Average annual rates of change 1960-75 ...................... 1960 - 68 ...................... 1960-75 ...................... Dollars Total construction Onsite Offsite Current Current 1960 Current 1960 Current 1960 128.3 90.3 99.4 40.5 76.5 21.6 63.0 113.7 79.6 87.6 33.2 62.7 17.7 51.6 14.6 10.7 11.8 7.3 13.8 3.9 11.4 -3 .4 -3.1 -3.7 -3.9 -3.2 -4.7 -0.4 -2 .6 + 1.0 1 Estimated, adjusted for productivity change of -4 .7 percent a year. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis respectively. Costs in the South were considerably lower partly because of lower wage rates and more unskilled labor. Costs per square foot were: A ll N o r th - N o r th re g io n s east C e n tr a l S o u th W est $ 2 5 .2 1 $ 3 0 .3 5 $ 2 9 .9 5 $ 2 0 .9 8 $ 2 7 .2 7 . . . 2 4 .3 9 3 4 .1 3 2 8 .9 2 2 0 .3 3 2 6 .4 2 T u r n k e y ..................... 2 5 .8 6 2 8 .6 2 3 0 .7 0 2 1 .6 5 2 7 .7 5 A ll p r o j e c t s C o n v e n t io n a l D u r in g rose from was 992.) ments per in 1968 to 1 9 6 8 - 75, th e average s iz e o f d w e llin g u n its 811 to 859 square feet. (The figure for 1960 Despite the increase, employee-hour require dwelling unit have decreased from 983 hours 720 in 1975. (See table 3.) By occupation. Onsite labor requirements by type of oc cupation, although not collected for the current survey, show gradual shifts over long periods. Based on data from previous surveys of public housing construction, in 1960 more than 61 percent of the onsite labor force consisted of skilled tradesworkers, and in 1968, about 64 percent. Carpenters accounted for the largest single share of employment in 1960 and 1968, with 19 and 20 percent, respectively; followed by plumbers at 8 and 9 percent; bricklayers at 8 percent for both years; electri cians at 4 and 6 percent; and painters at 4 and 5 per cent. Semiskilled and unskilled workers such as laborers, helpers, and tenders comprised between 30 and 31 percent of the onsite public housing construction work force in both studies. The remainder of onsite em ployees were in nonconstruction jobs such as superviso ry, clerical, and custodial. Contractors and subcontractors In 1975, 37.6 percent of employee hours in public housing construction were supplied by general or prime contractors. The remainder was from subcontractors. General and prime contractors performed a larger share of work in the South and West, but subcontractors performed more work on projects in the Northeast and North Central regions. (See table 4.) Of the structural types of buildings included in the 1975 public housing construction survey (high-rises, walk-ups, and townhouses and rowhouses), high-rise buildings of four or more stories required fewest em ployee hours. High-rise buildings generally require a larger percentage of materials and more intensive use of construction equipment. Also, high-rise construction is well-suited to take advantage of laborsaving préfabrica tion techniques. Offsite labor requirements In 1975, 18 percent of employee hours generated in the construction industry, by each $1,000 of expenditure for public housing construction, was worked away from 41 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • Labor Requirements Decline fo r Public Housing Construction the construction site. This includes employment such as in contractors’ offices and warehouses.3 Onsite employment requirements have decreased at an average rate of 4.7 percent a year during 1968-75, while offsite employment has increased at 1.0 percent. This is partly because of the complexity and differing design standards of the various projects, resulting in an increase in support employment. Further, there is need for more clerical jobs because of increased record keeping, reporting, inventory, payrolls, and other re quirements. The greater use of preassembled components in areas such as kitchens, bathrooms, and closets also increases the amount of offsite labor and decreases that of onsite. This work is not affected by inclement weather, and in dividual mass-production techniques can be utilized in building the components, a major benefit. This trend is likely to continue as more laborsaving techniques are sought and as attempts are made to counterbalance the seasonal nature of the industry. Some employment is generated indirectly from public housing construction. The production of needed materi als and supplies creates jobs throughout the economy. Although materials data were not collected for this sur vey, extrapolation of trends from previous surveys were used to have developed data for 1975 and 1979. By ap plying material consumption data to a series of inputoutput matrixes, the Bureau has developed estimates for the indirect employment effects of public housing con T a b le 2 . C u r re n t d o lla rs I n d u s tr y 1 9 6 0 d o lla rs 1 9 6 0 1 9 6 8 1 9 7 5 1 9 7 9 1 9 6 0 1 9 6 8 19 7 5 1 9 7 9 T o ta l . . 109 66 34 23 109 73 63 67 . 62 42 21 12 62 46 40 36 . . . . 29 16 8 8 29 18 15 22 m is c e lla n e o u s 18 8 4 3 18 9 8 8 M a n u fa c tu r in g T ra d e, tra n sp o r t a t io n , a n d s e r v ic e s M in in g a n d Distribution of costs For projects completed in 1975, estimated expendi tures for construction materials accounted for about 49 percent of contract costs.5 Onsite labor accounted for nearly one-third of total costs. Equipment, overhead, and profit accounted for the remainder.6 The rising costs of construction materials and equip ment during the 1970’s are reflected in changing percent distributions of costs during the three survey years. General contractors do not have detailed cost informa tion from their subcontractors, resulting in estimates only for 1975: T ype o f cost 1960 1968 1975 O n s it e w a g e s ............................................. 3 5 .5 3 2 .4 3 2 .7 M a t e r i a l s ........................................................ 4 5 .0 4 1 .9 4 8 .7 ................................................. 2 .5 1.5 4 .4 O v e r h e a d a n d p r o f i t ............................ E q u ip m e n t 1 7 .0 2 4 .2 1 4 .2 O n s it e e m p lo y e e - h o u r r e q u ir e m e n t s p e r $ 1 ,0 0 0 o f c o n t r a c t c o s t f o r p u b lic h o u s in g c o n s t r u c t io n , 1 9 7 5 Characteristic All projects........................................ Conventional................................... Tjrnkey ............................................... Size of structure 1 S tory.............................................. 2 S to ry.............................................. 3 S to ry.............................................. 4 and over ............................... Type of building W alk-up............................................ Townhouse/rowh'ouse...................... Hl-rise ........................................ Construction characteristics: Structural frame Steel ........................................ Concrete .......................................... Masonry............................................ W ood.......................................... Exterior wall Masonry............................................ W ood.......................................... Stucco .............................................. Concrete .......................................... Curtain wall ...................................... O th e r................................................. Interior wall Drywall ........................................ P laster.............................................. Floor base Concrete .......................................... W ood/plywood................................. Floor covering Vinyl/vinyl asbestos ........................ 42 struction for each 1,000 current dollars of expenditure.4 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis United States North east North Central South West 33.22 41.11 27.35 27.80 32.29 25.33 26.85 31.43 23.74 40.97 50.51 31.58 27.97 31 44 26.13 35.55 38.03 19.56 30.45 21.43 22.37 41.01 48 35 30.48 26.15 20.79 17.55 29.46 32.19 31.85 25 11 27.92 27.51 33.54 41.24 30.45 22.37 21.43 30.48 21.40 25.69 29.46 41.88 50.35 32.19 30.79 14.91 27.51 37.23 29.43 27.30 36.88 26.06 30.06 28.99 23.45 54.54 26.94 24.62 24.72 43.14 31.75 28.99 44.70 26.81 28.66 30.30 27.83 33.21 39.27 23.64 30.76 24.78 19.38 25.31 40.64 50.25 29.61 14.91 35.29 20.87 33.89 21.43 27.12 54.54 18.31 40.01 33.04 35.84 27.80 27.83 22.59 39.70 68.88 27.97 33.98 25.04 28.49 21.43 26.84 26.91 42.12 18.71 25.96 37.48 35.22 27.60 28.82 42.20 32.67 C eiling................................................. Acoustical t i l e ................................... Drywall............................................ Concrete .......................................... O th e r.......................................... Roof base Concrete .......................................... W ood/plywood................................. O th e r............................................ Other characteristics: Basement Partial or full basement .................... No basement ................................... Air conditioning C entral............................................... None ............................................... Type of heat Forced a ir .......................................... Hot w a te r.......................................... Electric radiant ................................. O th e r................................................. Type of fuel Electricity .......................................... Gas ................................................. O i l ................................................... C o a l................................................... Elevators Yes ................................................... N o ............................................ United States North east North Central South West 29.04 28.43 26.26 35.35 23.88 32.57 33.32 29.33 23.04 23.88 26.51 46.74 40.04 42.95 16.57 29.07 31.16 28.40 31.61 29.30 28 40 30.74 36.21 12.53 30.48 22.08 29.37 24.72 12.53 34.06 43.34 28 12 27.83 32.02 33.56 32.10 23.71 25.71 27.19 42.57 40.82 29.32 27.84 27.78 33.96 27.80 24.66 27.48 37.58 41.31 18.91 31.96 35.69 27.16 38.16 26.33 21.43 27.10 30.78 27.05 22.01 28.58 27.40 41.67 18.31 52.03 24.63 26.36 36.93 30.30 34.84 33.43 27.40 30.78 23.30 27.40 27.59 26.60 39.36 42.11 33.92 26.36 29.52 37.76 30.48 22.08 26.93 26.53 32.32 45.48 28.12 27.83 33.92 Table 3. Onsite hour requirements for public housing construction, by selected characteristics and region, 1960, 1968, and 1975 Characteristic Per $1,000 of contract cost Per 1,000 square feet Per dwelling unit United States 1960 ............................. 1968 ............................. 1975 ............................. 113.7 79.6 33.2 1,214 1,212 838 1,205 983 720 Northeast 1960 ............................. 1968 ............................. 1975 ............................. 95.9 66.7 27.8 1,046 1,107 844 1,073 920 676 North Central 1960 ............................. 1968 ............................. 1975 ............................. 106.0 86.3 26.8 1,299 1,452 804 1,205 1,036 601 South 1960 ............................. 1968 ............................. 1975 ............................. 142.1 90.5 41.0 1,331 1,216 859 1,336 1,033 813 98.4 62.8 28.0 1,270 949 763 1,176 741 647 --------- FOOTNOTES------------- West 1960 ............................. 1968 ............................. 1975 ............................. During 1968-75, the percentage of costs required by onsite wages and salaries remained about the same, but material and equipment expenditures increased. Labor’s share of costs has decreased since 1960, indicating that productivity and technology changes have kept pace with wage increases during the survey period. The dramatic decrease in overhead and profit during the period reflects, in part, that 1975 was a recession year for the industry. In the recession of 1974-75, con Table 4. Percent distribution of employee-hour requirements for public housing construction, by type of operation and region, 1975 Type of operation T o ta l........................ General and prime contractors...................... Electrical ............................. Plumbing ............................. Carpentry (including kitchen cabinets) ........................ Masonry ............................. Wallboard ........................... Gradings, footings, excava tion, and foundation......... Concrete and stucco work . Heating, ventilating, and airconditioning (except electric heat) .................. Painting and wall papering . . Plastering and lathing ......... Linoleum, vinyl tile, vinylasbestos tile, carpeting .. Ceramic t i l e ........................ Elevators............................. Structural steel erection .. . Landscaping........................ Roofing, gutter work, siding . Insulation............................. Other ................................. Note: United States Northeast North Central South West 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 37.6 8.0 7.9 27.9 9.8 7.4 34.1 9.9 9.6 42.4 6.7 7.4 40.3 7.2 7.5 6.9 6.0 5.8 6.4 8.9 6.5 3.8 5.1 6.7 8.6 5.2 5.1 4.4 5.4 7.4 4.8 4.6 6.3 10.5 3.6 2.7 5.0 3.1 3.2 4.6 3.9 3.7 1.2 2.5 3.8 0.1 4.7 3.3 4.2 3.6 4.0 0.7 7.5 2.8 0.2 1.0 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.5 3.8 1.0 0.5 1.4 1.1 0.6 0.8 0.1 4.5 0.6 0.4 1.7 2.3 0.4 0.6 0.3 6.0 1.2 1.3 0.4 0.2 0.7 0.7 0.8 2.8 0.9 0.2 0.6 0.1 3.0 0.9 0.6 3.3 Items may not add to totals due to rounding. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis tractors may have bid on less profitable jobs, or may have been willing to accept lower profits to stay in busi ness and to keep core employees on payroll. However, because the 1975 data are estimated by sur veyed general contractors (actual costs can only be obtained directly from subcontractors), a definitive ex planation of these changes cannot be made with the available data. □ 'The 1979 employment estimates for public housing construction were developed from previous survey data adjusted for price and pro ductivity changes. The deflator used to adjust for price changes is the Bureau of the Census single-family price index, excluding value of lot. The index, on a 1972 base, equaled 131.6 in 1975, and 203.3 in 1979. The estimate used to adjust the survey data for productivity change is the inverse of the change in onsite employee hours per $1,000 after adjustments for price variations, between 1968 and 1975. The average annual rate of change was 4.7 percent. Estimates of the number of full-time jobs generated in the construc tion industry per billion dollars of expenditures were derived using 1,800 employee hours per year-long job for onsite construction, and 2,000 employee hours per offsite construction job. Because of part-time workers and the seasonal nature of the con struction industry, more workers would actually be employed than in dicated by the full-time job estimates. 2This survey is one of a series of studies of construction labor requirements prepared by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The data from this series are used to estimate the impact of Federal funding upon employment in the construction industry. The data may also be used to make budgetary decisions, aid in developing countercyclical employment and expenditure policies, assess training needs, anticipate occupational shortages and bottlenecks in skilled trades, and provide indicators of productivity change in construction. The 1975 survey is the third public housing construction survey. See Labor and Material Requirements for Public Housing Construc tion (Bulletin 1402, Bureau of Labor Statistics, May 1964); Labor and Material Requirements for Public Housing Construction, 1968 (Bulle tin 1821, Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1974); Joseph T. Finn, “Labor requirements for public housing,” Monthly Labor Review, April 1972, pp. 40-42. It is one of a group of abbreviated studies which exclude detailed information on material usage and onsite occupational re quirements. The 1975 public housing construction survey is the fourth abbreviated study of construction labor requirements. See John G. Olsen, “Decline noted in hours required to erect Federal office build ings,” Monthly Labor Review, October 1976, pp. 18-22; Barbara J. Bingham, “U.S. civil works construction shows decrease in required labor,” Monthly Labor Review, October 1978, pp. 24-29; Barbara J. Bingham, “Labor requirements for college housing construction,” Monthly Labor Review, May 1979, pp. 28-34. In other BLS construc tion labor requirements studies, material and equipment expenditure data are used to develop indirect employment estimates for the indus tries which mine, manufacture, and transport the construction materi als required. The abbreviated studies are designed to allow more frequent measurement of the labor requirements of different types of construction, as well as to reduce survey costs. Detailed data on ma terials, equipment, and occupational distribution will be included in the next survey of public housing construction. For reference, summa ries of cost components and occupational requirements from the pre vious surveys are included in this article. The information in this article is based on a probability sample of 67 public housing projects completed in 1975. Of these, 35 were turn key projects and 32 were conventional. The sample frame was strati fied two ways. The primary division was by the four broad regions of the Bureau of the Census. Within regions, projects were directly grouped by development type (conventional or turnkey), as well as implicity by size of contract. The measure of size used was the esti mated development cost (ETDC) provided by the Department of Housing and Urban Development, (HUD). The number of units in 43 M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 « Labor Requirements Decline fo r Public Housing Construction the universe was 296. Based on estimates of standard errors computed on previous construction survey results, a Neyman allocation was used to determine the number of projects in each region. Within re gions, the square roots of the ETDC’s were used to determine the number of projects for each development type. Within the eight strata thus obtained, projects were ordered by magnitude of ETDC, and the sample was drawn using probability proportionate to size. A sample of 65 projects was being selected plus a 10 percent oversample for non-response. A case study of several rehabilitation and leased projects was in cluded in the survey. Data on the leased projects, however, were in sufficient for publication. Data for the rehabilitated projects are being reviewed for possible future publication. The sample projects were randomly selected from a universe of 296 projects supplied by area of fices of HUD. The projects are grouped by geographic region, and data are presented on a regional as well as national basis. The four geographic regions are: Northeast— Connecticut, Maine, Massachu setts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont; North Central — Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kan sas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, and Wisconsin; South— Alabama, Arkansas, Dela ware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and West Virginia; and West— Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming. Although the national and regional data provided by the survey are believed to be accurate, the detailed data would have a wider margin of sampling error and may be subject to other limitations. Except for nonresponding sample units and estimated data, there are no known sources of nonsampling error. Sampling variances are being prepared by the Bureau. 3Employee-hour and employee-year estimates for offsite construc tion were derived from the ratio of “nonconstruction” workers to to tal workers among general building contractors and special trade contractors (Standard Industrial Classifications 15 and 17) as shown in Employment and Earnings, United States 1909-78 (BLS Bulletin 1312-11). The data were adjusted to remove the portion of clerical and administrative hours already included in onsite hours. 4 Estimates for 1975 and 1979 were based upon data from the 1968 survey which included detailed data on equipment and material usage. Cost distribution for 1975 is based on conventional and turnkey projects; 1960 and 1968 figures are based on conventional projects only. The costs for 1975 are estimates made by the general contrac tors, and should not be construed as representing actual costs as col lected in complete labor and material requirements surveys. Actual construction cost components can only be obtained from subcontrac tors. 6 “Overhead” includes salaries for offsite workers, supplemental benefits, insurance, construction financing charges, and other miscella neous expenses. Caution: sociocentrics at work T h o u g h t h e c o n f o r m is t a n d e n tr e p r e n e u r ia l v a lu e s y s t e m s h a v e l o n g c h a r a c t e r iz e d t h e A m e r ic a n w o r k f o r c e , is a g o a l- o r ie n t e d in d iv id u a l w h o s e b e h a v io r s e e m s t o s a y , p a r t ic u la r ly have a n d le t m e d o it m y w a y .” B e in g h is o r h e r o w n m a n a g e r w it n e s s e d r e j e c t io n o f t h e m a te r ia lis m a n d c o m m e r c ia lis m is t h e o n ly a c c e p t a b le c o n d it io n o f e m p lo y m e n t , a n d if d e at th e m a n a g e r ia l le v e ls , recent years “ O K , I u n d e r s t a n d t h e j o b t o b e d o n e ; n o w le a v e m e a lo n e o f t h e s e v a lu e s y s t e m s . C o n c e r n w it h t h e q u a lit y o f life a n d p r iv e d o f t h is o p p o r t u n it y , t h e p e r s o n is lik e ly t o le a v e t h e d is d a in fo r t r a d itio n a l s t a t u s s y m b o ls c h a r a c t e r iz e t h e v a l o r g a n iz a t io n o r t o b e c o m e p r e o c c u p ie d w it h p e r s o n a l g o a ls o n c o m p a n y tim e . u e s o f m a n y n e w c o m e r s t o t h e w o r k fo r c e . T h e y t e n d t o o th e rs In s u m m a r y , “ e v e r y e m p lo y e e a m a n a g e r ” is a u n iv e r s a l s e e m s t o b e m o r e im p o r ta n t t h a n g e t t in g a h e a d in t h e o r w ard str o n g a ffilia tio n n e e d s — g e t t in g a lo n g w it h ly a p p lic a b le c o n c e p t , b u t o n e t h a t d e p e n d s o n a p p r o p r ia te g a n iz a t io n . T h e y w is h t o b e r e s p e c t e d b y t h o s e w h o m th e y j o b c o n d it io n s fo r it s fu lle s t im p le m e n t a t io n . E v e r y p e r s o n r e s p e c t. T h o u g h th e ir in fo r m a lit y a n d s o m e t im e s u n k e m p t h a s t h e p o t e n t ia l f o r m a n a g in g s o m e j o b s , b u t n o t a ll j o b s . a p p e a r a n c e m a y b e d is c o n c e r t in g t o t r a d itio n a l m a n a g e r s , t h e y a r e c a p a b le o f p r o d u c t iv e e ffo r t u n d e r a p p r o p r ia te s u ta in p e r v is io n a n d p r o v id e d t h e y a r e n o t in v o lv e d w it h j o b s . T h e r e a liz a t io n o f t h is p o te n t ia l d e p e n d s o n m a t c h in g w hat H o w e v e r , e v e r y p e r s o n h a s t h e p o t e n t ia l fo r m a n a g in g c e r c o m p o n e n ts o f any jo b o r c o m b in a t io n s o f se v e r a l t h e y s e e a s h a r m fu l p r o d u c t s s u c h a s n a p a lm , b o m b s , o r t h e p e r s o n ’s t a le n t s a n d a s p ir a t io n s w it h t h e a p p r o p r ia te p e s t ic id e s . B e in g a m a n a g e r o f th e ir o w n j o b s is a n a p p e a l j o b , p a r t ic u la r ly if t h e e m p lo y e e h a s a n in flu e n tia l r o le in in g c o n c e p t t o s o c io c e n t r ic s , p a r t ic u la r ly w h e n t h e y c a n r e t h e m a t c h in g p r o c e s s . T h e “ j o b ” in t h is c a s e r e fe r s n o t la t e t o s u p e r v is io n o n a f ir s t-n a m e b a s is a n d a r e fr e e t o o n ly t o t h e w o r k it s e lf , b u t a ls o t o s t y le o f s u p e r v is io n , e x p e r ie n c e fo rce. p r o c e d u r a l c o n s t r a in t s , p e e r r e la t io n s h ip s , a n d m a te f a c to r s in t h e w o r k p la c e . s o lid a r it y w it h o th e r m em b ers of th e w ork o th e r c li A n e x is te n t ia l p e r s o n a lit y t y p e is a ls o e n c o u n te r e d w ith in c r e a s in g fr e q u e n c y in w o r k fo r c e s . H e o r s h e t e n d s t o ig n o r e p r o t o c o l, s h u n s t a t u s s y m b o ls , a n d r e s e n t b u r e a u c r a t ic c o n s t r a in t s a n d t h e u s e o f a u th o r it y . T h is p e r s o n c a n a c c e p t p e o p le w h o s e v a lu e s d iffe r fr o m h is o r h e r o w n a s lo n g a s t h e y d o n ’t tr y t o im p o s e t h o s e v a lu e s . T h is p e r s o n 44 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis — M. S cott M y e r s Managing With Unions (Reading, Mass., Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., 1978), pp. 37-38. The A natom y of Price C hange Inflation slows in third quarter, although food prices soar C r a ig H o w e ll , W il l ia m T h o m a s , a n d E d d ie L a m b The pace of inflation slowed to a single-digit rate from June to September, primarily because of a sharp drop in mortgage interest costs. The Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (cPl-u) rose at a seasonally ad justed annual rate of 7.0 percent during the third quar ter, the slowest rate since the final quarter of 1977. The CPI had risen at an 11.6-percent rate in the second quar ter of 1980 and at an 18.1-percent rate during the open ing months of the year. The mortgage interest cost index, which had advanced at an annual rate of more than 50 percent during each of the three preceding quarters, decreased at a rate of 30.3 percent. (See table 1.) Excluding mortgage interest costs, however, the rate of inflation at the retail level accelerated from 7.5 per cent in the second quarter to more than 12 percent in the third. The third quarter rate was still somewhat slower than the first quarter rate of nearly 15 percent. Most of the acceleration in the third quarter was caused by sharply higher food prices. When both food and mortgage interest costs are excluded, the CPI moved up at an annual rate of 9.7 percent, slightly more than in the previous quarter (9.0 percent), as retail prices for most other major categories of consumer spending rose more than they did from March to June. However, the rate of increase in energy prices— which had slowed dramatically from a 64.8-percent rate in the first quarter to an 8.1-percent rate in the second— slowed again to a rate of about 3 percent. At the primary market level, the Producer Price In dex (ppi) for Finished Goods advanced at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 13.0 percent, far faster than the 6.0-percent rate of increase registered in the previous quarter but considerably less than the 19.3-percent rate recorded in the first 3 months of the year. Food prices climbed even more sharply than in the CPlfollowing de clines during the first half of 1980. Price increases Craig Howell, William Thomas, and Eddie Lamb are economists in the Office of Prices and Living Conditions, Bureau of Labor Statistics. They were assisted by Andrew Clem and Mary Burns, economists in the same office. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis also accelerated, although more moderately, for con sumer goods other than food and energy. In contrast, energy prices dropped somewhat from June to Septem ber, after rising at a rate of 17 percent in the second quarter and at a rate in excess of 100 percent in the first. Prices for intermediate materials rose much more than in the preceding 3 months, and crude material prices soared after falling during the first half of the year. Food and related products The CPI for food advanced at an 18.9-percent annual rate from June to September, after rising more moder ately in both preceding quarters. At the primary market level, the PPI for finished consumer foods surged at a 36.9-percent rate, after falling during the first half of the year. (See table 2.) Much of the increase in food prices during the third quarter reflected the effects of unusual ly hot summer weather. A severe drought hampered production and affected marketing at the farm level, particularly for grains, hay, oilseeds, livestock, and live poultry. Consequently, the PPI for crude foodstuffs ad vanced steeply in July and August, before stabilizing in September. Retail food prices were also influenced by earlier increases for energy and for other distribution costs. The index for food away from home rose at an 8.2-percent rate, about the same as in the second quarter. Retail and processor prices for meats and poultry soared from June to September, buoyed by skyrocketing prices for hogs, cattle, and live poultry. The CPI for pork rose at a 75.0-percent annual rate, reflecting in creased prices for hogs. Hog marketings declined in the third quarter, a result of fewer pigs born in the early months of 1980. In addition, intense heat limited weight gains and caused some delay in marketings. There were also fears that the future hog supplies would be reduced by a decline in fertility rates caused by the heat. Pro cessed poultry prices increased at an annual rate of 82.7 percent in the CPI. Live poultry prices soared because of higher feed costs and sharply curtailed marketings after the intense heat killed millions of chickens. Retail prices for beef and veal rose at a 22.4-percent annual rate, partly in response to good demand as a re sult of higher prices for its competitors, pork and poul try. At the farm level, cattle prices increased sharply, reflecting smaller offerings of grain-fed cattle. Cattle farmers continued to rebuild herds after periods of heavy slaughter. Meanwhile, marketings of grass-fed 45 M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • Anatomy o f Price Change cattle increased in the summer when pastures dried up and cattle were taken to market earlier than usual. At the farm level, grain prices climbed at an unusual ly steep rate after declining substantially in the first half of the year. Prices for most grains were higher as re duced harvests were anticipated as a result of the drought. Good export demand also contributed to the price strength of grains. Many farmers deliberately held back grain marketings in hopes of more favorable prices later. Prices soared for corn, oats, and barley; wheat prices also moved up, but not as rapidly as other Table 1. Changes in selected components of the Consumer and the Producer Price Indexes, 1979-80 Index Compound annual rate, seasonally adjusted except as noted, for 3 months ended — 1979 1980 Sept. Dec. All items .......................................... Food and beverages ............................... Housing ............................................ Apparel and upkeep............................... Transportation.......................................... Medical c a r e ............................................ Entertainment .................................... Other goods and services........................ 13.8 6.5 15.9 7.7 20.6 10.7 7.7 12.2 13.7 11.9 17.4 5.1 14.3 12.0 5.3 5.1 Food..................................................... Commodities less fo o d ............................. Services ............................................ 6.5 16.4 14.3 Energy .............................................. All items less energy ............................... All items less food and energy ............... Mortgage interest costs ........................... All items less mortgage interest costs . . . All items less mortgage interest costs and foods ................................. Mar. June Sept. 18.1 4.3 19.5 15.3 35.2 15.9 15.0 10.6 11.6 5.8 20.6 .5 2.5 7.3 8.4 8.9 7.0 18.3 .3 9.6 10.4 9.2 10.8 12.5 12.1 12.7 15.8 3.8 22.1 20.9 5.6 4.7 21.6 18.9 10.6 - .6 49.9 10.6 10.9 29.0 12.3 19.2 13.5 13.9 52.8 11.8 64.8 12.9 15.7 53.8 14.8 8.1 2.9 12.3 7.8 13.5 5.1 55.0 -30.3 7.5 12.1 13.2 11.5 17.1 9.0 9.7 Finished go o d s.................................... Finished energy g o o d s ............................. Consumer foods ............................... Finished goods less food ........................ Finished goods less food and energy . . . . Finished consumer goods less fo o d ......... Finished consumer goods less food and energy .......................................... Capital equipment ........................ 16.1 106.2 15.3 16.4 7.6 23.4 13.3 45.7 8.6 15.0 11.0 17.9 19.3 109.4 -1 .2 26.5 16.1 34.8 6.0 17.0 -7 .8 10.3 9.0 10.1 13.0 -3.4 36.9 6.7 9.1 5.9 11.5 10.0 18.1 13.4 7 .7 8 .8 10.9 8 .8 Intermediate materials, supplies, and components Intermediate energy g o o d s ...................... Intermediate foods and feeds .................. Intermediate materials less foods and feeds..................................................... Intermediate materials less food and energy................................................... 19.7 71.1 24.8 16.0 37.1 1.2 22.8 62.0 -1 .5 4.8 6.5 13.7 15.6 70.4 19.4 17.0 24.0 4.4 7.2 13.4 13.9 18.3 4.1 6.0 Crude materials for further processing . . . . Crude energy materials2 .................... Crude foodstuffs and feedstuffs ............. Crude nonfood materials ........................ Crude nonfood materials less energy . . . 20.0 50.7 16.4 25.1 -7.1 14.9 32.5 -1.1 -7.5 30.8 20.3 -16.7 -10.5 21.9 -3 .9 7.4 -38.0 67.7 22.9 96.4 39.1 78.9 Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U)' Producer Price Index (PPI) by stage of processing ' 5 .7 27.8 20.1 8 .8 5.6 9 .9 1See “ Definitions” and “ Notes” preceding tables 22-30 Current Labor Statistics in this Review. 2 Not seasonally adjusted. Note: Monthly data for Producer Price Indexes have been revised through May 1980 to reflect the availability of late reports and corrections by respondents. For this reason, some of the figures shown above and elsewhere in this report differ from those previously published. 46 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis grains. There was a record harvest of winter wheat, which was not affected by the drought; spring wheat was adversely affected, but it normally accounts for less than 25 percent of total domestic wheat production. Prices for oilseeds and hay also advanced from June to September. Soybean prices skyrocketed as adverse weather reduced prospects for the domestic crop; expec tations of smaller crops in South America also helped to drive soybean prices higher. Prices for manufactured feeds rose in response to increased costs for ingredients, particularly grains and oilseeds. Prices for cereal and bakery products rose, largely be cause of higher costs of grains and energy. Fats and oils were higher, a result of higher costs for ingredients. Prices for soybean oil, a key ingredient in many canned foods, rose sharply because of increased costs for soy beans and rising energy costs associated with the crush ing process. Prices for fresh fruits and vegetables moved up sharply in both retail and farm markets. Among fresh vegetables, the largest increases occurred for both white and sweet potatoes because of reduced acreage and the effects of hot, dry weather. The rapid price increases for fresh fruits followed moderate increases earlier in the year. Citrus fruits accounted for most of the surge. Prices for sugar and sweets moved up at both the re tail and processor levels, reflecting earlier cost increases for raw sugar, fructose, and energy. Raw sugar rose sharply in August, as crop disease and adverse weather in many growing areas reduced production throughout the world. Prices were higher for packaged cane sugar, beet sugar, and corn syrup. On the other hand, prices for chocolate products declined in response to falling prices of cocoa beans, a result of excellent supplies. Roasted coffee prices fell for the third consecutive quarter at both the retail and processor levels, reflecting lower prices for green coffee. Green coffee prices dropped as a result of unseasonably mild weather in Brazil, the world’s leading producer, which often experi ences damaging frost conditions during the third quar ter. Downward pressure was also exerted by a continuing decline in coffee consumption in the United States. Tea prices moved up because of drought condi tions in some producing countries. Services, excluding energy Prices of consumer services other than energy de clined at an annual rate of 1.8 percent in the third quarter, in contrast to increases at rates of 21.0 and 20.0 percent in the first and second quarters of 1980. (See table 3.) The sharp decline in contracted mortgage interest costs (a component of the household services index) was primarily responsible for the downturn. Charges for transportation, medical care, and entertain ment services continued to move up. Table 2. Changes in retail and producer prices for consumer foods, 1979-80 Commodity Index Relative importance December 1979 Compound annual rate, seasonally adjusted except as noted, for 3 months ended — 1980 1979 Dec. Sept. Mar. June Sept. Consumer foods1 .................................................................. CPI PPI 100.0 100.0 6.5 15.3 12.1 8.6 3.8 -1.2 5.6 -7 .8 18.9 36.9 Beef and veal2 ................................................................................ CPI PPI 10.3 14.6 -17.7 32.0 13.2 7.9 10.9 -4.3 -7 .6 -22.9 22.4 44.8 Pork ............................................................................................... CPI PPI 4.7 6.7 -23.5 1.4 14.8 4.4 -12.4 -21.1 -23.3 -35.7 75.0 203.2 Poultry............................................................................................. CPI PPI 2.2 3.3 -21.6 -5 .0 27.5 100.6 -3.9 -49.0 -15.2 -25.5 82.7 295.9 Cereal and bakery products .......................................................... CPI PPI 8.6 12.7 15.1 22.8 11.1 3.3 12.6 16.8 12.8 10.1 7.4 5.5 Dairy products ................................................................................ CPI PPI 9.3 15.1 12.2 15.2 7.4 - .2 8.4 9.1 14.5 18.2 6.5 2.8 Fresh fruits and vegetables............................................................ CPI PPI 5.0 3.8 31.8 -7.3 - .2 15.0 -28.2 -21.2 38.1 34.5 76.2 118.3 Processed fruits and vegetables ................................................... CPI PPI 4.6 6.7 10.1 5.1 -1 .7 -8 .6 9.0 7.5 11.7 7.5 8.7 6.6 E g g s ............................................................................................... CPI PPI 1.3 2.1 -35.7 -38.8 12.8 -10.3 -21.8 -.5 22.7 -18.6 14.3 49.0 Sugar and sweets3 ......................................................................... CPI PPI 2.4 4.2 6.8 12.1 3.7 35.6 47.2 61.2 41.6 128.5 24.3 22.2 Coffee, roasted .............................................................................. CPI PPI 1.0 4.4 126.2 96.9 14.6 21.0 -2.8 -17.8 -4.7 -7.1 -5.7 -16.1 Fats and oil products4 .................................................................. CPI PPI 2.0 1.9 9.0 14.3 4.2 9.8 13.2 1.0 -1.5 -7 .6 5.6 11.3 1Includes items not listed. The CPI includes prices of food away from home, which account for about 31 percent of the food index. The PPI for finished consumer foods does not reflect restaurant prices. The index for household services other than rent and energy decreased at a 13.2-percent rate, after rising at rates of 29.2 percent in the second quarter and 29.9 per cent in the first. This reversal was caused by a steep drop (a 30.3-percent rate) in mortgage interest financing costs, as a 37.7-percent rate of decline in mortgage in terest rates was only partially offset by a 14.9-percent rate of increase in house prices.1The index for property insurance rose at an 8.2-percent rate, a slower pace than that registered in either of the two preceding quarters. The index for property taxes rose at a 7.7-percent rate, following a second-quarter decline, and a first-quarter advance at a 4.8-percent rate. Price increases for the home maintenance and repairs index were the smallest since the third quarter of 1977. This index advanced at a 6.1-percent rate in the third quarter of 1980, after ad vancing at a rate of 6.7 percent in the second quarter, and 20.0 percent in the first. The housekeeping services index rose at a rate of 6.4 percent after rising at a rate of nearly 9 percent in both the first and second quar ters. The index for transportation services moved up at a rate of 13.3 percent, a somewhat slower rate than in ei ther of the two previous quarters. The slowdown was https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 2 Not seasonally adjusted in the CPL 3 "Sugar and confectionery in the PPI. Not seasonally adjusted in the PPL 4 “ Vegetable oil end products" In the PPI. due to a 12.6-percent rate of decrease in automobile finance charges, which had climbed at a 46.0-percent rate during the first half of 1980. On the other hand, charges for public transportation rose much faster (at a Table 3. Changes in consumer services less energy prices, 1979-80 Item Services less energy Rent, residential1 ............................... Household, less rent and energy . . . . Flome financing, taxes, and insurance . Mortgage interest ra te s ...................... Home maintenance and repairs ......... Housekeeping services ’ .................... Transportation services...................... Auto maintenance and repairs ........... Other private transportation services . Public transportation1 ........................ Medical care services1 ...................... Entertainment services ' .................... Personal care services > .................... Apparel services1 ............................... Personal and educational services . . . Relative impor tance Decernber 1979 100.0 14.0 48.7 23.1 7.4 5.4 15.1 3.9 8.3 2.8 10.7 4.1 2.4 1.8 3.2 Compound annual rate, seasonally adjusted except as noted, for 3 months ended — 1980 1979 Sept. Dec. Mar. June Sept. 14.2 10.2 17.5 25.3 12.2 9.7 9.0 12.7 9.6 10.5 25.2 11.2 5.0 9.0 11.0 17.7 17.1 9.0 25.5 38.1 24.2 11.8 7.6 12.7 9.5 6.2 39.5 12.6 1.9 7.2 12.7 5.2 21.0 8.3 29.9 43.9 42.8 20.0 8.8 16.3 11.0 18.7 17.3 16.9 12.9 11.3 18.3 9.8 20.0 10.0 29.2 44.5 39.2 6.7 8.6 18.5 11.9 21.3 18.6 6.4 9.2 7.4 14.3 7.9 -1.8 8.6 -13.2 -23.4 -37.7 6.1 6.4 13.3 10.6 2.4 56.7 9.3 9.7 6.5 6.5 26.9 1Not seasonally adjusted. 47 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • Anatomy o f Price Change 56.7-percent rate) than earlier in the year, reflecting large increases in fares for airlines, intracity mass tran sit, intercity buses, and taxis. Charges for medical care services were up at a 9.3-percent rate, more than in the second quarter, but substantially less than in the first. The professional ser vices category (physicians’ and dental services) rose at a rate of 9.0 percent, the slowest quarterly advance over the past 12 months. However, the hospital services in dex climbed at an 18.5-percent rate, far more than in the previous 3 months. Among other services, the CPI for apparel services in creased at a 6.5-percent rate, the smallest increase since the third quarter of 1976. This moderation reflect ed a slowdown in charges for laundry and drycleaning services. The pronounced third-quarter acceleration in the index for personal and educational services was pri marily due to increases in college tuition. These charges, which generally increase once a year, were 10.2 percent higher in September 1980 than they were a year earlier. Energy Prices for most energy goods and services continued a moderating trend which had begun in the second quarter. Consumer prices for energy items moved up at a rate of 2.9 percent, while producer prices for finished energy goods declined at a 3.4-percent rate. (See table Table 4. 4.) In contrast, retail energy prices had climbed 47.2 percent between March 1979 and March 1980. The im proved energy price situation reflected a large surplus of crude petroleum on world markets. Consumption of oil by the industrialized nations declined because of a gen eral drop in business activity, as well as reductions in consumer demand induced by the earlier sharp price hikes. One major reason for the surplus was that Saudi Arabia decided to continue exporting greater-than-normal amounts of crude oil. This decision made it more difficult for other Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries ( o p e c ) members to raise prices on their own. As a result, there were no major price increases by OPEC between July and September. However, prices con tinued to vary widely among OPEC members, even after the latest meeting of OPEC oil ministers in September.2 The reduced demand for petroleum products in this country was reflected in the unusually low rate of re finery capacity utilization (about 74 percent in the third quarter, compared with about 90 percent at the same time in 1978). At the same time, primary stocks of both crude and refined petroleum were substantially above seasonal norms. As a consequence of sluggish demand, retail gasoline prices moved down for the second consecutive quarter, and prices received by refiners turned down after decel erating substantially in the previous quarter. Prices for Changes in retail and producer prices for energy-related items, 1979-80 Item Index Relative Importance December 1979 Compound annual rate, seasonally adjusted except as noted, for 3 months ended — 1979 1980 Sept. Dec. Mar. June Sept. Finished items Energy items, (gas, electricity, fuel oil, coal, gasoline, motor oil) Finished energy g o o d s........................... Gasoline, motor oil, coolants, etc........................... Gasoline' .......................................... Household fuels2 ....................................... Fuel oil1' 2 ................................................... Gas (piped)2 ........................................ Electricity .......................................... ............... CPI PPI CPI CPI PPI 100.0 100.0 55.3 54.5 64.1 49.9 106.2 62.2 63.1 89.4 19.2 45.7 28.3 29.1 58.7 64.8 109.4 105.2 105.7 138.1 81 170 -5.7 -6 .2 14.0 29 34 54 -5 .3 -8 .2 CPI CPI PPI CPI CPI 44.7 10.3 24.0 13.4 19.5 31.7 99.7 141.5 22.5 9.7 7.0 22.2 22.0 20.4 2.3 31.5 68.4 78.1 14.3 20.3 28.9 3.7 18.0 29.3 39.4 10.1 1.5 28 15.6 8.1 PPI PPI PPI PPI PPI PPI 100.0 10.3 8.4 14.6 7.1 35.7 71.1 157.0 157.5 111.2 204.4 14.8 37.1 26.1 60.6 23.2 95.7 24.7 62.0 88.2 98.6 75.0 63.2 19.8 6.5 10 1 24.2 -41.0 9.4 16.0 15.6 79 13.2 68 3 94 22.6 PPI PPI PPI PPI 100.0 43.9 38.1 17.8 50.7 45.5 96.7 2.1 32.5 27.4 54.8 6.8 30.8 25.9 52.1 7.3 20.3 25.6 21.6 -2.7 22.9 36.5 16.9 6.3 Intermediate materials Intermediate energy g o o d s .................... Diesel fuel1 ...................................... Commençai jet fuel '■2 ........................................ Residual fuel1 .............................................. Liquefied petroleum gas2 ............................................ Electric power3 ...................................... Crude materials Crude energy materials2 ............................... Natural gas1 2 ..................................................... Crude petroleum2 ............................................... Coal .............................................................. ' Prices for these items are lagged 1 month in the PPI. 2 Not seasonally adjusted. 48 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 3 Includes commercial and industrial power, but not residential. home heating oil edged upward at both the consumer and the producer level. Within the PPI for intermediate energy goods, price increases continued to slow for die sel fuel and jet fuel. Prices for commercial and industrial electric power advanced more sharply than during the first 6 months of the year. One of the principal reasons for this accel eration was the heavy demand associated with increased use of air conditioning units in much of the country during the unusually hot summer. However, residential electricity rates did not rise nearly as rapidly as in the previous quarter. Similarly, consumer prices for piped gas increased less than in the prior 3-month period. The PPI for crude energy materials advanced at a 22.9-percent annual rate, slightly more than in the pre vious quarter, but not as fast as the 37.1-percent rise in the 12 months ended in March. Prices of natural gas at the wellhead increased at a 36.5-percent annual rate, following three quarters of advances at annual rates of about 25 percent. This acceleration reflected the ex Table 5. panded output of new gas fields which are not under price controls, as well as higher prices for gas imported from Canada. The index for crude petroleum (which only includes domestic production) moved up somewhat less than in the previous quarter, as higher prices for up per and lower tier crude oil were partly offset by small declines in prices of uncontrolled oil in weak markets. Finished goods, excluding food and energy Consumer goods. In the CPI, prices for commodities ex cept food and energy moved up at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 12 percent, following advances at rates of 9.7 and 7.3 percent in the first and second quarters. (See table 5.) Price increases also accelerated somewhat at the producer level, as the PPI for consumer goods other than foods and energy rose at an 8.8-percent rate, after increasing at a 7.7-percent rate in the previous 3 months, and climbing at an 18.1-percent rate in the first quarter. Domestic passenger car manufacturers raised their Changes in retail and producer prices for consumer goods other than foods and energy, 1979-80 Commodity Index Relative importance December 1979 Compound annual rate, seasonally adjusted except as noted, for 3 months ended — 1980 1979 Sept. Dec. Mar. June Sept. Commodities less food and energy1 ............................................................ CPI PPI 100.0 100.0 8.3 9.1 10.4 11.5 9.7 18.1 7.3 7.7 12.9 8.8 Apparel, excluding footwear2 ................................................................................ CPI PPI 10.9 13.8 7.3 4.8 3.0 2.5 16.3 13.1 -2.4 9.4 10.2 7.9 Footwear ............................................................................................................... CPI PPI 1.9 3.0 7.7 12.1 9.2 4.3 7.4 3.7 3.5 0 9.2 7.6 Textile housefurnishings2 ....................................................................................... CPI PPI 1.5 2.1 .5 8.7 7.8 8.1 18.3 5.6 7.3 5.9 9.9 30.1 Soap and detergent2' 3 ........................................................................................... CPI PPI .9 1.7 9.7 22.4 11.8 8.4 21.2 16.3 4.9 -1.1 15.8 20.2 Cleansing and toilet tissue, paper towels and napkins2' 3' 4 ................................. CPI PPI .7 2.7 -1 .0 21.7 14.9 8.6 11.8 31.1 19.0 12.4 14.3 15.3 Tires5 ...................................................................................................................... CPI PPI 1.3 1.9 7.8 24.6 18.3 17.3 16.9 21.8 10.8 8.9 11.5 -.3 Furniture2 ............................................................................................................... CPI PPI 3.5 4.3 4.4 8.0 9.3 11.7 17.0 10.5 6.0 6.0 7.0 10.3 Appliances, including radio and TV3 ..................................................................... CPI PPI 4.4 6.3 1.8 2.5 3.9 5.0 3.8 7.6 4.1 10.0 5.2 -2 .3 New cars ............................................................................................................... CPI PPI 9.6 15.4 7.1 1.8 0 7.5 12.3 9.0 10.5 10.9 15.3 -.2 Sporting goods and equipment3 ........................................................................... CPI PPI 1.8 1.3 7.5 19.7 3.3 4.5 19.1 14.9 4.9 11.2 8.7 21.1 Tobacco products2 3 ............................................................................................. CPI PPI 3.1 3.9 10.0 14.7 2.5 8.7 13.8 20.3 10.5 13.8 2.2 4.1 Gold jewelry3' 6 ...................................................................................................... CPI PPI 1.2 2.9 16.4 62.2 28.6 147.8 60.7 146.1 10.8 13.6 13.6 42.1 Home purchase3-7 ................................................................................................ Used cars7 ............................................................................................................. CPI CPI 30.1 7.5 17.1 -4.9 18.8 10.5 7.0 -2 .5 14.9 -16.8 14.9 40.1 ' Commodities less food and energy account for 34.5 percent of the CPI-U and 51.7 percent of the PPI for finished consumer goods. 2 Not seasonally adjusted in the PPI. 3 Not seasonally adjusted in the CPI. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis “ “ Sanitary papers and health products in the PPI. 5 "Tires and tubes in the PPI. 6 “ Jewelry and luggage in the CPI. 7Not Included In the PPI. 49 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • Anatomy o f Price Change prices at the beginning of the quarter to pass through earlier increases in the costs of metals and other inputs. Prices of imported cars also continued to rise as a result of generally good demand and changes in foreign ex change rates. Used car prices increased at a rate of about 40 percent from June to September, reversing a declining trend that was dominant for much of the first half of the year. In the PPI, substantial advances for passenger cars in July and August were balanced by a steep drop in Sep tember. The September decrease reflected “liquidation allowances” granted by domestic producers to their dealers for each 1980 car left on their lots when 1981 cars first went on sale.3 If this had not occurred, pro ducer prices for passenger cars would have risen at a rate of 19.6 percent in the third quarter, and the PPI for consumer goods other than foods and energy would have advanced at an 11.8-percent rate. The new car CPI rose at a rate of 15.3 percent from June to September. Home purchase prices rose at an annual rate of 14.9 percent in the third quarter, the same as in the previous 3 months. This index has risen at a double-digit rate in every calendar quarter but two since the end of 1977, partly reflecting intensive demand for homes as a hedge against inflation. Shifts in demographic factors have also served to bolster demand for homes. Jewelry prices resumed their strong upward climb during the third quarter, after slowing abruptly in the spring. This reacceleration reflected an upturn in gold and silver prices, which had soared early in the year and then had fallen sharply as part of a widespread commodity price decline. Capital equipment. The Producer Price Index for capital equipment moved up at an 8.8-percent annual rate from June to September on a seasonally adjusted basis, less than in any calendar quarter over the past year. Howev er, the slowdown was due to the introduction of liqui dation allowances for cars and trucks into the September index. Without this factor, the capital equip ment index would have advanced at a rate of 13.2 per cent, more than in the second quarter and about as fast as in the first 3 months of the year. Motor truck prices climbed rapidly in both July and August; price increases were concentrated in the heavier trucks, which continued to sell well in spite of the gen eral economic sluggishness. Demand for light trucks and vans remained weak, in part because relatively poor gas mileage for many domestic models discouraged pro spective buyers. The actual third quarter rate of in crease in truck prices was 10.9 percent; but if it were not for the liquidation allowances incorporated into the September index, truck prices would have jumped at a rate of 28.5 percent. Among other kinds of capital equipment, price in 50 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis creases accelerated for railroad equipment, fixed-wing utility aircraft, and transformers and power regulators. On the other hand, prices rose less than in the second quarter for machine tools, mining machinery, and oil field machinery. For the second consecutive quarter, prices for both office machinery and commercial furni ture moved up at a rate of less than 5 percent. Intermediate goods, excluding foods and energy The PPI for intermediate materials less foods and en ergy moved up at a 6.0-percent seasonally adjusted an nual rate in the third quarter, slightly more than in the second quarter, but substantially less than in any calen dar quarter during the 2 years prior to that. However, if the impact of volatile price fluctuations in precious met als (particularly for silver) were removed, the rate of in crease for this index would have been slightly less than in the second quarter. This continued moderate trend re flected weak industrial demand. The nondurable manufacturing materials index slowed considerably, rising at a 4.5-percent annual rate following much more rapid advances in each calendar quarter since late 1978. The slump in business activity, combined with stabilized prices for crude petroleum on world markets, led to lower prices for organic industrial chemicals and plastic resins and materials. Similarly, prices for synthetic rubber were virtually unchanged as low production levels of m otor vehicles reduced de mand for tires. Paperboard prices turned down in re sponse to the reduced output of paperboard boxes, and the rate of increase slowed markedly for paper and woodpulp. On the other hand, leather prices turned upward sub stantially after declining during the first half of the year, reflecting a similar pattern in cattle hide prices. The in dex for inedible fats and oils also turned upward sharp ly, as a result of the reduced weight of slaughtered livestock. The inorganic chemicals index rose rapidly for the third consecutive quarter, largely because of sharply higher prices for caustic soda. Production of caustic soda was reduced as a result of a cutback in output of its coproduct, chlorine; this occurred because of weak demand for plastics, which often contain chlorine com pounds. Among textile materials, prices for synthetic fibers advanced at a double-digit rate for the third con secutive quarter, as producers reduced output to match a decline in demand. Gray fabric prices turned up sharply after moving down from March to June; the third-quarter increases were attributed to higher costs for cotton and synthetics. The index for durable manufacturing materials rose at a 3.8-percent annual rate, reversing the decline of the previous quarter. Much of this upturn was caused by nonferrous metals; prices for silver, copper, lead, and tin rebounded after falling from March to June, and gold prices climbed more than in the second quarter. A strike by copper workers in this country caused a re duction in supplies, and heavy purchases by the Soviet Union raised lead prices. Prices for jewelers’ materials continued to rise rapidly, reflecting the upsurge in prices for gold and silver. In contrast, the finished steel mill products index declined at a 9.2-percent annual rate as steel firms introduced discounts in July for steel sheets, strips, and bars in reaction to poor demand for these items, which are used in making automobiles and appliances. Overall domestic shipments of finished steel products were about one-third less during the summer than they were a year before. Weak demand also result ed in a drop in hardwood lumber prices for the third consecutive quarter. The construction materials index moved up at a 5.7-percent annual rate, somewhat more than in the previous quarter, but less than in any calendar quarter during the preceding 3 years. As a result of the sharp decline in mortgage interest rates between April and July, the rate of new private residential construction be gan to recover in June after a steep drop that had be gun in late 1979. However, interest rates turned upward in late summer, curtailing the availability of mortgage credit and driving many potential homebuyers out of the market. Closely mirroring the fluctuations in the level of housing sales, softwood lumber and plywood prices advanced early in the quarter, but turned down ward in September. Millwork prices rose steadily fol lowing a second quarter decline, reflecting higher labor costs. Prices for most other construction materials exhibited weakness, reflecting the earlier sharp drop in housing starts and the easing of cost pressures on ener gy-intensive materials. The indexes for gypsum products and refractories registered declines, and prices rose con siderably less than in the first half for concrete prod ucts, plumbing fixtures, and fabricated structural metal products. Among other intermediate goods, the index for elec tronic components continued upward, rising at a 13.5percent annual rate. About one-third of this increase was caused by higher prices for capacitors, a conse quence of higher costs of the metal tantalum. Prices also rose substantially for motor vehicle parts, nonfarm tractor parts, and machine tool parts. In contrast, wooden pallet prices continued to decline, reflecting a low volume of manufacturing shipments. Crude nonfood materials, excluding energy The index for crude nonfood materials less energy moved up sharply at a 78.9-percent annual rate, follow ing a decrease at a rate of 38.0 percent in the second quarter. The dramatic upturn was broad-based, as prices for scrap metals, raw cotton, hides and skins, and natural rubber all climbed rapidly after falling earlier in the year. Iron and steel scrap prices, which had declined at a rate of 46.8 percent during the first half of the year, soared in the third quarter. Strong export demand and tight supplies, a result of abnormally low prices which forced some dealers out of the market, were the major factors in this abrupt price resurgence. Increased de mand from secondary smelters and higher prices for primary copper lifted prices for copper base scrap, which had declined in both previous quarters. Improved demand from Japan raised prices for aluminum base scrap, following a severe slump in the second quarter. After falling in the previous quarter, prices of raw cotton climbed rapidly, as hot, dry weather led to ex pectations of a much smaller domestic cotton crop than in most recent years. The U.S. Department of Agricul ture estimated that the 1980 cotton crop would be 20 percent smaller than last season. Export demand for cotton also improved. Hides and skins prices climbed at a rate of almost 80 percent, in contrast to a 58.5-percent rate of decrease during the first half; heavier de mand from the Far East and from domestic tanners, combined with poor supplies, pushed prices higher. Crude natural rubber prices advanced following a sec ond-quarter drop because of the impact of the border disputes between Thailand and Cambodia. Much of the natural rubber imported into this country normally comes from Thailand. On the other hand, wastepaper prices fell for the second consecutive quarter because of continued poor demand from domestic paperboard mills and the building materials industry. □ FOOTNOTES 1Mortgage interest rates in the cpi are represented by conventional, rates. Although fha and va ceiling rates were raised from 11.5 to 12 percent late in the third quarter, conventional rates de clined sharply in all 3 months. Conventional rates are represented in the cpi by actual mortgage loan transactions and not by current com mitment rates. 2As a result of the September 1980 opec conference, Saudi Arabia lifted its basic price from $28 per barrel to $30 for the fourth quarter; this was still the lowest official contract price within opec . The highest fha , and va https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis officially allowed price within opec remained at $37 per barrel. The war between Iraq and Iran, which broke out in September, did not have any significant impact on crude oil prices in the third quarter. ’ This marked the first time that the Bureau of Labor Statistics succeeded in reflecting these annual liquidation allowances in the ppi, as part of a stepped-up commitment to obtain realistic transaction prices whenever possible. The cpi has, in effect, always reflected the impact of such discounts each September. 51 Productivity Reports Sixth consecutive productivity drop recorded during the second quarter L aw r en c e J. F ulco Exceptionally large declines in output and proportion ately smaller decreases in hours during the second quar ter of 1980 were reflected in falling productivity in all sectors of the economy for which the Bureau of Labor Statistics prepares quarterly productivity measures. Pro ductivity in the private business sector declined 2.7 per cent— the sixth consecutive quarterly drop in output per hour of all persons. This is the second longest period of continuously fall ing productivity for the sector. By the second quarter of 1980, productivity had decreased about 2.5 percent cu mulatively over six quarters. A steeper and longer de cline, lasting seven quarters, occurred during the 197374 downturn. As of the third quarter of 1974, private business productivity had fallen 4.3 percent, also after six quarterly drops. Output declined at a 12.0-percent annual rate in sec ond quarter 1980, the first such drop in the private business sector in a year. However, it was the largest quarterly decrease in three decades. In the nonfarm business sector, productivity fell at a 3.7-percent annual rate. This decline was larger than the drop in the private business sector, owing to productivi ty gains in the farm sector during the second quarter. Nonfinancial corporations marked six quarters of continuously falling productivity with a 1.9-percent drop in the second quarter. These corporations, which account for about two-thirds of private business hours, also showed a 0.1-percent decline in the first quarter. Output per hour declined 4.7 percent among manu facturing industries, but the drop in nondurables was much greater than that in durables. This was the third consecutive quarter of productivity decrease in manufac turing. Chart 1 traces the growth of productivity, hourly compensation, and unit labor costs in major sectors of the economy since 1967. The following tabulation shows the second-quarter annualized rates of change in proLawrence J. Fulco is an economist in the Office of Productivity and Technology, Bureau of Labor Statistics. 52 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis ductivity, output, and hours paid for by major sector; more complete information may be found in tables 3 1 34 of the Current Labor Statistics section of this issue: Sector Private business . . Nonfarm business . Nonfinancial corporations . . . . Manufacturing . . . Durable............ Nondurable . . . Productivity . . -2 .7 . . -3 .7 Output -12.0 -12.3 Hours -9 .6 -8 .9 .. .. .. .. -11.5 -21.8 -25.5 -16.4 -9 .8 -18.0 -23.0 -9 .6 -1 .9 -4 .7 -3 .2 -7 .5 Compensation, labor costs, and profits Hourly compensation in the private business sector grew faster in the second quarter than at any time since the third quarter of 1974. The 12.0-percent annual rate of increase in compensation payments, combined with the decline in productivity, resulted in a 15.1-percent rise in unit labor costs (compensation per unit of out put). These costs grew faster in the second quarter of 1980 than at any other time since the third quarter of 1974. In the nonfarm business sector, hourly compensation rose at a 10.8-percent annual rate in the second quarter, contributing to a 15.0-percent increase in unit labor costs. Hourly compensation in nonfinancial corporations grew at an annual rate of 11.1 percent in the second quar ter, and unit labor costs rose 13.2 percent. Unit prof its in the nonfinancial sector declined 34.7 percent (annualized) in the second quarter— the sixth in a series of quarterly decreases which have cumulatively reduced unit profits by about 22 percent. Among manufacturing industries! hourly compensa tion gains were somewhat larger in durables. However, unit labor costs grew faster among nondurable goods producers, partly reflecting the steeper decline in their productivity. Although hourly compensation increased rapidly in the second quarter, the faster rise of the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-u) caused a reduction in real compensation in the private business and nonfarm business sectors. The 13.7-percent annu alized advance in the CPI-U is the third highest quarterly price increase in the series.1 When compensation pay ments were adjusted for changes in the CPI-U, real hour ly compensation in the private business sector declined at a 1.5-percent annual rate during the second quarter. Real hourly compensation has not risen in the private business sector since the first quarter of 1978. After more than two years of decline, the measure has fallen to its third-quarter 1975 level. Chart 2 shows that while hourly compensation has increased rather smoothly since 1967, trends in real compensation tend to reflect variations in the rate of growth of the CPI-U. Employment and hours Employment in the private business sector fell 5.5 percent in the second quarter— down 1.1 million jobs https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis to 79.5 million— ending a pattern of growth which had been unbroken since m id-1975. This was the only quar terly employment decline since 1975. Average weekly hours dropped from 37.0 in the first quarter to 36.6 in the second, the greatest quarterly reduction since 1957. Nonfarm business employment declined 5.2 percent. Employment in manufacturing, 20.7 million in the second quarter, was down 13.2 percent from the previ ous period. Average weekly hours in the sector declined 5.6 percent to 39.6. Employment fell at an annual rate of 17.6 percent in durables and 5.9 percent in nondu rables. 53 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • Productivity Reports Table 1. Trends in hours in the private business sector, second quarter 1980 Worker category Total private business ............. Manufacturing ............... Durable ............................... Nondurable.................... Transportation, communication, and public utilities.................. Transportation ............... Communications........................ Public utilities ............. Finance, insurance, and real estate . . Services .......................... Mining ...................... Construction............................... Wholesale tra d e ............. Retail trade ...................... Farm employees ............... Farm unpaid family workers ......... Farm proprietors............................. Nonfarm proprietors ............. Nonfarm unpaid family w o rke rs........... Government enterprises .................... Sum of interaction terms ’ ........... Percent change in hours - 9 .5 3 Category share of hours Contribution to trend 1 .0 0 - 9 .5 3 - 17.31 0 .2 8 3 - 4 .8 9 - 2 1 .8 9 0 .1 7 4 - 3.81 - 9 .5 4 0 .1 0 9 - 1 .04 5 .1 8 0 .0 6 9 - 0 .3 6 - 9 .8 2 0 .0 4 0 - 0 .3 9 - 1.5 7 0 .0 1 8 - 0 .0 3 6 .1 0 0.011 0 .0 7 2 .7 6 0.061 0 .1 7 0 .7 3 0 .1 2 3 0 .0 9 - 11.51 0 .0 1 5 0 .0 5 7 - 0 .6 5 - 4.21 0 .0 6 9 0 .2 9 - 5 .9 7 0 .1 5 5 - 0 .9 3 - 3 0 .5 5 0 .0 1 5 - 0 .4 5 0 .2 9 - 4 5 .0 9 0 .0 0 4 0 .0 0 - 0 .1 9 - 1 5 .2 7 0 .0 2 4 - 0 .3 7 - 1 4 .5 3 0 .0 9 9 - 1 .44 2 6 .9 4 0 .0 0 5 - 3 .5 0 0 .021 0 .1 3 - 0 .0 7 54 --------- FOOTNOTE---------- - 0 .3 4 1Ameasure of howmuch of the overall trend results fromthe joint effect of the individual worker category movements. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Hours reductions in the private business sector were recorded for the great majority of worker categories in cluded in the totals. Table 1 shows the distribution of changes in second-quarter hours, and the relative im portance of the individual categories. The steepest drop in hours occurred among farm unpaid family workers, but because such workers account for only about 0.4 percent of all hours, the impact was quite small. Manufacturing, on the other hand, represents about 28.3 percent of total hours, and its 17.31-percent decline in hours over the quarter accounted for 4.89 percentage points of the overall 9.53-percent decrease for private business. Other important components of the reduction were changes in hours among nonfarm proprietors, and employees in retail trade, construction, and on farms. □ ' During the first quarter of 1951, prices rose at a 17.2-percent an nual rate (seasonally adjusted), and a 16.9-percent advance occurred in first quarter 1980. Family Budgets Autumn 1979 retired couple budget dominated by rise in transportation Table 2. Percentage changes in budgets for a retired urban couple, at 3 levels of living, autumn 1978 to autumn 1979 Component Reflecting large increases in transportation, the three hypothetical budgets for an urban retired couple in au tumn 1979 totaled $6,023 at the lower level, $8,562 at the intermediate level, and $12,669 at the higher level. (See table 1.) From autumn 1978 to autumn 1979, tintermediate, 9.1 percent, and the higher, 9.3 percent. (See table 2.) Total consumption costs rose by the same amount as the total budget: 9.2, 9.1, and 9.3 percent, respectively, for the lower, intermediate, and higher budgets. The largest increase was in transportation, which increased approximately 17 percent for the lower and intermedi ate budgets, and 18 percent for the higher budget. Transportation in the higher budget contains a larger proportion of automobile owners, and therefore, was af fected most by increases in private transportation costs. Large increases in fuels and utilities had the greatest impact on housing costs in the lower budget, because those items constitute a larger budget share of housing at that level. Homeowner costs are based on the as sumption that retired couples own their homes and have no mortgage and interest payments. Shelter costs are based on rented and owned dwellings. The budgets represent the costs that were specified in the mid-1960’s to portray three relative levels of living. They are designed for a precisely defined retired couple Table 1. Summary of annual budgets for a retired urban couple, at 3 levels of living, autumn 1979 Component Lower budget Intermediate budget Higher budget Total budget................................... Total family consumption........... Food ...................................... Housing ................................. Transportation........................ Clothing ................................. Personal c a r e ........................ Medical c a re ........................... Other family consumption . . . . Other items ............................... $6,023 5,763 1,882 1,996 420 225 169 837 234 259 $8,562 8,047 2,507 2,862 820 378 247 842 390 515 $12,669 11,719 3,149 4,481 1,528 581 362 848 770 950 N ote: Because of rounding, sums of individual items may not equal totals. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Total budget................................. Total family consumption ......... Food...................................... Housing ............................... Transportation...................... Clothing ............................... Personal care ...................... Medical c a r e ........................ Other family consumption . . . Other item s............................... Lower budget Intermediate budget Higher budget 9.2 9.2 9.1 9.0 16.7 2.3 8.3 9.4 6.4 9.3 9.1 9.1 9.0 8.4 17.0 2.4 7.9 9.5 6.6 9.1 9.3 9.3 9.2 8.3 17.6 2.3 8.1 9.6 6.6 8.6 — a husband age 65 or over, and his wife. The couple is assumed to be self-supporting, residing in an urban area, in good health, and able to care for themselves. The budget levels provide different qualities and quanti ties of goods and services. The lower budget was not designed as a subsistence or poverty level, but simply as a level somewhat lower than the intermediate budget. Beginning with the autumn 1973 updating of the bud gets, the total budget is defined as the sum of “total family consumption” and “other items.” Income taxes are not included. The autumn 1979 cost estimates for medical care contain a preliminary estimate for “out-ofpocket” costs for Medicare. The budget costs are updated annually and reflect au tumn price levels. Users should note that the proce dures used in updating the budgets in 1979 differ from those used in 1978. Because of the revision of the Consumer Price Index program in January 1978, indi vidual area price indexes from autumn 1978 to autumn 1979 were available for only 25 of the 44 family budget areas. The urban U.S. average includes estimates for those areas, however, using price data for the appropri ate region and population size classes that are available from the CPI. Nonmetropolitan areas have always been shown as a separate class, and their costs have been similarly updated. (See table 3.) Complete data for 24 metropolitan areas; four non metropolitan areas; Anchorage, Alaska; total metropoli tan average; and the U.S. urban average can be ob tained from the Bureau of Labor Statistics or any of its regional offices. 55 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • Family Budgets Table 3. Indexes of comparative costs based on an intermediate budget for a retired couple,1autumn 1979 [U.S. urban average cost=100] Family consumption Area Total budget2 Food Total con sumption Housing Total Food at home Total3 Renter costs4 Homeowner costs5 Transpor tation6 Clothing Personal care Medical care Other family consump tion7 Urban United States .......................... Metropolitan areas8 ........................ Nonmetropolitan areas9 .................. 100 103 90 100 103 90 100 101 96 100 101 97 100 107 80 100 107 78 100 106 83 100 101 97 100 102 94 100 98 108 100 101 98 100 107 78 Northeast: Boston, Mass..................................... Buffalo, N.Y....................................... New York-Northeastern N.J.............. Philadelphia, Pa.-N.J.......................... Pittsburgh, Pa.................................... Nonmetropolitan areas9 .................. 118 108 115 104 102 100 118 108 115 104 102 100 107 104 111 112 105 103 108 105 109 109 105 104 142 112 138 107 99 100 130 104 122 103 90 102 173 119 167 115 102 121 102 119 71 87 111 108 112 123 93 73 98 102 91 90 102 85 90 104 97 94 100 99 98 98 117 104 111 109 104 77 North Central: Chicago, lll.-Northwestern Ind............ Cincinnati, Ohio-Ky.-Ind..................... Cleveland, O h io ............................... Detroit, Mich....................................... Kansas City, Mo.-Kans...................... Milwaukee, Wis.................................. Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minn................ St. Louis, Mo.-lll................................. Nonmetropolitan areas9 ................. 99 98 104 102 98 103 102 100 92 99 98 104 102 98 103 102 100 92 101 102 100 98 97 97 101 105 96 102 103 99 99 97 96 101 106 98 97 91 106 103 90 106 102 94 84 106 82 106 107 81 106 112 83 88 87 92 108 103 86 108 93 87 89 92 102 108 108 110 110 107 114 94 97 116 107 99 108 117 104 98 107 90 85 119 96 113 99 102 85 115 101 100 96 100 103 99 95 97 97 113 107 113 108 108 108 115 105 79 South: Atlanta, Ga......................................... Baltimore, Md.................................... Dallas, Tex......................................... Houston, Tex..................................... Washington, D.C.-Md.-Va.................. Nonmetropolitan areas9 .................. 92 99 95 98 108 86 92 99 95 98 108 86 97 96 93 98 103 94 95 95 91 95 104 95 78 98 89 92 113 73 76 102 96 82 114 61 59 77 78 88 109 71 106 108 110 105 111 95 108 97 92 104 94 80 96 97 99 104 119 102 99 99 103 107 105 99 106 103 102 98 116 77 West: Denver, Colo...................................... Los Angeles-Long Beach, Calif. . . . San Diego, Calif................................. San Francisco-Oakland, Calif............ Seattle-Everett, Wash........................ Honolulu, Hawaii ............................. Nonmetropolitan areas9 ................. 99 99 97 105 109 116 93 99 99 97 105 109 116 93 97 97 95 101 100 130 96 97 95 91 102 99 132 97 93 92 92 101 117 110 84 84 124 114 128 138 150 98 80 64 74 72 103 77 80 111 120 112 124 113 124 96 130 94 96 106 111 102 111 91 94 93 119 112 110 116 98 109 107 109 103 102 100 104 98 103 105 112 117 80 Anchorage, Alaska............................... 136 136 127 128 152 194 141 127 129 180 123 94 1The family consists of a retired husband and wife, age 65 years or over. 2Total budget costs do not include personal income taxes. 3 Housing includes shelter, housefumishings, and household operations. The higher budget also includes an allowance for lodging away from home city. 4 Renter costs include average contract rent plus the cost of required amounts of heating, fuel, gas, electricity, water, specified equipment, and insurance on household contents. 5 Homeowner costs include property taxes, insurance on house and contents, water, refuse disposal, heating fuel, gas, electricity, specified equipment, and home repair and maintenance. 6 The average costs of automobile owners and nonowners in the lower budget were weighted by the following proportions of families: Boston, Chicago, New York, and Philadelphia, 100 percent for nonowners of automobiles; all other metropolitan areas, 45 percent for owners, 55 percent for nonowners; nonmetropolitan areas, 55 percent for owners, 45 percent for nonowners. The intermediate budget proportions are: New York, 25 percent for owners, 75 percent 56 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis for nonowners; Boston, Chicago, Philadelphia, 40 percent for owners, 60 percent for nonowners; all other metropolitan areas, 60 percent for owners, 40 percent for nonowners; non metropolitan areas, 68 percent for owners, 32 percent for nonowners. The higher budget pro portions are: Boston, Chicago, New York, and Philadelphia, 75 percent for owners, 25 percent for nonowners; all other areas, 100 percent for owners. 7 Includes average costs for reading, recreation, tobacco products, alcoholic beverages, and miscellaneous expenditures. 8 As defined in 1960-61. For a detailed description of current and previous geographical boundaries, see the 1967 edition of Standard M etropolitan Statistical Areas, prepared by the Office of Management and Budget. 9 Places with population of 2,500 to 50,000. Data for some places previously shown are no longer available. f Research Summaries Women’s use of time converging with men’s Frank P. St a f f o r d Does the work history of a married woman primarily reflect her own voluntary choices between market work and other time uses, or is her work history largely the consequence of culturally prescribed differences in the household division of labor reinforced by low wages and tax considerations? The probability of married women working has in creased, but official statistics may be overstating the ex tent they work, particularly in terms of hours per week. This can be seen in table 1, where time diary estimates indicate a 22.7-percent decline between 1965 and 1975 in market hours of married women who worked at least 10 hours per week. The drop in hours per working mar ried woman is sufficient to offset the increased participa tion rates so that, overall, married women have decreased their hours of employment by an estimated 2.2 percent. If work provides on-the-job training, one would still expect the earnings of married men and women to converge in the future because married men have decreased their hours of employment at a faster rate than married women, by 10.8 percent between 1965 and 1975. This includes declines associated with falling participation rates, as well as falling hours per week of those working.1 Unmarried women increased their labor market hours via an increased labor force participation rate and a modest increase in hours. Coupled with the growth in the number of unmarried women (partly the conse quence of increased divorce rates), this means that, overall, women’s hours of market work continue to ap proach those of men. Research has shown that some women are more like ly to stay in the labor market and others to remain at home.2 Even when preschool children are in the house Frank P. Stafford is a professor of economics at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis a mm // 0n ü hold, married women, particularly those with a college education, are likely to work a good deal of the time. This does not appear to threaten the quality of child care or child-related housework: college-educated, work ing mothers tend to have fewer children and to meet their responsibilities by reducing their sleep and passive leisure, such as TV viewing. Working women can expect some help with child care and housework from their husbands, though the time involved is small relative to their own time. Full sharing of these responsibilities is rare. Not only has market participation of men and wom en tended toward equality, but their leisure lifestyles and other nonmarket activities have also become more equal, as can be seen in table 2. Working women have decreased their time to housework, while working men have increased their housework time slightly. Among Table 1. Estimates of weekly hours at work by sex and marital status, 1965-76 Time diary estimates for those working1 1965 Marriedmen............. Unmarriedmen......... All men ................. Marriedwomen......... Unmarriedwomen...... All women .............. Travel to work Normal work Sex and marital status 1975 Percent change 1965 1975 Percent change - 10.0 4 4 .7 4 1 .3 - 7.6 5 .0 4 .5 4 6 .0 3 5 .2 - 23.5 3 .9 4 .4 + 12.8 4 4 .9 3 9 .9 - 11.1 4 .8 4 .2 - 12.5 3 4 .3 2 6 .5 — 22.7 3 .2 2 .3 — 28.1 3 4 .9 3 5 .6 + 2.0 3 .6 3 .7 + 2.8 3 4 .6 3 0 .8 - 11.0 3 .4 2 .9 - 14.7 Current Population Survey estimates Hours worked last week 1965 Marriedmen2........... Marriedwomen2 ................. Men, 2 0 to 6 4 years . . . Women, 2 0 to6 4 years . 1975 Percent change Participation rates 1965 1976 Percent change 3 4 4 .2 3 4 2 .9 - 2.9 3 9 5 .5 4 9 2 .2 3 3 4 .5 3 3 4 .0 - 1.4 3 3 8 .7 4 4 9 .0 - 3.5 26.6 4 3 .9 4 2 .6 - 3.0 3 9 4 .6 5 9 2 .2 - 2.5 3 5 .7 3 5 .0 - 2.0 3 5 1 .7 5 8 .5 13.2 1From the national time-use surveys conducted by the Survey Research Center of the University of Michigan. Hours of normal work were defined to include regular work for pay outside the home or brought home, overtime, waiting, or interruption during worktime (for ex ample, machine breakdown), and coffee breaks. Data are weighted using day of the week as a stratification variable, and are available only for those reporting at least 10 hours per week in the labor market. 2 Married, spouse present. 3 November. “ May. 5 April. M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • Research Summaries Table 2. Time use of men and women by minutes per day at work and at home, 1965 and 19751 Labor market time 2 Sex and marital status Total3 Main job Work at home Second job Travel to work 1965 1975 1965 1975 1965 1975 1965 1975 Average.................. 409 367 350 316 7 3 37 33 Married men .................. Unmarried men ............. Married women ............. Unmarried women ......... 451 454 337 350 428 353 276 353 383 394 294 300 365 309 242 305 9 8 2 5 7 2 0 0 43 33 28 31 40 34 21 32 Housework 1965 Household repairs, upkeep, gardening Child care Shopping, financial Total work time 1975 1965 1975 1965 1975 1965 1975 1965 1975 76 64 8 13 19 19 47 40 559 503 23 37 181 121 25 38 143 89 13 2 4 2 18 10 10 7 17 5 29 19 15 5 31 27 44 36 51 56 37 29 55 41 548 534 602 548 523 435 515 517 Passive leisure Personal care Education Organizations Social events Active leisure TV viewing 1965 1975 1965 1975 1965 1975 1965 1975 1965 1975 Average .................. 647 662 11 20 16 15 39 34 24 Married men .................. Unmarried men ............. Married women ............. Unmarried women ......... 639 636 652 671 642 667 685 684 10 20 4 17 18 34 7 20 16 15 9 23 15 12 16 10 35 76 30 46 29 48 35 36 26 27 23 16 1From the national time-use surveys conducted by the Survey Research Center of the University of Michigan. 2 Labor market participation was defined by 10 or more hours of work per week. working adults, total market and nonmarket work of married women and men has become quite similar. In contrast, during 1965, the total worktime of married women who were employed was substantially greater than that of married men (602 minutes per day com pared to 548). Total leisure time of married women has increased and they have begun to approach married men in time spent TV viewing (105 minutes per day compared to 132). From these data and other labor market studies, it can be concluded that women’s and men’s time uses are con verging. Though the market worktime estimates for women are lower than the official statistics, the latter have understated the decline in men’s work hours, and time-use data for 1965-75 indicate a larger decline in men’s hours of market work than recorded in the Cur rent Population Survey. Employment figures for highly educated women with preschool children suggest that there is now a greater awareness of the “full shadow val ue” of worktime early in the life cycle. The full shadow value includes the current wage, and the discounted val ue of on-the-job training acquired through labor force participation. As a result, the sacrifice of sleep and TV viewing to pursue both child care and labor market goals may be worth it, even though it implies short-run stress. Response to preschool children The pattern of high levels of labor market activity by college-educated women with preschool children is not observed historically. Based on analysis of 1960 census data, Arleen Liebowitz concluded that market time is usually greater the higher the level of a woman’s 58 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Other activities Sample size4 time 1965 1975 34 84 117 60 55 881 937 864 557 31 59 24 24 103 73 59 66 132 118 105 94 62 57 62 54 51 66 53 55 891 904 839 893 918 1,004 925 923 448 73 190 152 248 86 119 104 1965 1975 1965 1975 1965 1975 3Including time at lunch. 4 Subgroup sample sizes may not add to totals due to missing data. schooling, except when preschool children are present, and then hours of highly educated and less educated women are similar.3 Our results imply a change during the last 10 to 15 years in the market response to pre school children by college-educated women relative to other women; namely, despite a high level of per child care time, market hours are now reduced less per child by college-educated women than by high-school educat ed women. Our research also indicated that the amount of help by the husband, in either the form of child care or housework, is still minor.4 In our social security system, married women who work receive as an incremental benefit only the benefits which exceed what they could claim as a dependent. Be cause a woman usually earns less than her husband, the marginal discounted benefit gain from labor market activ ity is very small, relative to the present value of tax contri butions.5 Under the Federal income tax system, married women who work are taxed at the marginal rate applica ble to the husband’s earnings. In Sweden, by comparison, married individuals are taxed under the same schedule as single persons. The zero marginal tax rate on the first la bor market earnings creates a larger substitution effect to ward market work, while the progressive tax structure, by lowering the husband’s after-tax earnings, results in a smaller income effect toward the wife’s leisure. In Sweden, many working women hold part-time jobs, perhaps because tax progression sets in rapidly there, and the after-tax payoff to longer hours declines. These tax effects toward a shorter workweek need not greatly depress part-time wages. An increased supply of part-time workers may keep wage rates high, and sup- ply would then create its own demand.6 If there are enough part-time job seekers, the full price of their ser vices to firms, which includes the wage and search costs, will be partially decreased via reduced search costs. Firms will then have the incentive to restructure their work schedules to make better use of these work ers, and as a result the market equilibrium wage-hours will be less hours dependent.7 While the current U.S. income tax policy can be ar gued as “unfair” to families who derive a large share of their economic well-being through market activity, a Swedish-style tax law can be regarded, by comparison, as “unfair” to the division of labor households.8 There fore, as a conceptual matter, the unfairness of the cur rent policy could be remedied by taxing imputed income on nonmarket activity, rather than adopting a Swedish-style tax law. As a practical matter, taxing im puted income would be difficult due to valuation and because it is difficult to demand cash from a household activity which generates in-kind flows, if total family market income is low. As a possible solution, lowering taxes on market income is an easier way to achieve eq uity, but certainly this would provide redistributive gains to multiple-earner families and would further in crease their number. On “fairness” grounds, the case for the Swedish-style system is stronger if the tax law is more progressive, and progressive taxes can be viewed as a policy which adversely affects multiple-earner fami lies. Also, the political popularity of ceilings on the rate of taxation of labor market income is partly the conse quence of the growth of multiple-earner families. □ --------- FOOTNOTES------------One caveat is that the 1975-76 study coincides with a recession. It could be that some of the 1965-75/76 changes in table 1 reflect business cycle effects. Suppose the difference between actual hours at work and contracted hours at work is greater during recessions, but that respondents tend to report normal or contractual hours when hours are measured by direct questioning, rather than time diaries. 2James Heckman and Robert Willis, “A Beta Logistic Model for the Analysis of Sequential Labor Force Participation by Married Women,” Journal of Political Economy, February 1977, pp. 27-58, and C. R. Hill and Frank P. Stafford, “Lifetime Fertility, Child Care, and Labor Supply,” mimeo, September 1979. 1Arleen Liebowitz, “Education and Home Production,” American Economic Review, May 1974, pp. 243-50. 4 C. Russell Hill and Frank P. Stafford, “Parental Care of Children: Time Diary Estimates of Quantity Predictability and Variety,” Jour nal o f Human Resources, spring 1980, pp. 219-39. 5Nancy M. Gordon, “Institutional Responses: The Social Security System,” and “Institutional Responses: The Federal Income Tax Sys tem,” in Ralph E. Smith, ed., The Subtle Revolution: Women Who Work (Washington, D.C., The Urban Institute, 1979), pp. 223-55. 6 Proposed by my colleague, Paul Courant. 7See Harvey Rosen, “Taxes in a Labor Supply Model with Joint Wage-Hours Determination,” Econometrica, May 1976, pp. 485-507, for a discussion of the market equilibrium wage-hours locus. *By Swedish style, I mean the adoption of individual earner status for married individuals, but not necessarily the adoption of the extent of progressivity. In Sweden, the 82-percent marginal tax rate is https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis reached at an annual income level equivalent to about $20,000. By di vision of labor, I mean specialization by one spouse to market activity and specialization by the other spouse to nonmarket activity. Occupational earnings in electric and gas utilities Average straight-time hourly earnings in privately oper ated electric and gas utility systems ranged from $10.81 for watch engineers to $5.02 for janitors, according to a February 1978 survey conducted by the Bureau of La bor Statistics. This represents a 45 to 55 percent in crease in earnings since a similar survey in November 1972. The increase compares with a 47-percent rise in average hourly earnings of all workers in the private nonfarm sector, as measured by the Bureau’s hourly earnings index. Fifty-six physical (plant) worker occupations, virtual ly all staffed by men, were studied in 1978. The most populous job class, journeyman line workers, averaged $8.58 per hour. Twenty-four office clerical classifica tions, predominantly held by women, and 19 profes sional and technical categories studied had average hourly earnings ranging from $10.96 for class A sys tems analysts, working independently or under general supervision, to $3.93 for messengers. Class B account ing clerks, numerically the largest white-collar job class, averaged $5.08 per hour. Of the nearly 500,000 nonsupervisory workers cov ered by the survey, the Great Lakes and Middle Atlan tic regions accounted for about 20 percent each; the Southwest, 14 percent; the Southeast, 13 percent; and the remaining regions, 10 percent or fewer. All utility systems included in the study had 100 workers or more. Of the survey’s nonsupervisory workers, more than nine-tenths were in utility systems that, employed at least 500 workers. Average hourly earnings were generally highest in the Pacific States and lowest in the Southwest region. For the physical and professional / technical groups, pay lev els in the highest-paying region exceeded those for the lowest paying region by about 25 percent; for office clerical workers, the corresponding pay spread was ap proximately 33 percent. Differences in pay levels among regions were usually greater for lower paid occupations than for relatively higher paid jobs— a trend common to BLS wage surveys. Employees were paid mainly on a time-rated basis, typically incorporating ranges of rates for specified oc cupations. Almost four-fifths of the physical workers, and more than one-third of the office clerical workers, were employed by utility systems with labor-manage ment agreements (union contracts). The major union for 59 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • Research Summaries both groups was the International Brotherhood of Elec trical Workers ( a f l -c io ). Paid holidays and vacations were provided to nearly all employees, along with eligibility for cost-sharing health, medical, and retirement plans. An employer fre quently provided 9 to 12 paid holidays per year. Vaca tions with pay ranged from 2 to 5 weeks annually, depending on length of service. A comprehensive report, Industry Wage Survey: Elec tric and Gas Utilities, February 1978, ( b l s Bulletin 2040), is available from the Bureau or any of its region al offices. □ Table 1. Average hourly earnings and employer-paid wages for workers in selected occupations in hotels and motels, 24 areas, May 1978 Region and metropolitan area Waiters and waitresses, full-course restaurants Waiters' and waitresses' assistants, fullcourse restaurants Earnings1 Wages2 Earnings ' Wages2 $5.12 4.48 4.59 4.44 3.06 $1.72 1.84 2.14 1.61 1.56 $3.69 3.14 3.47 2.91 2.83 $2.87 2.04 2.67 2.23 2.28 4.60 3.27 4.96 3.80 4.12 4.41 5.15 1.52 1.44 1.43 1.53 1.62 1.54 1.82 2.79 2.68 2.81 2.87 3.16 2.74 3.39 2.69 2.67 2.66 2.71 2.09 2.22 2.96 2.89 3.28 3.46 3.89 5.33 3.85 4.72 1.91 1.49 1.45 2.47 1.81 2.08 1.54 2.53 2.75 2.86 2.97 3.31 3.08 2.91 2.32 2.24 2.52 2.83 2.61 3.01 1.97 4.75 ( 3) 1.54 3.27 3.24 ( 3) 2.53 3.52 5.49 5.43 8.23 2.50 2.68 3.15 3.12 3.18 5.74 2.52 2.64 3.16 Northeast Boston ............................. Buffalo ............................. New York ........................ Philadelphia...................... Pittsburgh ........................ South Wages and tips in hotels and motels Tips contributed substantially to the earnings of em ployees in a number of hotel and motel occupations, particularly of those paid comparatively low wages, such as customer lodging attendants, and waiters and waitresses, according to a May 1978 Bureau of Labor Statistics survey of 24 areas.1 Table waiters and waitresses employed in full-course restaurants, for ex ample, typically received lower wages than their assis tants. However, their total hourly earnings were con siderably higher when tips are included. (See table 1.) Tipped occupations. Tips constituted a significantly high proportion of total hourly earnings for waiters and waitresses, customer lodging attendants, and bartenders who directly serve the public, than for employees with little or no direct contact with customers, such as ser vice bartenders, and waiters’ and waitresses’ assistants. In 4 of the 5 categories of waiters and waitresses having personal contact with customers, tips accounted for at least 50 percent of the workers’ total earnings in a ma jority of the 23 areas for which comparisons could be made. In contrast, tips for service bartenders, and waiters’ and waitresses’ assistants in full-course restaurants where tips are often shared, usually averaged less than 25 percent of total hourly earnings. Customer lodging attendants received between 40 and 60 percent of their earnings from tips in 16 of the 23 areas compared. Among occupations where tips are im portant wages for both public and service bartenders averaged at least $3 an hour in most areas; for customer lodging atten dants, and waiters’ and waitresses’ assistants, between $1.75 and $3; and for waiters and waitresses, less than $2 an hour. The Fair Labor Standards Act permits tips up to 50 percent of the minimum wage and the reason able cost of board and lodging to be credited against the Federal minimum wage.2 60 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Atlanta ............................. Dallas-Fort W orth............. Houston ........................... M em phis........................... Miami ............................... New O rleans.................... Washington ...................... North Central Chicago............................. Cincinnati........................... Cleveland ........................ D etroit............................... Kansas C ity ...................... Minneapolis-St. P a u l......... St. Louis ........................... West Denver-Boulder ............... Las Vegas ........................ Los Angeles-Long Beach ........................... Portland ........................... San Francisco-Oakland .. 1Refers to employer-paid wages plus estimated average hourlycustomer tips. 2Refers to employer-paid straight-time wages, excluding premiumpay for overtime and for work on weekends, holidays, and late shifts; also excluded are tips and the value of free rooms, meals, and uniforms, and nonproduction payments, such as Christmas and yearend bonuses. 3Informationon tips was not available. Nontipped occupations. For nontipped occupations, sta tionary engineers were among the highest paid, ranging hourly from $9.66 in Las Vegas to $4.67 in Miami. General maintenance mechanics and second cooks aver aged between $4 and $6 an hour in most of the 24 areas. In May 1978, occupational pay levels for nonoffice, nonsupervisory workers in the hotel and motel industry were usually highest in Las Vegas, followed closely by New York and San Francicso. Lowest averages among the occupational categories generally were found in Buf falo, Miami, and St. Louis. Most hotels and motels provided paid holidays, typi cally 6 to 8 days annually, and paid vacations after specified periods of service. Life, hospitalization, surgi cal, and basic medical insurance were available to at least 70 percent of workers in most of the 24 areas. Re tirement pension plans (other than Federal social securi ty) applied to at least half of the workers in 14 areas. A comprehensive report, Industry Wage Survey: Hotels and Motels, May 1978, BLS Bulletin 2055 is for sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Govern ment Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402. Q --------- FOOTNOTES---------1The survey covered commercial establishments, known to the pub lic as hotels, motel-hotels, motels, and tourist courts, which primarily provide lodging or lodging and meals, for the general public. It cov ered establishments that operate at least nine months a year, and em ploy at least 20 workers. In May 1978, the 1,850 surveyed establish ments employed about 188,200 nonoffice, nonsupervisory workers. Information on “wages” relates to employer-paid straight-time wages, excluding premium pay for overtime and for work on weekends, holi days, and late shifts. Also excluded are tips, and the value of free rooms, meals, and uniforms, and nonproduction payments such as Christmas and yearend bonuses. “Earnings,” on the other hand, refer to employer-paid wages plus estimates of customer tips. 2 At the time of this study, the applicable minimum wage was $2.65 per hour. The current minimum wage is $3.10 per hour. Building wage gains accelerate in 1978-79 Following 2 years of smaller increases, hourly wage rates of union building trades members in large cities rose by an average of 6.9 percent between July 3, 1978 and July 2, 1979. These findings are based on the Bu reau of Labor Statistics annual studies of cities with populations of 100,000 or more.1The increase raised the Bureau’s index of union building trades wage rates to 239.9 (1967= 100). Average annual wage increases for union building trades fluctuated widely during the 1970’s, which witnessed a period of wage and price con trols early in the decade, as well as varying levels of both union and nonunion construction activity. (See table 1.) Among the 25 journeyman trades studied, machinists reported the largest average increase, 11.5 percent, and elevator constructors, the smallest, 4.8 percent. Carpen ters, the largest occupational group, averaged a 6.8-per cent rise, while the rate for building laborers, the predominant job among the nine helper and laborer classifications measured, advanced 7.3 percent. Table 1. Hourly wage rate increases for union building trades by year, 1969-79 [In percent] Year July to July: 1969-70 1970-71 1971-72 1972-73 1973-74 1974-75 1975-76 1976-77 1977-78 1978-79 ...................................... ...................................... ...................................... ...................................... ...................................... ...................................... ...................................... ...................................... ...................................... ...................................... https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis All building trades Journeyman trades Helpers and laborers 11.6 11.8 6.4 5.0 7.8 8.6 6.5 5.9 5.7 6.9 11.4 11.6 6.6 4.8 7.6 8.7 6.5 5.8 5.7 6.9 12.5 12.7 5.4 5.7 9.1 8.0 6.6 6.4 5.8 6.9 The highest regional increases during the 1978-79 period were reported in the Mountain States, 7.9 per cent, and the Great Lakes, 7.8 percent. The latter re gion had the largest number of union building trades members. Outside of the Pacific States, 7.3 percent, in creases in the remaining six regions were in the 6.0 to 6.2 percent range. On July 2, 1979, hourly wage rates for all journey man trades averaged $11.81, and for helpers and labor ers, $9.15. The middle half of the wage rate array, excluding the upper and lower fourths, ranged from $10.99 to $12.68 per hour for journeymen, and from $8.52 to $10.11 per hour for helpers and laborers. Regionally, average wage rates for journeymen were highest in the Pacific States, $12.73, and lowest in the Southeast, $10.20. Averages for helpers and laborers were also lowest in the Southeast, $6.89, and were highest in the Great Lakes States, $9.94. Although less im portant than location, city popula tion size also seemed to be related to average wage rates.2 Journeymen in cities of at least 1 million inhabit ants, for example, averaged 3 percent more per hour, or $12.28, than the $11.97 average of their counterparts in cities of 500,000 to 1 million; 6 percent more than the $11.62 average in cities of 250,000 to 500,000; and 8 percent more than the $11.36 average in cities of 100,000 to 250,000. There was, however, considerable variation among cities and individual trades in the same region and size group. Employee benefits raised the journeymen’s average to $14.59 and that of helpers and laborers to $11.26.3 The proportion of employer contributions for these selected benefits to the basic wage-plus-benefit package has in creased steadily during the 1970’s, from about 10 per cent in 1969 to nearly 20 percent in 1979. On request, the Bureau or any of its regional offices will provide listings of union wage rates and employer payments for selected benefit funds, for each of the 66 cities studied, and for the Nation as a whole. A bulletin providing national, regional, and city averages, and wage trend data for each year since 1907 is in prepara tion. □ --------- FOOTNOTES---------1The survey was designed to reflect union wage rates in the 153 cit ies having 100,000 inhabitants or more, according to the 1970 Census of Population. Data were obtained from local union officials in 66 sample cities, by mail questionnaire, telephone, or personal interview by BLS field representatives. Union wage rates are the basic (minimum) wage rates (excluding holiday, vacation, or other benefit payments made or regularly credited to the employee) agreed upon through collective bargaining between employers and unions. Averages do not include rates for ap prentices or premium rates for overtime, or for work on weekends, holidays, or late shifts. Thus, they do not represent total hourly earn ings of organized building trades workers. 2 For a detailed discussion of the relative importance of city size and location in determining union building trade wage rates, see 61 M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • Research Summaries Mark Sieling, “Union wage rates in building trades,” Monthly Labor Review, July 1976. 3 Data were collected on employer contributions to insurance (life, hospitalization, medical, surgical, and other similar types of health and welfare programs); pension funds; vacation payments; supplemen tal unemployment insurance; savings funds; and paid holidays, as pro vided for in labor-management contracts. In actual practice some employer payments are calculated on the bases of a negotiated rate, total hours worked, or gross payroll. Some contracts also provide for additional payments to other funds as for education and promotion; information on payments to these funds was not included in the sur vey averages. Wage structure in steel mills narrows during 70’s The occupational pay structure in basic steel mills nar rowed substantially during the 1970’s, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics wage surveys, primarily be cause of uniform cents per hour wage increases for steelworkers, mostly those covered by labor-manage ment contracts and paid under a common job evalua tion system. Between the last survey in February 1978, and May 1980, when the new master agreement became effective,1 basic hourly wage rates for union workers rose 25 to 30 percent, depending on job class. The 27-month increase under both the old and new contracts included general wage advances of 55 cents per hour and cost-of-living adjustments totaling $1.47 per hour. Table 1 illustrates the narrowing such increases have had on the basic wage scales for selected occupations during the past 8 years. Scales for tandem-mill rollers, for example, were 44 percent above those of laborers in May 1980, com pared with 80 percent in the September 1972 survey. Table 1. Basic hourly wage scales and pay relatives for workers in selected occupations in steel mills with common job evaluation and pay systems1 Occupation Laborers .......................... Chargers (bar mills) ......... Locomotive engineers . . . . Millwrights ........................ First helpers (open hearth) Tandem-mill rollers........... Typical job class 1 6 11 16 27 32 Basic wage scales2 Pay relatives3 Sept. 1972 Feb. 1978 May 1980 Sept. 1972 Feb. 1978 May 1980 $3,520 3.896 4.366 4.836 5.870 6.340 $6,705 7.149 7.704 8.259 9.480 10.035 $8,725 9.233 9.868 10.503 11.900 12.535 100 111 124 137 167 180 100 107 115 123 141 154 100 106 113 120 136 144 1Includes establishments under common job evaluation and pay system, that Is, with the same minimum hourly rates ($6,705 an hour) and the same increment (11.1 cents) between job classes. 2 Includes cost-of-living adjustments. 3 Basic wage scales of laborers = 100. 62 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Narrower earnings also exist among individual work ers in the industry, even though most are under incentive pay plans. The dispersion of earnings that commonly results from such plans was dampened sub stantially in recent years because most wage advances were not incorporated into the rates used for incentive calculations. For example, the incentive calculation rates for a job-class 9 locomotive craneman were nearly three-fourths of the basic hourly rate in 1972, compared to one-half in 1980. The overall industry compression can be measured by the relative index of wage disper sion, which declined from 24 in 1972 to 18 in 1978, one of the lowest figures for manufacturing industries stud ied by the Bureau.2 The primary reason for the concentration of earnings is the degree of uniformity built into the nationwide job evaluation system, applying to a large majority of the workers.3 Slightly more than two-thirds of production workers were employed in establishments using a com mon job evaluation system, which has the same mini mum rate and increment between job classes or labor grades. Under this system, all occupational classifica tions are assigned point values on the basis of factors such as experience, skill, responsibility, effort, and working conditions. These point values in turn, are re lated to one of the 34 established job classes. At the least nine-tenths of production workers were in mills that provided various types of health and insur ance benefits, pension plans, supplemental unemploy ment benefits, 11 paid holidays, regular paid vacations (up to 5 weeks after 25 years), and extended benefits ev ery 5 years, that can bring total vacation pay to 14 weeks for “senior” personnel. Slightly over one-fourth of the work force was employed on second shifts, and just over one-fifth, on third shifts. Pay differential for such shifts are 30 cents for evening and 45 cents for nightwork. A summary of these findings was issued earlier and copies are available upon request from the Bureau of Labor Statistics or any of its regional offices. A compre hensive bulletin, Industry Wage Survey: Basic Iron and Steel, 1978- 79, BLS Bulletin 2064, is also available. Q --------- FOOTNOTES---------1See May 1980 Monthly Labor Review for summary of provisions in the new basic steel agreements. 2The dispersion index is computed by dividing the difference be tween the first and third quartiles in the earnings array by the median. 3See “Incentive pay patterns in the steel industry,” Monthly Labor Review, August 1974, pp. 75-77. Significant Decisions In Labor Cases Supreme Court opens new term On the opening day of its 1980-81 term, the Su preme Court agreed to review a lower court decision upholding the government standard limiting worker ex posure to cotton dust.1 Challenged by the textile indus try as unreasonable and too costly, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration standard was ruled valid by the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Ap peals, which found it technologically and economically feasible. The court reasoned that the cost of implement ing an OSHA standard is feasible as long as the industry is not confronted with massive economic dislocation. This conflicts with interpretations of the Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh Circuits that some cost/benefit approach must be used to justify standards.2 The cotton dust case presents the first opportunity for the High Court to clarify the constraints on OSHA’s regulatory authority3 since striking down the agency’s attempt to reduce worker exposure to benzene last term.4 In the benzene case, the Court made clear that all OSHA standards must be “reasonably necessary” to rem edy a “significant risk” to workers’ health or safety. In ruling that the benzene standard failed to meet this cri terion, the Court’s split opinion revealed that “substan tial proof” is required to identify a “significant risk” and suggested that the economic relationship between costs and benefits also should play some role in deter mining when a standard is reasonably necessary. Thus, a decision on the cotton dust standard should help clar ify OSHA’s burden of proof in setting workplace health and safety regulations and should settle other questions concerning the agency’s options for implementing stan dards. On opening day, the Court also agreed to decide whether a worker’s right to file suit under the Fair La bor Standards Act remains intact following contractual grievance proceedings on the same claim.5 In 1974, the Court ruled that initial resort to contractual grievance procedures to settle a workplace discrimination claim does not forfeit a worker’s right to seek redress of the same claim under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.6 “Significant Decisions in Labor Cases” is written by Gregory J. Mounts of the Monthly Labor Review staff. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis In other opening-day action, the High Court sum marily dismissed the appeals of lower court rulings that approved the voluntary use of racial quotas by a public employer and that upheld the constitutionality of a Federal requirement that State unemployment compen sation laws cover all employees of State and local gov ernments. The Court refused to review 72 other labor and labor-related cases on appeal from various lower courts. Unless four of the nine justices vote to review a case, review is denied, leaving the lower court ruling in effect.7 Quota questions A public employer’s use of voluntary racial quotas in hiring and promotion to remedy the effects of specifically identified discrimination was approved by the California Supreme Court in Sacramento County Civil Service Com mission.^ The California court pointed to portions of the Supreme Court’s Bakke and Weber decisions9 in reason ing that the temporary quotas, adopted after administra tive proceedings had identified the effects of the county’s discriminatory employment practices, do not violate Ti tle VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act or the equal protec tion guarantees of either State or Federal Constitutions. The California decision occurred before the Supreme Court ruled last term that Congress could remedy prior discrimination by imposing racial and ethnic quotas in allocating Federal money.10 By dismissing the appeal of the California ruling, the Court permitted what amounts to an extension of the remedial authority used by Con gress in Fullilove to public employers in California. The constitutionality of preference schemes might be further clarified by another case from California the High Court has already agreed to review.11 The Califor nia Department of Corrections adopted an affirmative action program that called for goals in the employment of women and minorities. The corrections department contended that such a program was necessary to ease tensions between employees and inmates. But white em ployees alleged that the department actually reserved job slots for women and minorities and that prior dis crimination had not been established, violating the cri teria for voluntary affirmative action programs estab lished by the Supreme Court. The California Supreme Court refused to review a ruling by the California Court of Appeals that the corrections department’s plan fell 63 M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • Significant Decisions within the boundaries set by the High C ourt’s Bakke decision. A Supreme Court Ruling in the California case could answer questions about what evidence of prior discrimi nation is necessary to sanction a voluntary affirmative action program, whether the safe and efficient operation of correctional facilities justifies certain percentages of women and minorities in the work force, and if such employment goals are permissible what reference group should be used to establish the target proportions. The Court could soon act on appeals in two other cases that would also clarify the authority of public em ployers to utilize minority preference schemes. Both the Sixth Circuit and the Washington Supreme Court have approved the use of racial preference schemes by munic ipal employers which had first identified the effects of prior discrimination.12 States’ rights, union duties The Federal Unemployment Tax Act sets voluntary conditions for the application of State unemployment compensation laws. However, for private employers to obtain Federal tax credits in proportion to their pay ment to the State compensation program, the State law must conform to Federal requirements. One such re quirement since 1976 extended coverage to all State and local government employees. Refusing to comply, New Hampshire challenged the consitutionality of the re quirement, claiming that it involved the same impair ment of State sovereignty disallowed by the Supreme Court in National League o f Cities.13 The First Circuit ruled that the voluntary nature of the Federal require ment for unemployment compensation coverage bore no similarity to the mandatory minimum wage issue raised in National League o f Cities and therefore it did not vio late the Constitution.14 The Supreme Court dismissed New Hampshire’s appeal of the First Circuit’s ruling and denied review to an appeal of a similar decision by the District of Columbia appeals court in a case brought by the County of Los Angeles.15 The Supreme Court also refused to review a January 1980 ruling by the Eighth Circuit that a union breached its duty of fair representation when it processed the grievances of unsuccessful job bidders and failed to rep resent the less senior workers actually prom oted.16 The employer had promoted the less senior workers under contract language that permitted “skill and ability” to outweigh seniority in such decisions. After arbitration, the promotions were awarded to the more senior work ers, and the union refused to process the grievances of those demoted. The appeals court ruled that, even though the union’s policy of processing grievances on the basis of seniority was conducted in good faith, it il legally discriminated against employees promoted on the basis of merit. The court reasoned that such a prac tice may significantly alter the negotiated contract by challenging only those promotion decisions that are based on merit. The decision limits union discretion in using classifications such as seniority to select which grievances to process. □ FOOTNOTES ' American Textile Manufacturers Institute, Inc. v. Marshall, 48 U.S.L.W. 2311 (D.C. Cir., Oct. 24, 1979), review granted 49 U.S.L.W. 3208 (U.S., Oct. 7, 1980). 2American Iron and Steel Institute v. OSH A, 581 F.2d 493 (5th Cir., 1978); RM I Co. v. Sec. o f Labor, 594 F.2d 566 (6th Cir., 1979); and Turner Co. v. Sec. o f Labor, 561 F.2d 82 (7th Cir., 1977). The Court, had agreed last term to rule on an industry challenge to OSHA’s coke oven emissions standard, American Iron and Steel In stitute v. OSHA, 577 F.2d 825 (3d Cir., 1978), review granted, 48 U.S.L.W. 3855 (U.S., July 2, 1980), but on Sept. 16, 1980 the indus try withdrew its appeal of the Third Circuit’s ruling upholding the regulation (49 U.S.L.W. 3145). Industry spokespersons cited the fact that substantial compliance had been achieved with the emission stan dard during the years of litigation and that the Court’s 1980 ruling on OSHA’s benzene standard (see footnote 4) achieved their goal of a more balanced regulatory environment. 4 Industrial Union Dept., AFL- CIO v. American Petroleum Institute, 48 U.S.L.W. 5022 (U.S., July 2, 1980), see Monthly Labor Review, September 1980, pp. 53-54. Barrentine v. Arkansas-Best Freight System, Inc. 615 F.2d 1194 (8th Cir., Feb. 20, 1980), review granted 49 U.S.L.W. 3209 (U.S., Oct. 7, 1980). 6Alexander v. Gardner-Denver Co. 415 U.S. 36 (1974), see Monthly Labor Review, March 1975, pp. 4 6 -48, and Apr. 1975, pp. 69-70. 7Denial of review does not technically affirm lower court holdings 64 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis because the Supreme Court is free to alter them by ruling in other cases raising the same issues. *District Atty. Sacramento County v. Sacramento County Civil Serv. Comm., 48 U.S.L.W. 2538 (Cal. Sup. Ct„ Jan. 25, 1980), cert, dismissed, 49 U.S.L.W. 3213 (U.S., Oct. 7, 1980). 9Regents of the University o f California v. Bakke, 438 U.S. 265 (1978); see Monthly Labor Review, July 1978, p. 46; and Steel workers v. Weber, 443 U.S. 193 (1979), see Monthly Labor Review, Au gust 1979, pp. 56-57. 10Fullilove v. Klutznick, 48 U.S.L.W. 4979 (U.S., July 2, 1980), see Monthly Labor Review, Sept. 1980, pp. 54-56. 11 Minnick v. California Department o f Corrections, 48 U.S.L.W. 2128 (Cal. Ct. App., 1979), review granted, 48 U.S.L.W. 3855 (U.S., July 2, 1980). 12 Detroit Police Officers' Assoc, v. Young, 608 F.2d 671 (6th Cir., 1979); and Maehren v. City o f Seattle, 20 FEP 854 (Wash. Sup. Ct., 1979) . 13 National League o f Cities v. Usery, 426 U.S. 833 (1976). 14 State o f New Hampshire, Dept, o f Employment Security v. Mar shall, 616 F.2d 240 (1st Cir., Feb. 20, 1980), appeal dismissed 49 U.S.L.W. 3214 (U.S., Oct. 7, 1980). 15 Los Angeles County v. Marshall (D.C. Cir., Mar. 19, 1980), review denied, 49 U.S.L.W. 3240 (U.S., Oct. 7, 1980). 16Steelworkers, Local 13889 v. Smith, 48 U.S.L.W. 2505 (8th Cir., 1980) , review denied, 49 U.S.L.W. 3230 (U.S., Oct. 7, 1980). M ajor Agreements Expiring Next M onth This list of collective bargaining agreements expiring in January is based on contracts on file in the Bureau’s Office of Wages and Industrial Relations. The list includes agreements covering 1,000 workers or more. U n io n 1 In d u str y E m p lo y e r a n d l o c a t i o n N um ber of w orkers Aldens, Inc. (Chicago, 111.)...................................................................................... American Home Foods, Inc., Chef Boy-ar-dee Division (Milton, Pa.) . . . . American National Insurance Co. (Galveston, Tex.) ...................................... Retail trade ................................ Food products ........................... Insurance ...................................... Teamsters (Ind.) ...................................... Food and Commercial W o r k e rs........... Insurance W orkers................................... 1,900 1,300 3,850 Bryant Packing Co. (West Point, Mass.) ........................................................... Building Trades Employers Association Cement League and Building Contractors Association (New York, N.Y.) Food products ........................... Construction................................ Food and Commercial W o r k e rs........... Plasterers and Cement M ason s............. 1,200 1,600 Coming Glass Works (Coming, N .Y .) ................................................................ Stone, clay, and glass products Flint Glass W orkers................................ 4,000 Del Monte Corp., Midwest Division (Illin o is)................................................... Dow Jones and Co., Inc. (Interstate)........................................ .......................... Food products ........................... Printing and publishing ........... Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Independent Association of Publishers Employees, Inc. (Ind.) 1,450 1,100 Honeywell, Inc. (Minneapolis and St. Paul, Minn.) ........................................ Instruments ................................ Teamsters (Ind.) ...................................... 8,000 Kroger Co., Houston Division (T exas)................................................................ Retail trade ................................ Food and Commercial W o r k e rs........... 2,400 Movers Association of Greater Chicago, Individual Employer (Illinois) Trucking Teamsters (Ind.) ...................................... 1,000 . . ..................................... Philadelphia Food Store Employer Labor Council (Pennsylvania) ............. Retail trade ................................ Food and Commercial W o r k e rs........... 6,500 Shell Oil Co., Shell Chemical Co. (Houston, T e x .)........................................... Supermarkets, 6 companies (Georgia and Tennessee)2 ................................... Petroleum ..................................... Retail trade ................................ Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers Food and Commercial W o r k e rs........... 2,250 1,600 Government activity Michigan: Detroit Public Schools Custodial-Maintenance-Transportation Employees 'Affiliated with A F L -C IO except where noted as independent (Ind.). https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Education...................................... Employee organization1 American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees 2,400 industry area (group of companies signing same contract). Erratum In George Iden’s August 1980 article, “The labor force experience of black youth: a review,” a typographical error resulted in the omission of a minus sign from two of the coefficients in the first column of table 3, page 13. 65 Developments in Industrial Relations Stevens, Clothing Workers sign first agreement J. P. Stevens & Co. and the Amalgamated Clothing and Textile Workers signed their first collective bar gaining agreement, thereby easing one of the longest and most bitter confrontations in the history of labormanagement relations in the United States. The agree ment covers only 3,500 workers at 10 plants, but Ste vens agreed to accept similar terms at any of its other plants that the union is able to organize within 18 months. However, during this period, the union agreed to give up its court-granted right to use company facili ties for organizing purposes. J. P. Stevens, the second largest textile company in the industry, has a total of 70 plants and 44,000 workers. A F L -C IO President Lane Kirkland called the victory “a tremendous forward step for the textile and apparel workers of the South.” Clothing and Textile Workers’ President Murray H. Finley, referring to the company claims that the union made the most significant conces sions to attain the settlement, said his union “looks for ward to more [such] victories by Stevens.” Whitney Stevens, chairman and chief executive officer of the company, said the settlement means that the union will no longer single out J. P. Stevens as its pri mary target. He claimed that the agreement would not spur unionization because, “people in the South basical ly don’t care for unions,” and acknowledged that the company plans to continue to resist organizing efforts in its nonunion plants. Seven of the 10 plants involved in the settlement are located in Roanoke Rapids, N.C., and employ 3,000 of the covered workers. In 1974, the National Labor Rela tions Board had certified the results of a representation election the union had won earlier that year at the sev en plants. Subsequent years did not produce a settle ment, only union charges that Stevens had engaged in unfair labor practices, including refusal to bargain — charges that were ruled valid by the board and the courts. The union only recently gained representation rights at the other three plants through board elections “Developments in Industrial Relations” is prepared by George Ruben and other members of the staff of the Division of Trends in Employee Compensation, Bureau of Labor Statistics, and is largely based on in formation from secondary sources. 66 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis or orders. These plants are in Allendale, S.C., High Point, N.C., and Boylston, Ala. The 30-month contract for the Roanoke Rapids workers provided for an 8.5-percent pay increase effec tive immediately and 10.0 percent retroactive to July 1979. These increases matched those that the company gave workers in all other plants, but had withheld from the Roanoke Rapids workers “as a contract bargaining measure,” according to company officials. The union said the 1980 increase brought the average straight-time pay rate at the 10 plants to more than $5 an hour. The contracts are subject to reopening during their term on wages and benefits. All of the contracts provided for the following terms considered favorable to the union: checkoff of union dues from payroll; various changes in health and safety practices; binding arbitration of disputes that arise be tween contract settlements; “regulation” of work loads; a seniority system to govern layoffs and promotions; and company assurances that it would not retaliate against employees who engage in union activities. Provisions viewed as favorable to Stevens called for an end to the union’s designation of Stevens as its pri mary organizing target; termination of the consumer boycott against Stevens products that the union had ini tiated in 1976; and an 18-month suspension of the union’s campaign to pressure and embarrass directors of other companies serving on Stevens’ board of direc tors and Stevens’ officers serving on other boards. Re portedly, the settlement was hastened by the union’s plan to attempt to gain two seats on the board of Met ropolitan Life Insurance Co., Stevens’ major lender. This led Metropolitan to express concern to Stevens over the adverse publicity and the estimated $7 million cost associated with a contested election. Boeing and Machinists reach accord The first settlement in the round of bargaining in the aerospace industry occurred when the Boeing Co. and the Machinists union agreed to a 3-year contract for 50,000 employees in Seattle, Wash., Wichita, Kans., Portland, Oreg., and other locations. The union valued the wage and benefit package at $3.85 an hour, or a 39-percent increase over the term, in- eluding wage escalator adjustments based on an estimat ed 10-percent annual rise in the Consumer Price Index. Wages will increase by 7 percent immediately, and 3-percent increases are scheduled on the first and sec ond anniversaries. In addition, workers in the top 11 pay grades received an “inequity adjustm ent” of 1 to 35 cents an hour. The wage escalator clause was not changed; it provides 1-cent-an-hour quarterly adjust ments for each 0.3-point movement in the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (1967=100). Pensions for future retirees were increased to $16 a month for each year of credited service after December 31, 1980, and the existing $14 rate will now apply to all past years. Under the prior contract, the rate was $12 for each year of service through January 1978 and $14 for each year thereafter. Retirees’ pensions also were increased by $1 a month for each year of service or 1 percent of their total monthly entitlement, whichever is more. Employees are now permitted to retire at unreduced benefit rates at age 60, instead of age 62, and benefits for early retire ment (at age 58) will be computed at 94 percent of the normal rate, instead of the previous 86 percent. Health and welfare improvements included the estab lishment of an alcoholic rehabilitation program and a hearing aid plan, extension of the dental plan to provide orthodontic coverage for dependents under age 19, and an increase in the amount payable for major medical expenses. Later, the Machinists union settled with Lockheed Corp. on similar terms for 31,000 workers in Burbank and Sunnyvale, Calif., and Marietta, Ga. Also, the United Auto Workers negotiated a similar contract with McDonnell Douglas Corp. for 15,000 workers in Long Beach, Calif., Tulsa, Okla., and Melbourne, Ark. Meanwhile, the Machinists and Auto Workers unions, which coordinate their bargaining efforts in the aerospace and other industries, began merger talks that could result in the Nation’s largest union, with more than 2.3 million members. The two unions have been suffering declines in membership because of economic conditions and are in the midst of efforts to cut operat ing costs. American Motors, Auto Workers settle Continuing the practice of recent years, American Motors Corp. and the United Auto Workers negotiated a 3-year contract that provided for some cost conces sions from the pattern the union negotiated with Gener al Motors Corp. and Ford Motor Co. in 1979. (See Monthly Labor Review, November 1979 pp. 58-59, for the GM and Ford terms and Monthly Labor Review, March 1980, p. 56, for the terms at Chrysler Corp., https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis which also deviated from GM and Ford.) Following the lead of Chrysler Corp., American Motors agreed to nominate an official of the union to its board of direc tors, pending approval from the Federal Government. However, the company reportedly is concerned that having a union representative on its board might violate the rule that a board member’s responsibility is to rep resent the interests of stockholders. Raymond Majerus, the union’s secretary-treasurer and director if its American Motors department, said that pension improvements will lag the GM pattern during the first two contract years, but in the final year will attain parity with the GM contract. (The GM, Ford, and Chrysler agreements expire in September 1982 and the American Motors agreement expire a year later.) According to Majerus, 14 cents of the 24 cents costof-living allowance at American Motors was diverted to help the company meet the cost of benefits improve ments. (GM withheld 14 cents by reducing each of the quarterly cost-of-living increases by 1 or 2 cents an hour.) American Motors and the union also agreed to revise the escalator formula to 1 cent for each 0.26 point movement in the consumer price index. This for mula is effective beginning with the quarterly adjust ment in June 1983 and is retroactive to December 1981. (At GM, the formula is to be effective with the quarter ly adjustment in December 1981.) “Set” wage increases at American Motors were the same as those at G M — 3 percent at the beginning of each contract year and an additional 24-cent increase in the first year. The final concession at American Motors was in the number of paid personal holidays, which was raised to a total of 23, from 15, to be taken during three calendar years. (At GM, the total was raised from 15 to 26.) The American Motors accord was preceded by a 2-day strike by the 8,800 hourly employees the United Auto Workers union represents in Kenosha and Mil waukee, Wise. Clothing workers accept short-term contract In a departure from their practice in recent years, the Amalgamated Clothing and Textile Workers and the Clothing Manufacturers of America negotiated a con tract that extends for only 18 months. The previous 40-month contract expired on September 30, the day of the new settlement. The parties agreed that the de pressed state of the men’s and boys’ tailored clothing industry and concern over the rate of inflation were the major factors in the shorter duration. The 18-month term was a compromise between the union’s demand for either a 1-year contract or a 3-year agreement with an uncapped cost-of-living clause, and management’s proposal for a 3-year contract with a capped escalator. 67 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • Developments in Industrial Relations The accord, which covered 80,000 workers, provided for wage increases of 30 cents an hour on October 1, 1980, and 20 cents on March 1 and October 1 of 1981. Also, on October 1, 1981, employees may receive an es calator increase— not to exceed 10 cents— calculated at 6 cents for each percentage point rise in the Consumer Price Index above 9.1 percent for the year ending June 1981. The previous contract provided for increases of $1.10 an hour over the 40 months and also resulted in a 10-cent escalator increase in 1979. There were numerous changes in insurance coverage. Employer financing of health and welfare and pension benefits remained at 15 percent of payroll, but .4 of a percentage point more of the money will be allocated for pensions. There was no immediate change in the vacation schedules— all employees with at least 1 year of service receive 3 weeks of paid vacation each year. However, the parties agreed that the contract to be negotiated in 1982 will give 20-year employees 4 weeks of annual vacation. Federal white-collar workers get pay increase The 1.4 million white-collar employees covered by the General Schedule pay system received a 9.1-percent sal ary increase in October, after earlier indications that the increase would be smaller. (About 25,000 employees in the two lowest pay grades received 10.1- or 10.4-percent increases.) In January, President Jimmy Carter had pro jected a 6.2-percent increase; this was changed to 7.8 percent in July. The President said the figure was in creased to 9.1 percent because “Federal employees face the same kinds of problems with inflation as other citi zens and should not have to bear an unfair burden.” The President’s pay agent— the Director of the Office of Personnel Management, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, and the Secretary of Labor— announced that an increase ranging from 10.12 percent for employees in the lowest pay grade to 20.91 for those in grade 15 would be required to attain comparability with equivalent occupations in the private economy. The average increase would have been 13.46 percent. However, the President used his authority under the Federal Pay Comparability Act of 1970 to propose the 9.1-percent increase, which matched the March 1979 to March 1980 rise in private sector salaries covered in the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ annual survey of profession al, administrative, technical, and clerical pay. Either the House of Representatives or the Senate could have re jected the proposal and the President would have then been obligated to implement an increase in accord with the comparability principle— presumably, the increase recommended by his pay agent— but the Congress did not act. Some employees in the upper length-of-service pay 68 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis steps of grade 15 either did not receive the increase or received only part of it because, by law, they cannot ex ceed the $50,112.50-a-year salary of presidential appoin tees at the lowest level of the Executive Schedule. This also precluded any increase for employees in GS grades 16, 17, and 18, and for those in the Senior Executive Service, established under the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978. Under the Executive Salary Cost-of-Living Adjust ment Act of 1975, members of the Congress, Executive Schedule personnel, and Federal judges would have au tomatically received the 9.1-percent increase— which would have resulted in a matching increase for the gov ernment employees at the $50,112.50 limit. However, the Congress had voted earlier to forgo this year’s in crease. The 9.1-percent increase also applied to members of the Foreign Service and members of the medical and dental staffs of the Veterans’ Administration under existing laws linking their salary levels to those of Gen eral Schedule employees. A similar linkage usually applies to the 2 million members of the Armed Forces, but the Congress legislated a more costly compensation package intended to make military service more attrac tive. The package, effective in October, included an 11.7-percent pay increase; a $20,000-ceiling on re-enlistment bonuses (formerly $15,000); a 15-percent increase in sea pay and a 25-percent increase in flight pay; in creases in subsistence and housing allowances; increased travel expenses; and increased living expenses in highcost areas and for temporary assignments. Pay for the Government’s 465,000 blue-collar work ers is adjusted annually at various times throughout the year, based on comparisons with prevailing local pay rates for the same occupation in the private economy. However, special legislation and a presidential order limited the blue-collar employees increases to 7 percent during the fiscal year that ended September 30, 1980. A similar 9.1-percent limit applies during the current fiscal year. Postal Workers’ president loses re-election bid Morris Biller won a 2-year term as president of the Postal Workers, defeating incumbent president Emmet Andrews and two other officers of the union in a mail referendum. Biller, who was head of the union’s local in New York City, received 45,049 votes and Andrews, 26,025. William Burrus of Cleveland, running on the Biller slate, was elected executive vice president. Secre tary-treasurer Chester W. Parrish retained his post in the voting, which involved 93 positions in the union. Andrews became president of the union in 1977 after the death of Francis S. Filbey, and was elected to his first full term in 1978. Steelworkers’ local retracts offer of pay reduction Local 2869 of the Steelworkers retracted its offer to accept a $l-an-hour reduction in future cost-of-living in creases from Kaiser Steel Corp., leading to renewed speculation about the future of the company’s mill in Fontana, Calif., which lost $39 million in 1979. Earlier, the company had announced plans to keep the mill open, calling the local’s move to aid the company an im portant factor in the decision. Kaiser officials attrib uted the withdrawal of the offer to the international leaders of the Steelworkers. The decision was an “effort to avoid any future con flict in regard to the alleged legalities in the matter of this local union’s recent vote . . . and to maintain the union’s integrity,” according to the union. The conces sion would have been accomplished by withholding the first 10 cents of each of the next 10 quarterly cost-ofliving adjustments. Kaiser officials attributed the mill’s difficulties to competition from Japanese steelmakers, to operating problems, and to the depressed state of the steel mar ket. They welcomed the union’s pledge to “seek out, discuss and implement all feasible ways to . . . make Kaiser Steel Corp. more competitive.” In recent months, Kaiser has laid off 2,000 of its 6,000 hourly workers and cut production to 2.8 million tons a year, from 3.5 million tons. California wine workers end strike A threat to the 1980 vintage in the California wine industry ended when members of the Winery, Distillery and Allied Workers Union approved a 3-year contract with the Winery Employers Association and ended their first strike in 35 years. The walkout was first limited to two of the largest wineries but then spread to all 23 wineries. The employers said they continued production during the stoppage by using supervisory employees. The settlement came only about a week before the https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis peak of the grape picking and crushing period. It pro vided for yearly wage increases of 13, 8, and 7 percent, bringing average pay to about $ 11 an hour, from about $8.39. (This includes an estimated 18 cents increase un der the escalator clause, which was continued.) The wineries are located in the Napa and Central val leys of California and produce 80 percent of the State’s wine. The State, in turn, accounts for 80 percent of the Nation’s wine. Industry withdraws coke emission exposure suit The long legal fight over the Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s limits on worker exposure to coke oven emissions ended when the steel industry with drew the appeal it had filed with the Supreme Court. Sheldon Wesson, speaking for the American Iron and Steel Institute, said the case had become almost moot because companies have already instituted most of the protective measures called for by the standard during the series of appeals that followed O S H A ’s announcement of the standard in 1977. According to O S H A , the stan dard is needed to reduce an excessive rate of cancer for 21,000 coke oven workers. The industry had contended that the standard could not be met in many instances. In another occupational safety and health case, Gen eral Motors Corp. announced that it will undertake a year-long study to determine why employees and retir ees from its Flint (Mich.) trim plant suffer a high rate of lung cancer. The company said it decided on the study after the Sloan Kettering Cancer Center con firmed earlier findings of the United Auto Workers that the rate of lung cancer deaths for the employees and re tirees exceeded the national average. Earlier, General Motors had announced that it was underwriting the largest industrial health screening in history, aimed at finding the causes of rectal and colon cancer in men and women who build scale models of cars from wood, clay, and other materials. (See Monthly Labor Review, April 1980, p. 63.) □ 69 Book Reviews Labor relations: room for research The Labor Relations Process. By William H. Holley, Jr. and Kenneth M. Jennings. Hinsdale, 111., The Dryden Press, A division of Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1980. 656 pp. $19.95. This volume, by William H. Holley, Jr. and Kenneth M. Jennings, is designed as a text for college courses in industrial relations. The authors state that the book combines “theoretical and practical insights” into the labor relations process; that it was “written with both the beginning student and the professional scholar” in mind; that each of its sections “has been subjected to critical academic and practitioner review”; and that the extensive references at the end of each chapter are in tended “as useful stimuli and starting points for con tinuing research on the subject.” Somehow the performance is not quite up to the promise. It may be that the authors had too many ob jectives in view, and that their large accumulation of in formation, which is impressive, could not be sufficiently digested and fitted into the framework of their analysis. The analytical framework itself is unexceptionable. It is based on the first chapter of John Dunlop’s Industrial Relations Systems (1958), in which the essence of the in dustrial relations process is found in the establishment and administration of work rules relating to pay, benefits, and other conditions of employment. These rules are shaped under various conditions and constraints by the “actors” in the system— workers and their formal or informal organizations; managers and their organiza tions; and the representatives of appropriate govern ment administrative or rule-making agencies. The present book is divided into four parts. The initial chapter of part 1 consists largely of an adapta tion of the Dunlop model of the industrial relations process, but with scant attention to the constraints im posed upon the actors in the system by conditions in the relevant product and labor markets. There is also a discussion of why workers join unions. In between con sideration of “alienation” (Marx) and “job scarcity” (Perlman) as possible reasons for union membership is the statem ent— perhaps undergraduates need to be told this— that “Some research has shown that employees https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis might join unions if they (a) are dissatisfied with physi cal characteristics of the workplace, low wages, or lack of benefits and (b) believe that a union will help them achieve the job-related conditions important to them.” The remainder of part 1 (chapters 2 -5 ) deals with the development of the labor movement in the United States; major legal decisions and legislative enactments affecting labor relations; how unions are organized (largely restricted to the certification procedures of the National Labor Relations Board, with some attention to employer antiunion tactics); and to the structure of the trade union movement, including a brief discussion of union membership. There are quite a few points relating to these chapters that cannot be raised in a brief review, however, one broad question suggests itself, but not with respect to this book alone. It is this: why should not more re search attention be devoted to employer associations with bargaining functions and indeed to the policies, procedures, and tactics of major employers who bargain independently? So far as I know, the most recent fullscale study of employer bargaining associations was published almost 60 years ago (Clarence E. Bonnett, Employers' Associations in the United States, 1922). Bonnett at that time pointed to the lack of information on the bargaining and related activities of employer or ganizations. The trade union movement might well complain of the disproportionate attention given to its side of the bargaining relationship. Part 2 (chapters 6 -9 ) is concerned with the negotia tion of collective bargaining agreements; methods of Books reviewed in this issue Robert U. Ayres, Uncertain Futures: Challenges for De cision-Makers. Reviewed by Klaus Weiermair. William H. Holley, Jr. and Kenneth M. Jennings, The Labor Relations Process. Reviewed by H. M. Douty. Helen J. McLane, Selecting, Developing, and Retaining Women Executives: A Corporate Strategy for the Eighties. Reviewed by Diane N. Westcott. Marjorie Hansen Shaevitz and Morton H. Shaevitz, Making It Together as a Two-Career Couple. Re viewed by George R. Pospolita. resolving impasses, including mediation, interest arbitra tion, and work stoppages; and with contract admin istration, with emphasis upon grievance procedures and the development of grievance arbitration. This is fol lowed in part 3 (chapters 10-13) by a discussion of ma jor issues that tend to arise in the collective bargaining process, including managerial prerogatives, union securi ty, employee discipline, job security, and worker com pensation. These chapters are uneven, the strongest being those dealing essentially with a single subject (for example, grievance arbitration, employee discipline). A general weakness is the absence at many points of much in the way of analysis, coupled with a tendency to throw all kinds of odds and ends of information into the narra tive. This is shown, perhaps to an exaggerated extent, in the chapter on economic issues. For example, industry wage differentials sometimes enter into collective bargaining, but the discussion in chapter 13 throws no light on the matter. The section on job evaluation as it relates to collective bargaining is confusing. There is no coherent analysis of the factors that influence decisions on general wage changes. With respect to cost-of-living escalator clauses, it is stated in the same paragraph that the most common formula for adjustment “is cents per hour for each point increase in the CPI” and also that the “most common arrangement is to have wages ad justed for each 0.3-percent change in the CPI.” Neither of these statements is correct. Part 4 (chapters 14-17) covers a variety of situations that are designated as emerging labor relations process es. One chapter deals with State and local government, with special emphasis upon collective bargaining at edu cational institutions; another with the development of collective bargaining in the Federal sector. This is followed by a brief account of industrial relations sys tems in other parts of the world, with some consider ation of problems of transnational collective bargaining with multinational corporations. The final chapter con siders collective bargaining in professional sports (base ball in some detail); health care (particularly for nurses); and agriculture. At the end of the volume, sum maries of a number of cases dealing with various as pects of the industrial relations process decided by the National Labor Relations Board and private arbitra tors, with the decisions not indicated, are set forth for class discussion. Clearly this volume contains a great deal of informa tion. It cannot be used uncritically as a text. Its useful ness will depend heavily upon the extent to which the instructor brings skill and knowledge to bear upon its subject matter. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis — H. M. DOUTY Washington, D.C. Opening the managerial ranks to women Selecting, Developing, and Retaining Women Executives: A Corporate Strategy for the Eighties. By Helen J. McLane. New York, Litton Educational Publish ing, Inc., 1980. 248 pp., bibliography. $14.95, Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., New York. The labor force participation of women has grown substantially over the last decade and, today, more than half of all women are working or looking for work. Currently, women make up 42 percent of the labor force and, not surprisingly, most are crowded into a narrow range of lower paying, less desirable occupa tions. More than half of all women are engaged in ei ther clerical or service work. Even when women have professional careers, they are often slotted into nonsupervisory and technical roles, rather than manage rial positions which lead to the apex of the corporate pyramid. Yet, the aspirations of women to be managers and leaders is rising. Past practices have allowed few women in management, but present laws and govern ment policies, most notably, affirmative action and equal opportunity, are requiring that changes be made in the hiring and advancement of women. The introduction of women into mid- and upper-level managerial ranks is by no means a simple task. There are psychological and sociological barriers confronting women which make this endeavor difficult. In this book, Helen J. McLane focuses on management’s task of successfully integrating women into the corporate hierarchy. Probably the biggest mistake made in selecting a woman for a key managerial position is the failure to consider whether her personal characteristics are appro priate to the organization. In other words, the inter viewer must determine if the potential woman executive is qualified not only in terms of her education and expe rience but that her personality, attitude, and life style do not conflict with the company’s projected self-image. This evaluation is not something that occurs exclusively when considering a woman candidate; however, in their eagerness to hire women, many companies tend to over look the need to match personalities. It is not surprising to learn that the attitude of the woman executive’s male peers often creates the biggest barrier and source of discouragement for women mov ing into the managerial ranks. The author points out a number of steps an organization can take to help assure the successful integration of a woman into management. First, the job should be a substantive position and not a post created for her. Second, the organization should judge her performance by clearly defined and readily measurable standards, the same standards by which others are judged. Last, the company should commit it self to providing the support that a woman will need if 71 M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • Book Reviews she is to succeed. The message is clear; little overall progress will be made in advancing women without consistent and committed leadership from top manage ment. Developing a climate for change of policies and practices in order to accept women as managers usually means revising some organizational procedures and many attitudes and relationships. And while the compa ny must avoid being overprotective of women, female managers must be allowed to take risks and they must be allowed the opportunity to fail. What do managerial and professional women want? McLane states it succinctly when she notes that women “basically want the same things as men: responsibility, challenge, opportunity for advancement, and appropri ate compensation.” Women want to be treated as indi viduals and not as stereotypical women. They seek evaluation on merit, not on sex. In summation, the book offers advice on every matter concerning the recruitment, selection, hiring, develop ment, positioning, and retention of women executives. In fact, its major inadequacy is in effectively separating one chapter from the next. The book would have bene fited from an overall tightening of its content and a re duction in the use of personal interest stories which, after a while, tend to belabor the point rather than en hance it. The only other area for concern, in an other wise fine presentation of management’s goals, was the careless inclusion of a statement in which she reports that “three-fourths of all woman workers remain in five female occupations: secretary-stenographer, household worker, bookkeeper, elementary teacher, and waitress.” While women are indeed concentrated in these occupa tions, they account for only 20 percent of the jobs held by women. In fact, an additional 20 percent of all wom en are engaged in managerial and professional occupa tions, but as McLane so aptly points out, they are concentrated in the technical-professional path that is likely to go to the lower middle-management level of the organization and not the more general managerial path leading all the way to top management. — D ia n e N. W estcott Office of Current Employment Analysis Bureau of Labor Statistics Will there be enough? Uncertain Futures: Challenges for Decision-Makers. By Robert U. Ayres. New York, John Wiley & Sons, 1979. 429 pp. $16.95. Built on Robert U. Ayres previous publications on interrelationships between resources and environment and on alternatives to the combustion engine, this book attempts to present a more global picture of national and international future resources and their economic, 72 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis technological, and political implications. The author’s objective is to provide the reader with a balanced as sessment of likely futures in terms of both technological feasibility and social likelihood. The book does not place much accent on technical questions related to specific types and models of long-term forecasting, nor on detailed underlying theories of long-term technologi cal and economic development. Rather, the author at tempts to link qualitative and quantitative reasoning, different strands of thought, alpha and omega (conser vative and revolutionary) methods, along with social and technological emphasis to yield a comprehensive overall picture of possible futures, mainly those pertain ing to the United States. After a brief, cursory, (and perhaps coarse) introduc tory chapter, which deals with issues of forecasting methodology written for the novice in this field, the au thor discusses various measures of man and projection, future natural resources, ecological development, and comparative advantage. The central idea of unraveling our possible future via various measures of man is an innovative approach. Given the expertise required in a number of disciplines, it is understandable that some areas of the book are better documented and presented than others. This be comes evident in the chapters on measures of man which discuss competing social values, demographic and international developments, which, apart from a few references to prior work in sociology and political science, employ a fair amount of stereotypes and mere classifications of social and personal value systems and ideologies, as opposed to more thorough discussions of factors facilitating, limiting, or constraining future eco nomic and technological developments. The depth of the discussion and documentation of supporting evidence change considerably in the chapters which deal with microeconomic forecasts in key sectors, the general environment of technological change, dif fusion of technological change, and the future resource environment. The first of these chapters provides an overview of likely patterns of future consumption in food, energy, materials, and services based both on conventional ex trapolations and, more importantly, on likely technolog ical and developmental changes underlying these growth processes. The provision of international comparative data throughout offers a good contextual frame against which to analyze and compare U.S. consumption pat terns. The chapters on technology are helpful in showing both the underlying rationale and dynamics of techno logical change, and the nature of substitution processes for a number of materials and technologies. In the chapter on the future resource environment, the author discusses factors which may or may not limit future growth in terms of physical resources, including an account of the interrelationships between energy con sumption and climate. The last chapter illustrates the consequences of nucle ar proliferation, another energy crisis, or a dramatic worsening of world food supplies. This book will prove to be an indispensable and thought-provoking source to those readers who are more interested in the illustration of possible future en vironments than in who is right or wrong about the fu ture. — K laus W eierm a ir Associate Professor, Department of Economics York University Toronto, Ontario, Canada Making the marriage work too Making It Together as a Two-Career Couple. By Marjorie Hansen Shaevitz and Morton H. Shaevitz. Boston, Mass., Houghton Mifflin Co., 1980. 282 pp. $8.95. As social and economic changes swept across the United States in the 1960’s and 1970’s, Americans found themselves altering their institutions and their lives in an effort to keep up with, if not always ahead of, the effects of their shifting personal and financial for tunes. Certainly, the American family, as an institution, has not remained invulnerable to change, and one of the largest changes overtaking it has been the emergence of women from the home and into the workplace. Accord ing to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, by 1979 there were 18.7 million married-couple families with two wage earners or more; this book was written with those families in mind. The authors, Marjorie Hansen Shaevitz and Morton H. Shaevitz, are codirectors of the Institute for Family and Work Relationships in La Jolla, Calif., and have been working with two-career couples for the last 8 years. They contend that until recently, couples who have faced career changes, reassignments, income dis ruption, and other facts of modern worklife, received little or no support from a community that was still pri marily one wage-earner oriented. To help such couples, the authors offer advice on how to cope with the prob lems that can arise from a two-career relationship as well as how to deal with the minor day-to-day struggles of home maintenance in a busy household. Half the book is devoted to advice about practical matters such as: choosing proper child care; finances; personal health care; and parental responsibilities as they relate to a working couple. A sample of subchapter headings finds information about Managing Your Time, Child Care Outside Your Home, and Costs in Earning https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Second Income. Unfortunately, most of the financial ad vice does not bear directly on the finances of two-career couples and has already been given in other popularly available “money books.” The second half of the book deals with serious career issues. The authors are firm believers in shared career decisionmaking and the sections dealing with work as it affects the two-career couple are realistic and fair. Lists of job-rating factors with instructions on how to weigh various items such as geographical area, personal goals, and economic costs are included to help readers in their decisionmaking. Even more helpful are the case histories of couples dealing with their own work-related dilem mas. Couples who have been counseled by the authors relate their two-career problems and solutions in their own words, which helps readers, who may themselves be facing the prospect of saying “N o” to a transfer or some other stressful job-related situation, realize that they are not alone. The authors emphasize that this book is for working couples, not about them. And although it may not suit every couple’s needs, it does give the working couple a handy reference guide for almost every question larger than “Who takes out the garbage?” — G eo rg e R. P ospolita Office of Statistical Operations Bureau of Labor Statistics Publications received Economic and social statistics Great Britain, Department of Employment, “International Unemployment Statistics,” Employment Gazette, August 1980, pp. 833-40. Griffith, Jeanne E., “Update on Statistics for Americans of Spanish Origin or Descent,” Statistical Reporter, Septem ber 1980, pp. 401-05. Katzan, Harry S., Jr., Multinational Computer Systems: An In troduction to Transnational Data Flow and Data Regulation. (International Series on Data Communica tions and Networks.) New York, Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., 1980, 198 pp. $16.95. Economic growth and development Fellner, William, Project Director, Contemporary Economic Problems, 1980. Washington, American Enterprise Insti tute for Public Policy Research, 1980, 342 pp. Fuchs, Victor, Economic Growth and the Rise of Service Em ployment. Cambridge, Mass., National Bureau of Economic Research, 1980, 30 pp. (NBER Working Pa per, 486.) $1. Harrington, Michael, Decade of Decision: The Crisis of the American System. New York, Simon & Schuster, 1980, 354 pp., bibliography. $11.95. 73 M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • Book Reviews Hutchison, T. W., The Limitations of General Theories in Macroeconomics. Washington, American Enterprise Insti tute for Public Policy Research, 1980, 31 pp. (AEI Stud ies in Economic Policy, 285.) “The Harnessing of Human Ingenuity to Help Solve the Problems of Economic Growth: Economic Develop ment,” by K. K. S. Dadzie; “People,” by Halfdan Mah ler; “Food,” by Nevin S. Scrimshaw and Lance Taylor; “Water,” by Robert P. Ambroggi; “Energy,” by Wolfgang Sassin; “The Economic Development of Chi na,” by Ding Chen; “The Economic Development of In dia,” by Raj Krishna; The Economic Development of Tanzania,” by Robert B. Mabele, William M. Lyakurwa, Beno J. Ndulu, Samuel M. Wangwe; “The Economic De velopment of Mexico,” by Pablo Gonzalez Casanova; “The World Economy of the Year 2000,” by Wassily W. Leontief, Scientific American, Special Issue, September 1980, pp. 58-231. Tobin, James, “Stabilization Policy Ten Years After,” Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 1, 1980, pp. 1971. Health and safety Clark, Donald, “Physician Assistants: When There’s No Doc tor in the House,” Occupational Outlook Quarterly, Sum mer 1980, pp. 20-23. Shapiro, Edward, “Controlling Health Care Expenditures,” Challenge, September-October 1980, pp. 40-44. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Injuries and Illnesses in the United States by Industry, 1978. Washing ton, 1980, 94 pp. (Bulletin 2078.) $4.25, Superintendent of Documents, Washington 20402. Industrial relations American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, The Administration's Plan to Reauthorize Revenue Sharing. Washington, 1980, 32 pp. (AEI Legislative Analysis, 18, 96th Cong., 2d sess.) ----- The Capital Cost Recovery Act Proposal. Washington, 1980, 31 pp. (AEI Legislative Analysis, 17, 96th Cong., 2d sess.) Bennett, James T. and Manuel H. Johnson, “The Impact of Right-to-Work Laws on the Economic Behavior of Local Unions: A Property Rights Perspective,” Journal of La bor Research, Vol. 1, No. 1, 1980, pp. 1-27. Chaikin, Sol C., “Labor’s Critical Issue: The Two-Tiered Soci ety,” The Journal! The Institute for Socioeconomic Studies, Autumn 1980, pp. 1-17. Chaison, Gary N., Union Mergers and International Unionism in Canada. Amherst, University of Massachusetts, Labor Relations and Research Center, 1980. (Reprint Series 57.) Reprinted from Relations Industrielles, Vol. 34, No. 4, 1979, pp. 768-76. Fischer, Harry C., Accounting and Office Manual for Labor Unions. Berkeley, University of California, Center for La bor Research and Education, Institute of Industrial Rela tions, 1979, 147 pp. Freeman, Richard B., “The Effect of Unionism on Worker Attachment to Firms,” Journal of Labor Research, Vol. 1, No. 1, 1980, pp. 29-61. 74 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Great Britain, Department of Employment, “Picketing and the Closed Shop: Draft Codes,” Employment Gazette, August 1980, pp. 849-58. Hekman, John S. and John S. Strong, “Is There a Case for Plant Closing Laws?” New England Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, July-August 1980, pp. 34-51. Kalachek, Edward and Frederic Raines, “Trade Unions and Hiring Standards,” Journal of Labor Research, Vol. 1, No. 1, 1980, pp. 63-75. Kennan, John, “Pareto Optimality and the Economics of Strike Duration,” Journal of Labor Research, Vol. 1, No. 1, 1980, pp. 77-94. Industry and government organization Anshen, Melvin, Corporate Strategies for Social Performance. New York, Columbia University, 1980, 274 pp. $12.95, Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc., New York. Choate, Pat, As Time Goes By: The Costs and Consequences of Delay. Columbus, Ohio, The Academy for Contemporary Problems, 1980, 38 pp., bibliography. Pluta, Joseph E., Economic and Business Issues of the 1980's. Austin, University of Texas at Austin, Bureau of Business Research, 1980, 235 pp. Wool, Harold and John Ostbo, The Labor Outlook for the Bi tuminous Coal Mining Industry. Palo Alto, Calif., Electric Power Research Institute, 1980, 287 pp. Available from Research Reports Center, Box 50490, Palo Alto, Calif. 94303. International economics Batra, Raveendra N. and Josef Hadar, “Theory of the Multi national Firm: Fixed Versus Floating Exchange Rates,” Oxford Economic Papers, July 1979, pp. 258-69. Chaikin, Sol Chick, A Labor Viewpoint: Another Opinion. Monroe, N.Y., Library Research Associates, 1980, 231 pp. $10.95. Dornbusch, Rudiger, “Exchange Rate Economics: Where Do We Stand?” Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 1, 1980, pp. 143-85. ----- Open Economy Macroeconomics. New York, Basic Books, Inc., Publishers, 1980, 293 pp. $18.50. ----- Stanley Fischer, Paul A. Samuelson, “Heckscher-Ohlin Trade Theory with a Continuum of Goods,” The Quar terly Journal of Economics, September 1980, pp. 203-24. Erb, Richard D., ed., “The Arab Oil-Producing States of the Gulf: Political and Economic Developments,” AEI For eign Policy and Defense Review, American Enterprise In stitute for Public Policy Research, Vol. 2, Nos. 3-4. Holzman, Franklyn D„ “Is There a Soviet-U.S. Military Spending Gap?” Challenge, September-October 1980, pp. 3-9. Kennedy, Charles and A. P. Thirlwall, “Import Penetration, Export Performance and Harrod’s Trade Multiplier,” Ox ford Economic Papers, July 1979, pp. 303-23. Labor force Becker, Brian E. and Stephen M. Hills, “Teenage Unemploy ment: Some Evidence of the Long-Run Effects on Wages,” The Journal of Human Resources, Summer 1980, pp. 354-72. Bergmann, Barbara R. and others, “The Effect of Wives’ La bor Force Participation on Inequality in the Distribution of Family Income,” The Journal of Human Resources, Summer 1980, pp. 452-55. Cook, Alice H. and Hiroko Hayashi, Working Women in Ja pan: Discrimination, Resistance, and Reform. Ithaca, N.Y., Cornell University, New York State School of In dustrial and Labor Relations, 1980, 124 pp. $12.50, cloth; $7.95, paper. Great Britain, Department of Employment, “The Disadvan tages of the Unemployed,” by Sue Moylan and Bob Da vies, Employment Gazette, August 1980, pp. 830-32. Hall, Robert E., “Employment Fluctuations and Wage Rigidity,” Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 1, 1980, pp. 91-123. Harrison, Cynthia, Working Women Speak: Education, Train ing, Counseling: A Report on Six Regional Dialogues Spon sored by the National Commission on Working Women. Washington, The National Advisory Council on Women’s Educational Programs, 1979, 43 pp. Jones, Landon Y., Great Expectations: America and the Baby Boom Generation. New York, Coward, McCann & Geoghegan, 1980, 380 pp., bibliography. $15.95. Management and organization theory Bennett, Dudley, Successful Team Building Through TA. New York, AMACOM, A division of American Management Associations, 1980, 260 pp. $14.95. Brix, V. H., “Systems and Cybernetics: A Methodology for Human Systems Management,” Human Systems Manage ment, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 53-61. “Career Planning,” Personnel Administrator, October 1980, pp. 18-54. Cohn, Theodore and Roy A. Lindberg, Compensating Key Ex ecutives in the Smaller Company. N ew York, AMACOM, A division of American Management Associations, 1979, 224 pp. $16.95. Cole, Robert E., “Learning from the Japanese: Prospects and Pitfalls,” Management Review, September 1980, beginning on p. 22. Digman, Lester A., “Management Development: Needs and Practices,” Personnel, July-August 1980, pp. 45-57. Emshoff, James R., Managerial Breakthroughs: Action Tech niques for Strategic Change. New York, AMACOM, A di vision of American Management Associations, 1980, 211 pp. $15.95. Faulkner, John C., “How to Strengthen Marketing When the Going Gets Tough,” Management Review, September 1980, pp. 8-14. Frederic W. Cook and Co., Inc., Future Value Incentive Plans: Survey of Executive Plans and Trends Among the 200 Largest Industrial Companies. New York, Frederic W. Cook and Co., Inc., 1980, 16 pp. Friedman, Joann and Larry J. Rosenberg, “Omnimarketing: How the Growing Influence of ‘Market Masters’ Is Changing Consumer Marketing Strategy,” Management Review, September 1980, pp. 15-21. Grinyer, Peter H. and Masoud Yasai-Ardekani, “Dimensions of Organizational Structure: A Critical Replication,” https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Academy of Management Journal, September 1980, pp. 405-21. Henrici, Stanley B., Salary Management for the Nonspecialist. New York, AMACOM, A division of American Manage ment Associations, 1980, 247 pp. $15.95. Monetary and fiscal policy Berkman, Neil G., “Bank Reserves, Money, and Some Prob lems for the New Monetary Policy,” New England Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, JulyAugust 1980, pp. 52-64. Browne, Lynn E. with Peter Mieszkowski and Richard F. Syron, “Regional Investment Patterns,” New England Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, JulyAugust 1980, pp. 5-23. Davenport, John A., “A Testing Time for Monetarism,” For tune, Oct. 6, 1980, beginning on p. 42. Feldstein, Martin, “Fiscal Policies, Inflation, and Capital For mation,” The American Economic Review, September 1980, pp. 636-50. Kopeke, Richard W„ “Why Interest Rates Are So Low,” New England Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Bos ton, July-August 1980, pp. 24-33. Moore, Basil, “The Curious Case of Common Stocks,” Chal lenge, September-October 1980, pp. 20-27. Ratti, Ronald A., “Bank Attitude Toward Risk, Implicit Rates of Interest, and the Behavior of an Index of Risk Aversion for Commercial Banks,” The Quarterly Journal of Economics, September 1980, pp. 309-31. Renshaw, Edward F., “Deferred Income Accounts,” Chal lenge, September-October 1980, pp. 17-19. Roper, Don E. and Stephen J. Turnovsky, “The Optimum Monetary Aggregate for Stabilization Policy,” The Quar terly Journal of Economics, September 1980, pp. 333-55. Prices and living conditions Brecher, Richard A. and Christopher J. Heady, “Stagflation in an Open Economy,” Oxford Economic Papers, July 1979, pp. 165-76. Fischer, David Hackett, “Chronic Inflation: The Long View,” The Journal/The Institute for Socioeconomic Studies, Autumn 1980, pp. 82-103. Perry, George L., “Inflation in Theory and Practice,” Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 1, 1980, pp. 20741. Productivity and technological change “The Productivity Crisis: Can America Renew Its Economic Promise?” Newsweek, Sept. 8, 1980, beginning on p. 50. Weinberg, Edgar, “The Productivity Slowdown: A Study of Three Industries,” Looking Ahead, National Planning As sociation, Summer 1980, beginning on p. 1. Social institutions and social change Abrahamsson, Bengt and Anders Broström, The Rights of La bor. Beverly Hills, Calif., Sage Publications, Inc., 1980, 301 pp. $25. Borchert, James, Alley Life in Washington: Family, Communi ty, Religion, and Folklife in the City, 1850-1970. Urbana, 75 M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • Book Reviews University of Illinois, 1980, 326 pp„ bibliography. $18.95, University of Illinois Press, Champaign, 111. Terris, Virginia R., Woman in America: A Guide to Informa tion Sources. Detroit, Mich., Gale Research Co., 1980, 520 pp. (American Studies Information Guide Series, Vol. 7.) $30. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, The Status of Children, Youth and Families 1979. Washington, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administra tion for Children, Youth and Families, 1980, 251 pp. (DHHS Publication [OHDS] 80-30274.) Wages and compensation Borjas, George J., “The Relationship Between Wages and Weekly Hours of Work: The Role of Division Bias,” The Journal of Human Resources, Summer 1980, pp. 409-23. Martin, Gail M., “Fringe Around the Paycheck: Employee Benefits,” Occupational Outlook Quarterly, Summer 1980, pp. 17-19. Sandell, Steven H. and David Shapiro, “Work Expectations, Human Capital Accumulation, and the Wages of Young Women,” The Journal of Human Resources, Summer 1980, pp. 335-53. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Area Wage Surveys: Houston, Texas, Metropolitan Area, April 1980 (Bulletin 3000-18, 51 pp., $3.25); Hartford, Connecticut, Metropolitan Area, March 1980 (Bulletin 3000-19, 40 pp., $2.25); Atlanta, Georgia, Metropolitan Area, May 1980 (Bulletin 3000-21, 41 pp., $2.25); Green Bay, Wisconsin, Metropolitan Area, July 1980 (Bulletin 3000-22, 25 pp., $1.75); Richmond, Virginia, Metropolitan Area, June 1980 (Bulletin 3000-23, 41 pp., $2.25); New York, N.Y.— New Jersey, Metropoli tan Area, May 1980 (Bulletin 3000-24, 41 pp., $2.25). Available from the Superintendent of Documents, Wash ington 20402, GPO bookstores, or BLS regional offices. ----- Federal Employees Under the General Schedule Pay Sys tem, 1975-78. Washington, 1980. (Supplement to Wage Chronology, Bulletin 1870.) 27 pp. ----- Union Wages and Benefits: Local Transit Operating Em ployees, July 1, 1979. Washington, 1980, 21 pp. (Bulletin 2074.) Stock No. 029-001-02498-3. $1.75, Superintendent of Documents, Washington 20402. 76 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis U.S. Employment and Training Administration, Exchanging Earnings for Leisure: Findings of an Exploratory National Survey on Work Time Preferences. Washington, U.S. De partment of Labor, Employment and Training Adminis tration, 1980, 184 pp. (R&D Monograph, 79.) Stock No. 029-014-00114-7. $5.50, Superintendent of Documents, Washington 20402. Welfare programs and social insurance Barth, Michael C., “Welfare Policy: Near and Longer Term,” The JournalIThe. Institute for Socioeconomic Studies, Autumn 1980, pp. 38-49. Baucus, Max, “The Federal Response to Medicare Supple mentary Insurance,” The JournalI The Institute for Socio economic Studies, Autumn 1980, pp. 65-73. Bethell, Tom, “Real Welfare Reform,” The Journal/The Institute for Socioeconomic Studies, Autumn 1980, pp. 29-37. Board of Directors, Manpower Demonstration Research Corp., Summary and Findings of the National Supported Work Demonstration. New York, Manpower Demonstra tion Research Corp., 1980, 164 pp. $3. Driver, William J., “Forty-Fifth Anniversary of Social Securi ty,” Social Security Bulletin, August 1980, pp. 3-5. Great Britain, Department of Employment, “Voluntary Early Retirement—Taking the Decision,” by Ann McGoldrick and Gary L. Cooper, Employment Gazette, August 1980, pp. 859-64. Worker training and development Friel, Theodore W. and Todd Holder, “Training Youth to Cope in Work Settings,” Journal of Employment Counsel ing, September 1980, pp. 153-61. Martin, Gail M., “Careers in Commodity Futures Trading,” Occupational Outlook Quarterly, Summer 1980, pp. 2429. ----- “Emerging Engineering Fields: New Jobs in an Old Pro fession,” Occupational Outlook Quarterly, Summer 1980, pp. 2-13. Seltz-Petrash, Ann, “The Great Woman Hunt,” Occupational Outlook Quarterly, Summer 1980, pp. 14-16. Current Labor Statistics Notes on Current Labor Statistics .............................................................................................. Schedule of release dates for major BLS statistical series Employment data from household survey. Definitions and notes ........................................... 1. E m ploym en t status o f non in stitu tion al pop ulation , selected years, 1 9 5 0 - 7 9 2. E m ploym en t status by sex, age, and race, seasonally adjusted .......................................................................... ...................................................................................................... 3. Selected em p loym en t ind icators, seasonally adjusted 4. Selected un em ploym ent ind icators, season ally adjusted ........................................................................................................................ 5. 6. U n em p lo y m en t rates, by sex and age, seasonally adjusted ............................................................................................................... U n em p lo y ed persons, by reason for un em ploym ent, season ally adjusted ................................................................................ 7. D uration o f un em p loym en t, season ally adjusted ..................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................. Employment, hours, and earnings data from establishment surveys. Definitions and notes 8. 9. 10. 11. E m ploym en t by industry, 1 9 5 0 - 7 9 ............................................................................................................................................................. E m ploym en t by State ........................................................................................................................................................................................ E m ploym en t by industry division and m ajor m anufacturing group ............................................................................................ E m p loym en t by industry division and m ajor m anufacturing group, seasonally adjusted .............................................. 12. L abor turnover rates in m anufacturing, 1977 to date 13. L abor turnover rates in m anufacturing, by m ajor industry group ........................................................................................................................ 14. 15. H ours and earnings, by industry division , 1 9 4 9 - 7 9 ........................................................................................................................... W eekly hours, by industry division and m ajor m anufacturing g r o u p ......................................................................................... ............................................................................................... 16. W eekly hours, by ind ustry division and m ajor m anufacturing group, season ally adjusted 17. 18. H ou rly earnings, by ind ustry division and m ajor m anufacturing group ................................................................................... H ourly E arnings Index, by ind ustry division , season ally adjusted ............................................................................................ ........................................... 19. 20. W eekly earnings, by industry division and m ajor m anufacturing group ................................................................................... G ro ss and spendable w eekly earnings, in current and 1967 dollars, 1960 to date .............................................................. Unemployment insurance data. Definitions and notes .............................................................. 21. U n em p lo y m en t insurance and em ploym en t service operations ...................................................................................................... Price data. Definitions and notes .................................................................................................. 22. 23. C onsum er Price Index, 1 9 6 7 - 7 9 ................................................................................................................................................................... C onsum er Price Index, U .S . city average, general sum m ary and selected item s .................................................................... 24. C onsum er Price Index, cross classification o f region and p op u lation size class 25. 26. C onsum er Price Index, selected areas .......................................................................................................................................................... P roducer Price Indexes, by stage o f p rocessing .................................................................................................................................... 27. 28. Producer Price Indexes, by c o m m o d ity groupings .............................................................................................................................. Producer Price Indexes, for special c o m m o d ity groupings ............................................................................................................... 29. 30. Producer Price Indexes, by durability o f product ......................................................................................... ........................................ Producer Price Indexes for th e o u tp u t o f selected SIC industries ............................................................................................... .................................................................... Productivity data. Definitions and notes 31. A nnu al indexes o f p rodu ctivity, hou rly com pensation , unit co sts, and prices, 1 9 5 0 - 7 9 32. A nnu al changes in productivity, hourly com p en sation , unit co sts, and prices, 1 9 6 9 - 7 9 .................................................. 33. ................................................. Q uarterly ind exes o f p rodu ctivity, hourly com p en sation , unit costs, and prices, season ally adjusted ...................... 34. Percent change from preceding quarter and year in p rodu ctivity, hourly com p en sation , unit co sts, and prices . . Labor-management data. Definitions and notes .......................................................................... 35. 36. W age and benefit settlem ents in m ajor co llective bargaining units, 1975 to date ................................................................. E ffective w age rate adjustm ents goin g in to effect in m ajor collective bargaining units, 1975 to d a t e ......................... 37. W ork stop p ages, 1947 to date https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis ...................................................................................................................................................................... NOTES ON CURRENT LABOR STATISTICS This section of the Review presents the principal statistical se ries collected and calculated by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. A brief introduction to each group of tables provides defi nitions, notes on the data, sources, and other material usually found in footnotes. Readers who need additional information are invited to consult the BLS regional offices listed on the inside front cov er of this issue of the Review. Some general notes applicable to several series are given below. Seasonal adjustment. Certain monthly and quarterly data are adjusted to eliminate the effect of such factors as climatic conditions, industry production schedules, opening and closing of schools, holiday buying periods, and vacation practices, which might otherwise mask short term movements of the statistical series. Tables containing these data are identified as “seasonally adjusted.” Seasonal effects are estimated on the basis of past experience. When new seasonal factors are com puted each year, revisions may affect seasonally adjusted data for sev eral preceding years. For a technical discussion of the method used to make seasonal adjustments, see X - ll Variant o f the Census Method II Seasonal Adjustment Program, Technical Paper No. 15 (Bureau of the Census, 1967). Seasonally adjusted labor force data in tables 2 - 7 were last revised in the February 1980 issue of the Review to reflect the preceding year’s experience. Beginning in January 1980, the BLS introduced two major modifications in the seasonal adjustment methodology for labor force data. First, the data are being seasonally adjusted with a new proce dure called X -ll/A R IM A , which was developed at Statistics Canada as an extension of the standard X -ll method. A detailed description of the procedure appears in The X - ll ARIMA Seasonal Adjustment Method by Estela Bee Dagum (Statistics Canada Catalogue No. 12-564E, September 1979). The second change is that seasonal factors are now being calculated for use during the first 6 months of the year, rather than for the entire year, and then are calculated at mid-year for the July-December period. Revisions of historical data continue to be made only at the end of each calendar year. Annual revision of the seasonally adjusted payroll data in tables 11, 13, 16, and 18 begins with the August 1980 issue using the X -ll ARIM A seasonal adjustment methodology. New seasonal fac tors for productivity data in tables 33 and 34 are usually intro duced in the September issue. Seasonally adjusted indexes and percent changes from month to month and from quarter to quarter are published for numerous Consumer and Producer Price Index series. However, seasonally adjusted indexes are not published for the U.S. average All Items CPI. Only seasonally adjusted percent changes are available for this series. Adjustments for price changes. Some data are adjusted to eliminate the effect of changes in price. These adjustments are made by dividing current dollar values by the Consumer Price Index or the appropriate component of the index, then multiplying by 100. For example, given a current hourly wage rate of $3 and a current price index number of 150, where 1967 = 100, the hourly rate expressed in 1967 dollars is $2 ($3/150 X 100 = $2). The resulting values are described as “real,” “constant,” or “ 1967” dollars. Availability of information. Data that supplement the tables in this section are published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics in a variety of sources. Press releases provide the latest statistical information published by the Bureau; the major recurring releases are published according to the schedule given below. The Handbook o f Labor Statis tics 1978, Bulletin 2000, provides more detailed data and greater his torical coverage for most of the statistical series presented in the Monthly Labor Review. More information from the household and es tablishment surveys is provided in Employment and Earnings, a monthly publication of the Bureau, and in two comprehensive data books issued annually— Employment and Earnings, United States and Employment and Earnings, States and Areas. More detailed informa tion on wages and other aspects of collective bargaining appears in the monthly periodical, Current Wage Developments. More detailed price information is published each month in the periodicals, the CPI Detailed Report and Producer Prices and Price Indexes. Symbols p = preliminary. To improve the timeliness of some series, preliminary figures are issued based on representative but incomplete returns. r = revised. Generally this revision reflects the availability of later data but may also reflect other adjustments, n.e.c. = not elsewhere classified. Schedule of release dates for major BLS statistical series Title and frequency (monthly except where indicated) Employment situation.................... Producer Price Index .................. Consumer Price Index ................ Real earnings .................. Work stoppages.................... Labor turnover in manufacturing . . . . Major collective bargaining settlements (quarterly) 78 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Release date Period covered Release date December 5 December 5 December 23 December 23 December 30 December 31 November November November November November November January 9 January 9 January 23 January 23 January 29 January 30 January 26 Period covered MLR table number December December December December December December 1980 1-11 26-30 22-25 14-20 37 12-13 35-36 EMPLOYMENT DATA FROM THE HOUSEHOLD SURVEY E mployment data in t h is s e c tio n a re o b ta in e d fr o m th e C u r r e n t P o p u la t io n S u r v e y , a p r o g r a m o f p e r s o n a l in te r v ie w s c o n d u c t e d m o n t h ly b y t h e B u r e a u o f t h e C e n s u s fo r t h e B u r e a u of Labor S ta t is t ic s . The s a m p le c o n s is t s of about 6 5 ,0 0 0 h o u s e h o ld s b e g in n in g in J a n u a r y 1 9 8 0 , s e le c te d t o r e p r e s e n t t h e U .S . p o p u la t io n 16 y e a r s o f a g e a n d o ld e r . H o u s e h o ld s a re in te r v ie w e d o n a r o t a tin g b a s is , s o th a t th r e e - fo u r t h s o f t h e those not classified as employed or unemployed; this group includes persons retired, those engaged in their own housework, those not working while attending school, those unable to work because of longterm illness, those discouraged from seeking work because of personal or job market factors, and those who are voluntarily idle. The noninstitutional population comprises all persons 16 years of age and older who are not inmates of penal or mental institutions, sanitariums, or homes for the aged, infirm, or needy. s a m p le is t h e s a m e fo r a n y 2 c o n s e c u t iv e m o n t h s . Definitions Employed persons are (1) those who worked for pay any time during the week which includes the 12th day of the month or who worked unpaid for 15 hours or more in a family-operated enterprise and (2) those who were temporarily absent from their regular jobs because of illness, vacation, industrial dispute, or similar reasons. A person working at more than one job is counted only in the job at which he or she worked the greatest number of hours. Unemployed persons are those who did not work during the survey week, but were available for work except for temporary illness and had looked for jobs within the preceding 4 weeks. Persons who did not look for work because they were on layoff or waiting to start new jobs within the next 30 days are also counted among the unemployed. The unemployment rate represents the number unemployed as a percent of the civilian labor force. The civilian labor force consists of all employed or unemployed persons in the civilian noninstitutional population; the total labor force includes military personnel. Persons not in the labor force are 1. Full-time workers are those employed at least 35 hours a week; part-time workers are those who work fewer hours. Workers on parttime schedules for economic reasons (such as slack work, terminating or starting a job during the week, material shortages, or inability to find full-time work) are among those counted as being on full-time status, under the assumption that they would be working full time if conditions permitted. The survey classifies unemployed persons in full-time or part-time status by their reported preferences for full-time or part-time work. Notes on the data From time to time, and especially after a decennial census, adjustments are made in the Current Population Survey figures to correct for estimating errors during the preceding years. These adjustments affect the comparability of historical data presented in table 1. A description of these adjustments and their effect on the various data series appear in the Explanatory Notes of Employment and Earnings. Data in tables 2 - 7 are seasonally adjusted, based on the seasonal experience through December 1979. Employment status of the noninstitutional population, 16 years and over, selected years, 1950-79 [Numbers inthousands] Civilian labor force Total labor force Year Total non institutional population Unemployed Employed Number Percent of population Total Total Agriculture Nonagricultural industries Number Percent of labor force Not in labor force 106,645 112,732 119,759 127,224 129,236 63,858 68,072 72,142 75,830 77,178 599 604 60.2 596 59.7 62,208 65,023 69,628 73,091 74,455 58,918 62,170 65,778 69,305 71,088 7,160 6,450 5,458 4,523 4,361 51,758 55,722 60,318 64,782 66,726 3,288 2,852 3,852 3,786 3,366 5.3 4.4 5.5 5.2 4.5 42,787 44,660 47,617 51,394 52,058 1970 ............................................................ 131,180 133,319 135,562 137,841 140,182 78,893 80,793 82,272 84,240 85,903 60.1 606 60.7 61.1 61.3 75,770 77,347 78,737 80,734 82,715 72,895 74,372 75,920 77,902 78,627 3,979 3,844 3,817 3,606 3,462 68,915 70,527 72,103 74,296 75,165 2,875 2,975 2,817 2,832 4,088 3.8 3.8 3.6 3.5 4.9 52,288 52,527 53,291 53,602 54,280 1974 .................................. 1975 ............................................................ 142,596 145,775 148,263 150,827 153,449 86,929 88,991 91,040 93,240 94,793 61.0 61.0 61.4 61.8 61.8 84,113 86,542 88,714 91,011 92,613 79,120 81,702 84,409 83,935 84,783 3,387 3,472 3,452 3,492 3,380 75,732 78,230 80,957 82,443 81,403 4,993 4,840 4,304 5,076 7,830 5.9 5.6 4.9 5.6 8.5 55,666 56,785 57,222 57,587 58,655 1979 ............................................................ 156,048 158,559 161,058 163,620 96,917 99,534 102,537 104,996 62.1 62.8 63.7 64.2 94,773 97,401 100,420 102,908 87,485 90,546 94,373 96,945 3,297 3,244 3,342 3,297 84,188 87,302 91,031 93,648 7,288 6,855 6,047 5,963 7.7 7.0 6.0 5.8 59,130 59,025 58,521 58,623 1950 1955 I960 ................................ ........................................ ................................ 1965 ............................................................ 1966 1967 1968 ................................ .......................................... ...................................... https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 79 M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • Current Labor Statistics: Household Data 2. Employment status by sex, age, and race, seasonally adjusted [Numbers in thousands] Employment status Annua average 1979 1978 1979 Oct Nov. Dec. 161,058 102,537 158,941 100,420 94,373 3,342 91,031 6,047 6.0 58,521 163,620 104,996 161,532 102,908 96,945 3,297 93,648 5,963 5.8 58,623 164,468 105,688 162,375 103,595 97,474 3,294 94,180 6,121 5.9 58,780 164,682 105,744 162,589 103,652 97,608 3,385 94,223 6,044 5.8 58,937 164,898 106,088 162,809 103,999 97,912 3,359 94,553 6,087 5.9 58,810 67,006 53,464 51,212 2,361 48,852 2,252 4.2 13,541 68,293 54,486 52,264 2,350 49,913 2,223 4.1 13,807 68,697 54,760 52,443 2,371 50,072 2,317 4.2 13,937 68,804 54,709 52,374 2,438 49,936 2,335 4.3 14,095 75,489 37,416 35,180 586 34,593 2,236 6.0 38,073 76,860 38,910 36,698 591 36,107 2,213 5.7 37,949 77,308 39,362 37,112 572 36,540 2,250 5.7 37,946 16,447 9,540 7,981 395 7,586 1,559 16.3 6,907 16,379 9,512 7,984 356 7,628 1,528 16.1 6,867 139,580 88,456 83,836 4,620 5.2 51,124 19,361 11,964 10,537 1,427 11.9 7,397 Feb. Mar. Apr. May 165,101 106,310 163,020 104,229 97,804 3,270 94,534 6,425 6.2 58,791 165,298 106,346 163,211 104,260 97,953 3,326 94,626 6,307 6.0 58,951 165,506 106,184 163,416 104,094 97,656 3,358 94,298 6,438 6.2 59,322 165,693 106,511 163,601 104,419 97,154 3,242 93,912 7,265 7.0 59,182 165,886 107,230 163,799 105,142 96,988 3,379 93,609 8,154 7.8 58,657 166,105 106,634 164,013 104,542 96,537 3,191 93,346 8,006 7.7 59,471 68,940 54,781 52,478 2,427 50,051 2,303 4.2 14,159 69,047 54,855 52,279 2,387 49,892 2,577 4.7 14,192 69,140 55,038 52,531 2,435 50,096 2,507 4.6 14,102 69,238 54,996 52,300 2,394 49,906 2,696 4.9 14,242 69,329 55,114 51,868 2,320 49,548 3,246 5.9 14,215 69,428 55,467 51,796 2,384 49,412 3,671 6.6 13,961 77,426 39,445 37,248 612 36,636 2,197 5.6 37,981 77,542 39,659 37,402 582 36,820 2,257 5.7 37,883 77,656 39,878 37,574 540 37,034 2,304 5.8 37,778 77,766 39,857 37,604 567 37,037 2,254 5.7 37,909 77,876 39,751 37,496 582 36,914 2,255 5.7 38,125 77,981 40,137 37,602 552 37,051 2,534 6.3 37,844 16,370 9,473 7,919 351 7,568 1,554 16.4 6,897 16,360 9,498 7,986 335 7,651 1,512 15.9 6,862 16,326 9,559 8,032 350 7,682 1,527 16.0 6,767 16,317 9,497 7,952 344 7,608 1,545 16.3 6,820 16,305 9,365 7,818 325 7,493 1,547 16.5 6,940 16,302 9,346 7,859 381 7,478 1,487 15.9 6,956 141,614 90,602 86,025 4,577 5.1 51,011 142,296 91,147 86,454 4,693 5.1 51,149 142,461 91,242 86,571 4,671 5.1 51,219 142,645 91,579 86,894 4,685 5.1 51,066 142,806 142,951 91,852 91,977 86,895 87,081 4,957 4,896 5.4 5.3 50,954 50,975 19,918 12,306 10,920 1,386 11.3 7,612 20,079 12,512 11,076 1,436 11.5 7,567 20,128 12,391 11,044 1,347 10.9 7,737 20,163 12,432 11,024 1,408 11.3 7,731 20,214 12,453 10,979 1,474 July Aug. Sept O ct 166,391 107,302 164,293 105,203 96,996 3,257 93,739 8,207 7.8 59,091 166,578 107,139 164,464 105,025 97,006 3,180 93,826 8,019 7.6 59,439 166,789 107,155 164,667 105,034 97,207 3,442 93,765 7,827 7.5 59,633 167,005 107,301 164,884 105,180 97,176 3,324 93,851 8,005 7.6 59,704 69,532 55,220 51,510 2,270 49,240 3,710 6.7 14,312 69,664 55,398 51,668 2,292 49,376 3,730 6.7 14,266 69,756 55,474 51,792 2,286 49,506 3,682 69,864 55,547 51,803 2,398 49,405 3,744 6.7 14,317 69,987 55,504 51,963 2,355 49,607 3,541 6.4 14,483 78,090 40,246 37,576 616 36,960 2,670 6.6 37,844 78,211 40,125 37,530 541 36,989 2,596 6.5 38,086 78,360 40,471 37,769 565 37,204 2,702 6.7 37,889 78,473 40,589 37,961 548 37,413 2,628 6.5 37,884 78,598 40,297 37,824 607 37,216 2,473 38,301 78,723 40,486 37,716 572 37,144 2,771 6.8 38,237 16,291 9,168 7,683 370 7,313 1,485 16.2 7,123 16,281 9,429 7,616 379 7,237 1,813 19.2 6,852 16,271 9,197 7,497 380 7,117 1,700 18.5 7,074 16,268 9,334 7,560 401 7,159 1,774 19.0 6,934 16,235 8,962 7,253 346 6,907 1,709 19.1 7,273 16,205 9,190 7,580 437 7,143 1,610 17.5 7,015 16,174 9,191 7,498 398 7,100 1,693 18.4 6,983 143,115 91.821 86.822 4,999 5.4 51,294 143,254 92,083 86,385 5,698 6.2 51,171 143,403 92,535 86,148 6,386 6.9 50,868 143,565 143,770 92,096 92,456 85,792 86,063 6,303 6,392 6.8 6.9 51,469 51,314 143,900 92,294 85,981 6,313 6.8 51,606 144,051 92,337 86,315 6,021 6.5 51,714 144,211 92,550 86,391 6,159 6.7 51,661 20,301 12,266 10,823 1,443 11.8 8,035 20,346 12,319 10,771 1,549 12.6 8,027 20,395 12,559 10,813 1,746 13.9 7,836 20,564 12,650 10,930 1,719 13.6 7,914 20,617 12,680 10,882 1,798 14.2 7,937 20,673 12,737 10,911 1,826 14.3 7,936 TOTAL Total noninstitutional population1 ........ Total laborforce ................. Civilian noninstitutional population1 ...... Civilianlaborforce ............. Employed ................. Agriculture ........... Nonagricultural industries Unemployed ............... Unemployment rate ........ Not inlaborforce ............... Men, 20 years andover Civiliannoninstitutional population1 ....... Civilianlaborforce .................. Employed ....................... Agriculture ................. Nonagricultural industries ... Unemployed .................... Unemployment rate ............. Not inlaborforce .................... 6.6 14,282 Women, 20years andover Civiliannoninstitutional population1 ....... Civilianlaborforce .................. Employed ....................... Agriculture ................. Nonagricultural industries ... Unemployed .................... Unemployment rate ............. Not inlaborforce .................... 6.1 Bothsexes, 16-19 years Civiliannoninstitutional population1 ....... Civilianlaborforce .................. Employed ....................... Agriculture ................. Nonagricultural industries ... Unemployed .................... Unemployment rate ............. Not inlaborforce .................... White Civiliannoninstitutional population1 ....... Civilianlaborforce .................... Employed ........................ Unemployed ..................... Unemployment rate .............. Not inlaborforce ..................... Blackandother Civiliannoninstitutional population1 ........ Civilianlaborforce .................... Employed ........................ Unemployed ..................... Unemployment rate .............. Not inlaborforce ..................... 1As in table 1, population figures are not seasonally adjusted. NOTE: The monthly data in this table have been revised to reflect seasonal experience through 1979. 80 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 11.8 7,761 20,261 12,362 10,937 1,424 11.5 7,899 20,448 12,446 10,751 1,695 13.6 8,002 20,523 12,739 10,932 1,807 14.2 7,784 3. Selected employment indicators, seasonally adjusted [ In thousands] Annual average Selected categories 1980 1979 Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. 1978 1979 Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. 94,373 55,491 38,882 38,688 21,881 96,945 56,499 40,446 39,090 22,724 97,474 56,629 40,845 39,124 22,919 97,608 56,580 41,028 38,845 22,940 97,912 56,734 41,178 38,924 23,027 97,804 56,486 41,318 38,749 23,111 97,953 56,732 41,221 38,955 23,178 97,656 56,601 41,051 38,745 23,202 97,154 55,998 41,156 38,342 23,080 96,988 55,823 41,165 38,147 23,155 96,537 55,457 41,079 38,193 23,144 96,996 55,629 41,367 37,999 23,097 97,006 55,551 41,455 37,910 23,162 97,207 55,738 41,469 37,969 23,017 97,176 55,885 41,291 38,139 22,953 47,205 14,245 49,342 15,050 49,738 15,057 49,912 15,131 49,911 15,272 50,313 15,337 50,448 15,444 50,302 15,397 50,405 15,542 50,606 15,551 50,861 15,712 51,114 15,741 51,413 15,761 51,149 15,501 51,084 15,796 10,105 5,951 16,904 31,531 12,386 10,875 3,541 4,729 12,839 2,798 10,516 6,163 17,613 32,066 12,880 10,909 3,612 4,665 12,834 2,703 10,639 6,261 17,781 32,205 13,001 10,967 3,593 4,644 12,937 2,695 10,617 6,362 17,802 32,110 12,925 10,963 3,628 4,594 12,899 2,718 10,535 6,346 17,758 32,302 13.041 11.042 3,635 4,584 12,970 2,694 10,608 6,452 17,915 31,882 12,814 10,678 3,616 4,774 12,979 2,660 10,971 6,185 17,848 31,754 12,728 10,661 3,571 4,795 13,080 2,764 10,755 6,113 18,037 31,670 12,767 10,579 3,558 4,767 12,981 2,733 10,745 5,988 18,129 31,127 12,773 10,408 3,483 4,463 13,034 2,658 10,882 6,022 18,152 30,681 12,523 10,336 3,421 4,402 13,932 2,745 10,911 5,981 18,256 30,243 12,301 10,131 3,395 4,416 12,930 2,606 11,046 6,128 18,199 30,149 12,382 10,134 3,335 4,299 13,045 2,689 11,153 6,124 18,375 29,983 12,233 10,066 3,474 4,209 12,917 2,601 11,018 6,347 18,284 30,444 12,546 10,196 3,434 4,268 12,917 2,779 10,958 6,317 18,013 30,621 12,545 10,244 3,457 4,376 12,863 2,735 1,419 1,607 316 1,413 1,580 304 1,381 1,602 313 1,475 1,622 310 1,451 1,596 310 1,428 1,554 293 1,417 1,648 283 1,449 1,600 300 1,370 1,591 281 1,405 1,662 289 1,365 1,590 269 1,352 1,631 292 1,263 1,648 273 1,418 1,706 315 1,344 1,643 338 84,253 15,289 68,966 1,363 67,603 6,305 472 86,540 15,369 71,171 1,240 69,931 6,652 455 86,982 15,423 71,559 1,261 70,298 6,812 430 87,020 15,358 71,662 1,211 70,451 6,781 417 87,384 15,397 71,987 1,228 70,759 6,737 409 87,578 15,414 72,163 1,132 71,031 6,752 379 87,419 15,540 71,879 1,178 70,702 6,899 397 87,221 15,622 71,599 1,115 70,484 6,825 376 86,741 15,668 71,072 1,123 69,949 6,813 363 86,631 15,799 70,832 1,206 69,625 6,648 411 86,257 15,891 70,365 1,219 69,147 6,666 445 86,407 15,760 70,647 1,245 69,402 6,765 441 86,508 15,495 71,014 1,209 69,805 6,879 399 86,331 15,538 70,793 1,113 69,679 7,014 423 86,507 15,565 70,942 1,146 69,796 7,051 420 85,693 70,543 3,216 1,249 1,967 11,934 88,133 72,647 3,281 1,325 1,956 12,205 88,638 73,204 3,315 1,354 1,961 12,119 88,617 72,997 3,392 1,413 1,979 12,228 89,180 73,137 3,519 1,491 2,028 12,524 89,454 73,223 3,513 1,549 1,964 12,718 88,985 73,110 3,406 1,380 2,026 12,469 88,585 72,749 3,418 1,463 1,955 12,418 87,660 71,807 3,816 1,709 2,107 12,037 87,680 71,224 4,349 2,064 2,285 12,106 87,910 71,206 3,999 1,781 2,217 12,706 87,454 70,649 4,113 1,847 2,266 12,692 88,270 71,478 4,148 1,692 2,456 12,644 88,243 71,969 4,204 1,695 2,509 12,069 88,466 72,142 4,261 1,667 2,593 12,064 CHARACTERISTIC Total employed, 16 years and over ...................... Men ............................................................ Women........................................................ Married men, spouse present ........................ Married women, spouse present .................... OCCUPATION White-collar workers............................................ Professional and technical ............................ Managers and administrators, except farm ........................................................ Salesworkers................................................ Clerical workers............................................ Blue-collar workers.............................................. Craft and kindred workers ............................ Operatives, except transport.......................... Transport equipment operatives .................... Nonfarm laborers.......................................... Service workers.................................................. Farmworkers ...................................................... MAJOR INDUSTRY AND CLASS OF WORKER Agriculture: Wage and salary workers.............................. Self-employed workers.................................. Unpaid family workers .................................. Nonagricultural industries: Wage and salary workers.............................. Government .......................................... Private industries.................................... Private households .......................... Other industries .............................. Self-employed workers.................................. Unpaid family workers .................................. PERSONS AT WORK1 Nonagricultural industries .................................... Full-time schedules ...................................... Part time for economic reasons...................... Usually work full time.............................. Usually work part tim e............................ Part time for noneconomic reasons................ ’ Excludes persons "with a job but not at work” during the survey period for such reasons as vacation, illness, or industrial disputes. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis NOTE: The monthly data in this table have been revised to reflect seasonal experience through 1979. ___________________________ MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • Current Labor Statistics: Household Data 4. Selected unemployment indicators, seasonally adjusted [Unemployment rates] Annua average Selected categories 1979 1980 1978 1979 Oct Nov. Dec. Jan. Total, 16years andover....................... Men, 2 0 years andover.................. Women, 20 years andover .............. Bothsexes, 16-19 years ................ 6.0 4.2 6.0 16.3 5.8 4.1 5.7 16.1 5.9 4.2 5.7 16.4 5.8 4.3 5.6 15.9 5.9 4.2 5.7 16.0 6.2 4.7 5.8 16.3 4.6 5.7 16.5 White, total ............................... Men, 2 0 years andover ............. Women, 20 years andover.......... Bothsexes, 16-19 years ........... 5.2 3.7 5.2 13.9 5.1 3.6 5.0 13.9 5.1 3.7 5.0 14.1 5.1 3.7 4.9 13.9 5.1 3.7 5.0 13.9 5.4 4.1 5.1 14.0 Blackandother, total..................... Men, 2 0 years andover ............. Women, 20 years andover.......... Bothsexes, 16-19 years ........... 11.9 8.6 10.6 36.3 11.3 8.4 10.1 33.5 11.5 8.6 10.2 35.1 10.9 8.4 9.5 32.8 11.3 8.6 10.0 34.3 11.8 9.6 10.0 34.6 Marriedmen, spouse present............. Marriedwomen, spouse present.......... Womenwhoheadfamilies................ Full-timeworkers.......................... Part-timeworkers ........................ Unemployed15weeks andover.......... Laborforcetimelost' .................... 2.8 5.5 8.5 5.5 9.0 1.4 6.5 2.7 5.1 8.3 5.3 8.7 1.2 6.3 2.9 5.2 8.4 5.4 8.9 1.2 6.4 2.9 4.8 8.4 5.4 8.3 1.1 6.4 2.8 5.0 8.4 5.4 8.5 1.2 6.4 3.4 5.2 9.2 5.7 8.7 1.3 6.7 3.5 2.6 3.3 2.4 3.4 2.7 3.2 2.4 3.3 2.3 2.1 4.1 4.9 6.9 4.6 8.1 5.2 10.7 7.4 3.8 2.1 3.9 4.6 6.9 4.5 8.4 5.4 108 7.1 3.8 2.2 3.8 4.7 7.2 4.6 9.1 5.6 10.7 6.8 4.3 1.9 3.7 4.4 7.5 4.9 9.0 5.2 12.2 6.6 4.5 5.9 10.6 5.5 4.9 6.3 3.7 6.9 5.1 3.9 8.8 5.7 10.2 5.5 5.0 6.4 3.7 6.5 4.9 3.7 9.1 5.9 9.9 6.0 5.5 6.8 3.8 6.4 4.9 4.0 9.9 5.8 10.2 5.9 5.6 6.3 4.2 6.5 4.6 3.6 10.1 Apr. May June July Aug. Sept Oct. 6.2 4.9 5.7 15.9 7.0 5.9 6.3 16.2 7.8 7.7 6.7 6.5 18.5 7.8 6.7 6.7 19.0 7.6 6.6 6.5 19.1 7.5 6.7 6.6 19.2 17.5 7.6 6.4 6.8 18.4 5.3 4.0 5.2 13.8 5.4 4.4 4.9 13.8 6.2 5.3 5.5 14.6 6.9 5.9 5.8 17.4 6.8 6.0 5.8 16.4 6.9 6.0 5.9 16.7 6.8 5.9 5.8 17.0 6.5 5.9 5.5 14.8 6.7 5.7 5.9 15.9 11.5 9.2 9.0 37.9 11.8 12.6 10.9 11.4 29.8 14.2 12.7 11.5 36.6 13.6 12.7 10.6 37.4 14.2 13.5 10.4 38.2 14.3 12.1 12.6 37.8 4.9 4.8 5.6 8.5 7.3 8.6 2.2 CHARACTERISTIC 6.0 3.1 5.4 8.5 5.6 8.9 9.3 10.5 33.0 6.6 13.9 13.6 12.0 12.6 11.9 35.2 10.9 34.4 4.7 6.3 8.3 7.5 9.3 1.6 6.6 3.4 5.3 8.7 5.8 8.3 1.3 6.8 8.9 1.6 7.5 8.8 4.9 6.1 8.4 7.4 8.8 1.7 8.3 3.4 2.2 3.4 2.3 3.3 2.3 3.7 2.4 3.9 2.7 2.0 3.8 4.6 7.2 4.4 9.0 5.0 12.2 6.6 4.3 1.9 4.4 4.8 8.0 4.9 9.9 6.9 12.3 6.9 4.4 2.2 4.5 4.7 7.7 4.8 9.2 6.7 12.0 6.9 3.9 2.4 4.0 4.5 8.0 5.4 9.3 6.6 13.0 7.1 4.0 2.6 4.7 5.1 9.7 6.7 11.6 8.9 14.1 8.0 5.0 2.7 4.5 5.4 11.3 14.0 9.0 15.4 8.5 4.8 5.8 10.3 5.9 5.5 6.4 4.1 6.4 4.7 3.6 9.4 6.2 10.8 6.7 6.7 6.8 4.4 6.6 4.6 3.8 10.3 6.0 10.5 6.4 6.3 6.7 4.4 6.4 4.6 4.0 9.2 6.2 13.0 6.5 6.4 6.7 3.8 6.3 4.9 4.2 10.2 7.1 15.1 7.9 8.3 7.4 4.6 7.0 5.1 4.4 11.9 8.2 17.5 9.9 10.5 8.8 5.1 7.6 5.7 4.2 11.7 1.2 4.1 5.7 9.3 6.6 5.1 6.2 8.9 7.6 8.7 6.1 8.5 8.9 7.4 8.6 2.1 8.3 8.2 4.6 6.1 10.4 7.3 9.4 2.2 8.4 3.7 2.6 3.7 2.4 3.7 2.3 3.7 2.4 4.0 2.7 2.4 4.4 5.3 11.5 8.0 13.8 10.5 16.2 2.5 4.2 5.4 11.5 7.4 14.6 10.5 16.1 8.4 4.8 2.4 4.1 5.4 11.4 2.4 4.2 5.4 10.9 7.7 13.0 10.6 15.1 2.6 4.6 5.6 1.8 6.1 OCCUPATION White-collarworkers ........................... Professional andtechnical ................. Managersandadministrators, except farm ..................................... Salesworkers .............................. Clerical workers ........................... Blue-collarworkers ............................ Craft andkindredworkers ................. Operatives, except transport .............. Transport equipment operatives ........... Nonfarmlaborers ......................... Service workers................................. Farmworkers.................................... 8.1 8.1 4.2 8.1 13.6 10.0 16.5 8.6 5.6 8.1 4.3 10.8 7.0 13.2 10.5 15.3 8.3 4.5 INDUSTRY Nonagricultural privatewage andsalaryworkers2 Construction ............................... Manufacturing.............................. Durablegoods ........................ Nondurablegoods..................... Transportationandpublicutilities .......... Wholesaleandretail trade ................. Financeandservice industries ............. Government workers ........................... Agricultural wage andsalaryworkers .......... nyyiuyuio IIVAJIP IUOI Uy II 1C UlItJIIIjJlUyWVJ 6 percent of potentially available labor force hours. 2 Includes mining, not shown separately. 82 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis NOTE: The monthly data in 1979. 8.3 16.5 9.9 11.2 8.0 5.2 8.0 5.7 3.5 9.7 8.2 16.1 10.3 11.2 8.8 5.8 7.5 5.7 4.1 10.8 8.0 18.3 9.3 10.2 7.9 5.7 7.6 5.6 4.0 13.8 7.8 16.5 9.1 10.1 7.7 5.4 7.6 5.3 4.1 10.9 7.9 14.3 9.3 9.4 9.2 5.3 7.7 5.7 4.6 11.8 6. Unemployed persons, by reason for unemployment, seasonally adjusted [Numbers in thousands) 1980 1979 Reason for unemployment Oct Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept Oct 2,731 929 1,802 835 1,762 804 2,729 987 1,742 845 1,698 736 2,728 944 1,784 800 1,771 858 2,988 1,019 1,969 779 1,797 811 2,907 1,031 1,876 813 1,784 827 3,047 1,129 1,918 788 1,803 805 3,611 1,424 2,188 926 1,967 743 4,301 1,944 2,357 992 2,015 884 4,625 2,117 2,508 898 1,822 863 4,558 1,975 2,583 857 1,868 930 4,360 1,692 2,668 897 1,895 867 4,473 1,809 2,664 842 1,817 858 4,237 1,727 2,510 865 2,045 886 100.0 44.5 15.2 29.4 13.6 28.7 13.1 100.0 45.4 16.4 29.0 14.1 28.3 12.3 100.0 44.3 15.3 29.0 13.0 28.8 13.9 100.0 46.9 16.0 30.9 12.2 28.2 12.7 100.0 45.9 16.3 29.6 12.8 28.2 13.1 100.0 47.3 17.5 29.8 12.2 28.0 12.5 100.0 49.8 19.6 30.2 12.8 27.1 10.3 100.0 52.5 23.7 28.8 12.1 24.6 10.8 100.0 56.3 25.8 30.6 10.9 22.2 10.5 100.0 55.5 24.0 31.5 10.4 22.7 11.3 100.0 54.4 21.1 33.3 11.2 23.6 10.8 100.0 56.0 22.6 33.3 10.5 22.7 10.7 100.0 52.7 21.5 31.2 10.8 25.5 11.0 2.6 .8 1.7 .8 2.6 .8 1.6 .7 2.6 .8 1.7 .8 2.9 .7 1.7 .8 2.8 .8 1.7 .8 2.9 .8 1.7 .8 3.5 .9 1.9 .7 4.1 .9 1.9 .8 4.4 .9 1.7 .8 4.3 .8 1.8 .9 4.2 .9 1.8 .8 4.3 .8 1.7 .8 4.0 .8 1.9 .8 NUMBER OF UNEMPLOYED Seekingfirstjob........................................................... PERCENT DISTRIBUTION Newentrants.............................................................. UNEMPLOYED AS A PERCENT OF THE CIVILIAN LABOR FORCE Reentrants ............................................................... Newentrants.............................................................. 7. Duration of unemployment, seasonally adjusted [Numbers in thousands] _____________________________________ 1978 Average (mean) duration, inweeks................ 1979 2,793 2,869 1,875 1,892 1,379 1,202 746 684 633 518 11.9 10.8 1980 1979 Annual average Weeks of unemployment Oct Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct 2,955 1,963 1,195 678 517 10.5 2,919 1,869 1,191 660 531 10.6 2,916 1,966 1,230 711 519 10.5 3,184 1,907 1,334 795 539 10.5 2,995 2,081 1,286 790 496 10.7 2,995 2,169 1,363 776 587 11.0 3,309 2,391 1,629 953 676 11.3 3,872 2,697 1,722 1,014 709 10.5 3,333 2,922 1,766 1,027 739 11.7 3,363 2,700 1,915 1,057 858 11.6 3,268 2,490 2,184 1,259 925 12.6 2,957 2,613 2,326 1,397 930 13.1 3,182 2,498 2,318 1,264 1,053 13.3 NOTE: Themonthlydatainthese tables have beenrevisedtoreflect seasonal experiencethrough1979. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 83 EM PLOYM ENT, HOU RS, AND EARNINGS DATA FRO M ESTABLISHM ENT SURVEYS E mployment, hours, and earnings data in t h is s e c tio n a r e c o m p ile d fr o m p a y r o ll r e c o r d s r e p o r te d m o n t h ly o n a v o lu n ta r y b a s is t o t h e B u r e a u o f L a b o r S t a t is t ic s a n d it s c o o p e r a t in g S ta t e a g e n c ie s b y Bureau of Labor Statistics computes spendable earnings from gross weekly earnings for only two illustrative cases: (1) a worker with no dependents and (2) a married worker with three dependents. 1 6 6 ,0 0 0 e s t a b lis h m e n t s r e p r e s e n t in g a ll in d u s t r ie s e x c e p t a g r ic u ltu r e . In m o s t in d u s t r ie s , t h e s a m p lin g p r o b a b ilit ie s a r e b a s e d o n t h e s iz e o f t h e e s ta b lis h m e n t; m o s t la r g e e s t a b lis h m e n t s a r e th e r e fo r e in t h e s a m p le . ( A n e s t a b lis h m e n t is n o t n e c e s s a r ily a firm ; it m a y b e a b r a n c h p la n t, Hours represent the average weekly hours of production or nonsupervisory workers for which pay was received and are different from standard or scheduled hours. Overtime hours represent the por tion of gross average weekly hours which were in excess of regular hours and for which overtime premiums were paid. fo r e x a m p le , o r w a r e h o u s e .) S e lf -e m p lo y e d p e r s o n s a n d o t h e r s B u r e a u o f L a b o r S t a t is t ic s a n d it s c o o p e r a t in g S ta te a g e n c ie s . Labor turnover is the movement of all wage and salary workers from one employment status to another. Accession rates indicate the average number of persons added to a payroll in a given period per 100 employees; separation rates indicate the average number dropped from a payroll per 100 employees. Although month-to-month changes in employment can be calculated from the labor turnover data, the re sults are not comparable with employment data from the employment and payroll survey. The labor turnover survey measures changes dur ing the calendar month while the employment and payroll survey A s a m p le o f 4 0 ,0 0 0 e s t a b lis h m e n t s r e p r e s e n ts a ll in d u s t r ie s in m easures changes from m id m on th to m id m onth. n o t o n a r e g u la r c iv ilia n p a y r o ll a r e o u t s id e t h e s c o p e o f th e s u r v e y b e c a u s e t h e y a r e e x c lu d e d fr o m e s t a b lis h m e n t r e c o r d s . T h is la r g e ly a c c o u n t s fo r t h e d iffe r e n c e in e m p lo y m e n t fig u r e s b e t w e e n t h e h o u s e h o ld a n d e s t a b lis h m e n t s u r v e y s . Labor turnover data in t h is s e c t io n a r e c o m p ile d fr o m p e r s o n n e l r e c o r d s r e p o r te d m o n t h ly o n a v o lu n ta r y b a s is t o t h e t h e m a n u f a c t u r in g a n d m in in g s e c to r s o f t h e e c o n o m y . Notes on the data Definitions Employed persons are all persons who received pay (including holi day and sick pay) for any part of the payroll period including the 12th of the month. Persons holding more than one job (about 5 per cent of all persons in the labor force) are counted in each establish ment which reports them. Production workers in manufacturing include blue-collar worker supervisors and all nonsupervisory workers closely associated with production operations. Those workers mentioned in tables 14-20 in clude production workers in manufacturing and mining; construction workers in construction; and nonsupervisory workers in transporta tion and public utilities, in wholesale and retail trade, in finance, in surance, and real estate, and in services industries. These groups account for about four-fifths of the total employment on private nonagricultural payrolls. Earnings are the payments production or nonsupervisory workers receive during the survey period, including premium pay for overtime or late-shift work but excluding irregular bonuses and other special payments. Real earnings are earnings adjusted to eliminate the effects of price change. The Hourly Earnings Index is calculated from aver age hourly earnings data adjusted to exclude the effects of two types of changes that are unrelated to underlying wage-rate developments: fluctuations in overtime premiums in manufacturing (the only sector for which overtime data are available) and the effects of changes and seasonal factors in the proportion of workers in high-wage and lowwage industries. Spendable earnings are earnings from which estimat ed social security and Federal income taxes have been deducted. The 84 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Establishment data collected by the Bureau of Labor Statistics are periodically adjusted to comprehensive counts of employment (called “benchmarks”). The latest complete adjustment was made with the re lease of June 1980 data, published in the August 1980 issue of the Re view. Consequently, data published in the Review prior to that issue are not necessarily comparable to current data. Complete comparable historical unadjusted and seasonally adjusted data are published in a Supplement to Employment and Earnings (unadjusted data from April 1977 through March 1980 and seasonally adjusted data from January 1974 through March 1980) and in Employment and Earnings, United States, 1909—78, BLS Bulletin 1312-11 (for prior periods). Data on recalls were shown for the first time in tables 12 and 13 in the January 1978 issue of the Review. For a detailed discussion of the recalls series, along with historical data, see “New Series on Recalls from the Labor Turnover Survey,” Employment and Earnings, Decem ber 1977, pp. 10-19. A comprehensive discussion of the differences between household and establishment data on employment appears in Gloria P. Green, “Comparing employment estimates from household and payroll sur veys,” Monthly Labor Review, December 1969, pp. 9-2 0 . See also BLS Handbook o f Methods for Surveys and Studies, Bulletin 1910 (Bu reau of Labor Statistics, 1976). The formulas used to construct the spendable average weekly earn ings series reflect the latest provisions of the Federal income tax and social security tax laws. For the spendable average weekly earnings formulas for the years 1978-80, see Employment and Earnings, March 1980, pp. 10-11. Real earnings data are adjusted using the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W). 8. Employment by industry, 1950-79 [Nonagricultural payroll data, in thousands] Government Manufac turing Trans portation and public utilities Whole sale and retail trade Wholesale trade Retail trade Finance, insur ance, and real estate Services Year Total Mining Construc tion 1950 .......................................................... 45,197 901 2,364 15,241 4,034 9,386 2,635 6,751 1,888 5,357 1952 ............................ 1953 ...................... 1954 .................................. 1955 .......................................................... 47,819 48,793 50,202 48,990 50,641 929 898 866 791 792 2,637 2,668 2,659 2,646 2,839 16,393 16,632 17,549 16,314 16,882 4,226 4,248 4,290 4,084 4,141 9,742 10,004 10,247 10,235 10,535 2,727 2,812 2,854 2,867 2,926 7,015 7,192 7,393 7,368 7,610 1,956 2,035 2,111 2,200 2,298 1956 ........................ 1957 .............................. 1958 .......................... 19591 ............................ I960 .......................................................... 52,369 52,853 51,324 53,268 54,189 822 828 751 732 712 3,039 2,962 2,817 3,004 2,926 17,243 17,174 15,945 16,675 16,796 4,244 4,241 3,976 4,011 4,004 10,858 10,886 10,750 11,127 11,391 3,018 3,028 2,980 3,082 3,143 7,840 7,858 7,770 8,045 8,248 1965 .......................................................... 53,999 55,549 56,653 58,283 60,765 672 650 635 634 632 2,859 2,948 3,010 3,097 3,232 16,326 16,853 16,995 17,274 18,062 3,903 3,906 3,903 3,951 4,036 11,337 11,566 11,778 12,160 12,716 3,133 3,198 3,248 3,337 3,466 1970 .......................................................... 63,901 65,803 67,897 70,384 70,880 627 613 606 619 623 3,317 3,248 3,350 3,575 3,588 19,214 19,447 19,781 20,167 19,367 4,158 4,268 4,318 4,442 4,515 13,245 13,606 14,099 14,705 15,040 1972 .................................... 1973 .................................... 1974 .................................... 1975 .......................................................... 71,214 73,675 76,790 78,265 76,945 609 628 642 697 752 3,704 3,889 4,097 4,020 3,525 18,623 19,151 20,154 20,077 18,323 4,476 4,541 4,656 4,725 4,542 79,382 82,471 86,697 89,886 779 813 851 960 3,576 3,851 4,229 4,483 18,997 19,682 20,505 21,062 4,582 4,713 4,923 5,141 1967 1968 1976 ................................ .............................. .............................. 1979 .......................................................... Federal State and local 6,026 1,928 4,098 5,547 5,699 5,835 5,969 6,240 6,389 6,609 6,645 6,751 6,914 2,302 2,420 2,305 2,188 2,187 4,087 4,188 4,340 4,563 4,727 2,389 2,438 2,481 2,549 2,629 6,497 6,708 6,765 7,087 7,378 7,278 7,616 7,839 8,083 8,353 2,209 2,217 2,191 2,233 2,270 5,069 5,399 5,648 5,850 6,083 8,204 8,368 8,530 8,823 9,250 2,688 2,754 2,830 2,911 2,977 7,620 7,982 8,277 8,660 9,036 8,594 8,890 9,225 9,596 10,074 2,279 2,340 2,358 2,348 2,378 6,315 6,550 6,868 7,248 7,696 3,597 3,689 3,779 3,907 3,993 9,648 9,917 10,320 10,798 11,047 3,058 3,185 3,337 3,512 3,645 9,498 10,045 10,567 11,169 11,548 10,784 11,391 11,839 12,195 12,554 2,564 2,719 2,737 2,758 2,731 8,220 8,672 9,102 9,437 9,823 15,352 15,949 16,607 16,987 17,060 4,001 4,113 4,277 4,433 4,415 11,351 11,836 12,329 12,554 12,645 3,772 3,908 4,046 4,148 4,165 11,797 12,276 12,857 13,441 13,892 12,881 13,334 13,732 14,170 14,686 2,696 2,684 2,663 2,724 2,748 10,185 10,649 11,068 11,446 11,937 17,755 18,516 19,542 20,269 4,546 4,708 4,969 5,204 13,209 13,808 14,573 15,066 4,271 4,467 4,724 4,974 14,551 15,303 16,252 17,078 14,871 15,127 15,672 15,920 2,733 2,727 2,753 2,773 12,138 12,399 12,919 13,147 Total ’ Data include Alaska and Hawaii beginning in 1959. 9. Employment by State [Nonagricultural payroll data, in thousands] State Sept 1979 Aug. 1980 Sept. 1980 State Sept. 1979 Aug. 1980 Sept. 1980 1,331.9 184.6 958.9 745.3 9,684.8 1,335.2 California...................................................................... 1,370.8 177.9 973.9 763.8 9,750.9 982.1 760.7 9,760.3 Montana.................................................................. Nebraska................................................................ Nevada .................................................................. New Hampshire ...................................................... New Jersey ............................................................ 296.6 635.7 394.3 385.6 3,050.6 286.3 623.8 402.8 388.8 3,077.1 287.6 629.1 407.9 386.7 3,046.7 Florida.......................................................................... 1,234.5 1,412.6 259.0 630.8 3,366.0 1,252.1 1,386.5 256.1 631.8 3,471.3 1,255.4 1,403.4 257.0 618.4 3,519.7 New Mexico............................................................ New York................................................................ North Carolina ........................................................ North Dakota .......................................................... Ohio ...................................................................... 469.7 7,201.7 2,406.9 249.4 4,543.6 475.3 7,197.4 2,385.9 248.1 4,360.5 476.5 7,154.3 2,427.1 249.1 4,417.8 2,125.8 395.3 344.2 4,886.5 2,283.8 2,127.4 413.6 327.7 4,842.8 2,199.2 2,141.0 396.1 4,788.4 2,226.6 Oklahoma .............................................................. Oregon .................................................................. Pennsylvania .......................................................... Rhode Isiand .......................................................... South Carolina ........................................................ 1,108.1 1,073.0 4,855.9 406.9 1,187.1 1,134.7 1,022.1 4,729.2 391.9 1,174.3 1,141.8 1,035.0 4,715.7 394.9 1,183.5 1,144.1 956.5 1,258.1 1,502.5 425.4 1,074.2 933.3 1,187.5 1,542.8 427.5 1,107.3 949.5 1,204.5 1,556.1 422.4 South Dakota.......................................................... Tennessee .............................................................. Texas .................................................................... Utah ...................................................................... Vermont.................................................................. 243.7 1,810.5 5,675.0 558.6 201.1 240.1 1,749.5 5,791.0 560.5 198.3 238.4 1,766.9 5,845.3 567.6 201.8 1,628.5 2,609.5 3,618.0 1,803.0 845.9 2,028.9 1,622.3 2,687.8 3,378.9 1,786.6 811.1 1,966.9 1,614.5 2,676.9 3,453.4 1,790.9 824.3 1,984.0 Virginia.................................................................... Washington ............................................................ West Virginia .......................................................... Wisconsin................................................................ Wyoming ................................................................ 2,120.2 1,609.8 660.2 2,007,3 212.4 2,124.1 1,608.0 625.4 1,987.0 224.2 2,135.9 1,621.9 630.1 2,000.1 225.0 Virgin Islands .......................................................... 35.2 36.5 35.4 Georgia ........................................................................ Indiana.......................................................................... Kentucky ...................................................................... Maine .......................................................................... Maryland ...................................................................... Michigan ...................................................................... Mississippi .................................................................... Missouri........................................................................ https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 85 M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • Current Labor Statistics: Establishment Data 10. Employment by industry division and major manufacturing group [Nonagricultural payroll data, in thousands] Annual average Industry division and group 1978 TOTAL 89,886 O ct Nov. 91,062 91,288 91,394 MINING ...................................................... CONSTRUCTION 4,483 4,792 4,698 Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept.» OcL » 89,630 89,781 90,316 90,761 90,849 91,049 89,820 90,072 90,718 91,242 982 987 996 1,006 1,024 1,049 1,030 1,029 1,034 1,037 4,194 4,109 4,150 4,311 4,471 4,611 4,633 4,712 4,683 4,694 MANUFACTURING...................................... Production workers.......................... 20,505 14,734 21,062 15,085 21,193 15,170 21,055 15,034 20,987 14,964 20,777 14,738 20,730 14,678 20,793 14,727 20,533 14,466 20,250 14,172 20,201 14,093 19,754 13,657 20,044 13,947 20,279 14,199 20,283 14,209 Durable goods Production workers.......................... 12,274 8,805 12,772 9,120 12,824 9,131 12,744 9,054 12,733 9,040 12,600 8,885 12,599 8,869 12,647 8,909 12,414 8,672 12,150 8,409 12,065 8,307 11,774 8,025 11,827 8,075 12,037 8,297 12,095 8,355 Lumber and wood products .................... Furniture and fixtures.............................. Stone, clay, and glass products .............. Primary metal Industries.......................... Fabricated metal products ...................... Machinery, except electrical.................... Electric and electronic equipment............ Transportation equipment........................ Instruments and related products ............ Miscellaneous manufacturing .................. 754.7 494.1 698.2 1,214.9 1,672.6 2.325.5 2,006,1 2 ,002.8 653.1 451.5 766.1 499.3 709.7 1.250.2 1.723.7 2.481.6 2.124.3 2.082.8 688.9 445.6 780.0 502.5 718.6 1.231.4 1.733.8 2,465.1 2,162.0 2.076.5 694.6 459.7 757.2 503.1 710.3 1,222.6 1,733.3 2.458.7 2.164.0 2.044.2 694.9 455.5 737.4 501.8 697.4 1.209.9 1.725.2 2,471.6 2.171.9 2.079.3 698.8 439.4 717.4 498.0 678.2 1,207.2 1,696.8 2,538.5 2,162.9 1,975.8 697.7 427.7 718.9 4946 674.7 1,205.1 1,699.4 2,536.5 2,157.7 1,983.1 700.5 428.8 716.9 494.1 679.0 1,203.7 1,703.8 2,539.9 2,167.7 2,005.6 703.6 432.9 678.4 488.7 675.5 1,193.8 1,671.4 2,523.5 2,156.2 1,891.1 702.2 433.0 654.8 469.1 668.1 1,149.8 1,619.8 2,509.3 2,120.2 1,835.1 699.4 424.6 668.0 460.8 666.2 1,112.9 1,598.6 2,486.1 2,102.2 1,847.0 702.9 420.1 666.8 438.1 656.0 1,055.5 1,538.4 2,440.2 2,066.5 1,810.2 698.3 404.0 683 0 454.6 663.2 1,059.6 1,567.6 2,417.8 2,080.7 1,785.4 697.8 417.6 689.0 466.6 668.1 1,079.5 1,593.6 2,448.5 2,105.6 1,869.4 695.0 421.3 690.5 468.8 669.0 1,084.2 1,605.1 2,458.7 2,117.6 1,879.3 697.5 423.8 Nondurable goods Production workers.......................... 8,231 5,929 8,290 5,965 8,369 6,039 8,311 5,980 8,254 5,924 8,177 5,853 8,131 5,809 8,146 5,818 8,119 5,794 8,100 5,763 8,136 5,786 7,980 5,632 8,217 5,872 8,242 5,902 8,188 5,854 1,724.1 70.6 899.1 1,332.3 698.7 1,192.0 1.095.5 207.7 754.5 256.8 1,728.1 69.9 888.5 1.312.5 706.7 1.239.5 1.110.7 210.0 775.6 248.0 1.781.8 77.4 886.1 1.317.3 709.3 1.251.4 1,113.7 213.5 770.8 247.9 1.736.3 68.6 890.4 1.305.8 707.8 1.262.0 1.113.9 212.6 765.9 247.6 1,706.2 70.8 889.7 1.287.1 705.9 1,268.5 1.114.2 210.6 755.6 245.2 1,659.9 69.1 884.0 1,282.0 703.5 1,266.3 1,113.1 208.6 750.3 240.3 1,644.1 67.1 884.6 1,305.8 701.9 1,270.4 1,112.1 155.9 746.3 242.6 1,641.1 64.4 886.9 1,318.4 701.8 1,272.1 1,118.1 153.1 746.5 243.4 1,626.2 62.9 882.1 1,304.2 698.8 1,270.4 1,120.6 173.6 737.2 243.3 1,638.5 62.7 870.6 1,299.0 692.4 1,267.8 1,119.5 203.4 702.4 243.2 1,676.8 64.6 853.2 1,310.5 695.0 1,271.3 1,122.2 209.1 688.5 244.7 1,709.5 63.9 820.6 1,236.9 682.3 1,264.5 1,112.0 212.0 659.3 218.9 1,795.3 71.3 854.1 1,299.9 688.7 1,264.3 1,108.4 212.4 680.4 242.6 1,791.2 75.3 854.1 1,310.6 688.7 1,267.6 1,106.5 211.0 695.0 242.1 1,729.5 76.8 857.7 1,304.6 686.6 1,270.8 1,107.8 213.2 699.5 241.3 4,923 5,141 5,233 5,243 5,240 5,136 5,130 5,143 5,147 5,167 5,185 5,145 5,144 5,168 5,167 19,542 20,269 20,474 20,756 21,114 20,325 20,155 20,226 20,373 20,497 20,562 20,506 20,579 20,687 20,706 WHOLESALE TRADE .................................... 4,969 5,204 5,266 5,282 5,264 5,241 5,250 5,269 5,265 5,263 5,287 5,278 5,284 5,290 5,321 RETAIL TRADE.............................................. 14,573 15,066 15,208 15,474 15,850 15,084 14,905 14,957 15,108 15,234 15,275 15,228 15,295 15,397 15,385 FINANCE, INSURANCE, AND REAL ESTATE . 4,724 4,974 5,025 5,039 5,047 5,052 5,061 5,085 5,104 5,137 5,201 5,229 5,232 5,188 5,190 SERVICES .................................................... 16,252 17,078 17,297 17,284 17,271 17,135 17,317 17,478 17,636 17,747 17,846 17,973 17,966 17,905 17,944 GOVERNMENT .............................................. Federal.................................................... State and local ............................ 15,672 2,753 12,919 15,920 2,773 13,147 16,064 2,756 13,308 16,227 2,760 13,467 16,214 2,770 13,444 16,029 2,763 13,266 16,292 2,803 13,489 16,445 2,869 13,576 16,651 3,103 13,548 16,556 2,963 13,593 16,394 2,995 13,399 15,550 2,949 12,601 15,366 2,862 12,504 15,774 2,754 13,020 16,221 2,740 13,481 Food and kindred products...................... Tobacco manufactures .......................... 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 .................... TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES WHOLESALE AND RETAIL TRADE 86 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 11. Employment by industry division and major manufacturing group, seasonally adjusted iNonaqricultural payroll data, In thousands] 1980 1979 Industry division and group TOTAL .......................................................................................... MINING ............................................................................................ Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept» Oct» 90,441 90,552 90,678 91,031 91,186 91,144 90,951 90,468 90,047 89,867 90,142 90,365 90,622 982 985 992 999 1,007 1,009 1,012 1,023 1,029 1,013 1,013 1,027 1,035 4,379 4,322 4,359 4,397 4,437 CONSTRUCTION ................................................................................ 4,529 4,553 4,615 4,745 4,659 4,529 4,467 4,436 MANUFACTURING .............................................................................. Production workers.................................................................. 21,043 15,025 20,966 14,948 20,983 14,956 20,971 14,911 20,957 14,871 20,938 14,850 20,642 14,550 20,286 14,186 20,014 13,931 19,828 13,759 19,940 13,872 20,046 13,978 20,139 14,070 Production workers.................................................................. 12,764 9,069 12,693 9,001 12,706 9,009 12,681 8,953 12,715 8,967 12,707 8,961 12,442 8,686 12,140 8,386 11,947 8,205 11,819 8,084 11,860 8,123 11,955 8,218 12,038 8,300 Machinery, except electrical............................................................ Electric and electronic equipment.................................................... Transportation equipment................................................................ Instruments and related products .................................................... Miscellaneous manufacturing .......................................................... 768 498 709 1,236 1,723 2,478 2,149 2,063 696 444 757 498 704 1,230 1,722 2,460 2,150 2,033 695 444 746 497 704 1,219 1,718 2,459 2,163 2,057 698 445 743 497 705 1,215 11707 2,532 2,169 1,970 699 444 745 495 705 1,214 1,711 2,529 2,168 2,006 702 440 737 494 700 1,209 1,711 2,530 2,176 2,006 705 439 689 491 680 1,193 1,678 2,518 2,167 1,885 703 438 654 472 663 1,144 1,620 2,517 2,127 1,819 700 424 648 461 647 1,096 1,584 2,476 2,094 1,831 696 414 650 449 641 1,049 1,551 2,448 2,079 1,839 698 415 662 456 648 1,059 1,569 2,437 2,083 1,840 697 409 674 464 656 1,072 1,586 2,451 2,093 1,854 696 409 680 465 660 1,087 1,596 2,471 2,105 1,866 699 409 Production workers.................................................................. 8,279 5,956 8,273 5,947 8,277 5,947 8,290 5,958 8,242 5,904 8,231 5,889 8,200 5,864 8,146 5,800 8,067 5,726 8,009 5,675 8,080 5,749 8,091 5,760 8,101 5,770 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 .......................................................... 1,723 70 885 1,302 709 1,251 1,114 212 766 247 1,725 64 887 1,294 708 1,259 1,116 212 762 246 1,724 66 889 1,296 708 1,261 1,118 213 756 246 1,716 67 888 1,305 710 1,269 1,121 214 755 245 1,713 68 888 1,313 709 1,273 1,121 161 751 245 1,704 68 888 1,316 708 1,274 1,123 157 749 244 1,690 69 884 1,302 702 1,272 1,123 175 740 243 1,691 70 869 1,291 692 1,268 1,120 203 703 239 1,677 71 843 1,287 685 1,269 1,112 205 681 237 1,683 69 833 1,276 680 1,266 1,103 207 663 229 1,690 67 851 1,296 682 1,266 1,100 208 680 240 1,672 68 851 1,300 686 1,269 1,104 208 692 241 1,673 70 857 1,289 686 1,271 1,108 212 69b 240 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES ...................................... 5,203 5,216 5,212 5,202 5,198 5,202 5,178 5,167 5,134 5,114 5,129 5,122 5,136 20,639 Lumber and wood products ............................................................ Stone, clay, and glass products ...................................................... Food and kindred products.............................................................. Tobacco manufactures .................................................................. WHOLESALE AND RETAIL TRADE WHOLESALE TRADE RETAIL TRADE FINANCE, INSURANCE, AND REAL ESTATE 20,414 20,479 20,448 20,529 20,637 20,610 20,531 20,487 20,459 20,506 20,589 20,615 5,246 5,269 5,251 5,278 5,302 5,301 5,286 5,268 5,245 5,247 5,263 5,279 5,300 15,336 15,339 15,168 15,210 15,197 15,251 15,335 15,309 15,245 15,219 15,214 15,259 15,326 5,033 5,049 5,064 5,091 5,101 5,115 5,119 5,137 5,150 5,167 5,180 5,188 5,200 17,760 17,788 17,851 17,908 16,157 2,893 13,264 16,144 2,828 13,316 16,119 2,765 13,354 16,128 2,754 13,374 SERVICES 17,264 17,308 17,362 17,462 17,540 17,580 17,618 17,659 17,652 GOVERNMENT 15,973 2,769 13,204 15,996 2,773 13,223 16,002 2,773 13,229 16,032 2,791 13,241 16,087 2,826 13,261 16,161 2,886 13,275 16,384 3,115 13,269 16,273 2,960 13,313 16,230 2,951 13,279 State and local .............................................................................. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 87 M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • Current Labor Statistics: Establishment Data 12. Labor turnover rates in manufacturing, 1977 to date [Per 100 employees] Year Annual average Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept Oct. Nov. Dec. 4.3 4,4 4.3 3.8 5.3 5.4 5.0 4.5 4.6 4.9 4.5 »4.3 3.9 4.3 4.1 3.1 3.3 3.0 2.4 2.4 2.2 3.0 3.3 3.1 2.1 4.0 4.2 3.7 2.5 3.5 3.9 3.4 »2.5 3.0 3.5 3.1 2.2 2.6 2.2 1.6 1.7 1.5 .9 .8 .9 1.4 1.0 .9 .9 1.7 .8 .7 .8 »1.4 .6 .6 .7 .6 .5 .5 .6 .5 .5 4.3 4.1 4.3 4.2 5.1 5.3 5.7 4.9 4.9 4.7 3.8 4.1 4.2 3.4 3.5 3.8 3.4 3.4 3.5 4 .8 » 4.1 1.9 2.1 2.0 1.4 3.1 3.5 3.3 2.2 2.8 3.1 2.7 »1.9 1.9 2.3 2.1 1.5 1.7 1.6 1.2 1.3 1.1 Total accessions 1977 1978 1979 4.0 4.1 4.0 3.7 3.8 4.0 3.8 3.7 3.2 3.4 3.3 4.0 3.8 3.8 3.5 3.8 4.0 3.9 3.1 4.6 4.7 4.7 3.4 1977 1978 1979 1980 2.8 3.1 2.9 2.2 2.5 2.8 2.4 2.1 2.2 2.5 2.2 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.3 2.7 2.9 2.9 2.1 3.5 3.6 3.6 2.1 1977 1978 1979 1980 .9 .7 .7 1.2 1.0 .9 1.1 1.3 .7 .7 .9 1.1 .8 .7 .9 .9 .8 .7 .8 .8 .8 .8 1.0 1977 1978 1979 1980 3.8 3.9 4.0 3.9 3.6 3.8 3.4 3.1 3.2 3.5 1980 4.9 4.9 4.8 3.9 New hires 3.7 3.9 3.8 2.4 Recalls .8 .7 .7 1.2 Total separations 4.1 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.4 3.6 3.7 4.7 3.5 3.7 3.8 4 .8 3.5 3.8 3.9 4 .4 Quits 1977 1978 1979 1980 1.8 2.1 2.0 1.4 1.5 1.8 1.6 1.3 1.4 1.6 1.5 1.6 1.8 1.9 1.6 1.7 2.0 2.0 1.5 1.9 2.1 2.1 1.5 1.9 2.2 2.1 1.4 Layoffs 1977 1978 1979 1980 13. . . . . 1.5 1.1 1.4 2.0 .7 .7 2.5 .9 2.3 1.1 »1.4 Labor turnover rates in manufacturing, by major industry group [Per 100 employees] Accession rates Major industry group Total Separation rates Yew hires Recalls Total Quits Layoffs Sept 1979 Aug. 1980 Sept 1980» Sept 1979 Aug. 1980 Sept 1980» Sept 1979 Aug. 1980 Sept 1980» Sept 1979 Aug. 1980 Sept 1980» Sept. 1979 Aug. 1980 Sept. 1980» Sept. 1979 Aug. 1980 Sept. 1980 » MANUFACTURING.................................. Seasonally adjusted.............. 4.5 3.9 4.5 3.6 4.3 3.8 3.4 2.8 2.5 1.9 2.5 2.0 0.8 1.7 1.4 4.7 3.9 4.8 3.9 4.1 3.5 2.7 1.9 2.2 1.3 1.9 1.3 1.1 1.2 1.7 1.9 14 1.5 Durable goods...................... Lumber and wood products . . . Furniture and fixtures .................. Stone, clay, and glass products . . . Primary metal industries .............. Fabricated metal products.......... Machinery, except electrical.......... Electric and electronic equipment .. Transportation equipment ............ Instruments and related products .. Miscellaneous manufacturing........ 4.0 5.7 5.8 3.8 2.3 4.6 3.1 3.8 4.4 3.0 6.9 4.0 6.9 5.0 4.5 4.3 4.7 2.6 3.2 4.5 2.6 5.3 4.0 5.3 5.7 3.7 4,4 5.0 2.9 3.3 3.0 4.9 5.2 3.1 1.5 3.6 2.5 2.9 2.3 2.5 6.0 1.9 4.3 3.3 2.3 .8 2.2 1.5 1.5 1.4 1.7 3.7 2.1 3.5 3.9 2.1 1.0 2.4 1.7 1.9 .7 .6 .4 .5 .6 .8 .3 .4 1.7 .2 .7 1.7 2.4 1.5 1.8 3.2 2.2 .9 1.1 2.5 .6 1.3 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.4 3.0 2.2 .9 .8 4.1 6.4 5.3 4.6 3.9 4.6 3.0 3.7 4.0 3.4 6.7 4.5 6.2 5.4 5.0 4.6 4.7 3.5 3.7 5.9 3.2 5.7 3.6 5.9 4.3 3.9 3.7 3.7 3.0 3.1 2.2 4.5 3.6 2.6 1.4 2.5 1.7 2.2 1.4 2.4 4.0 1.7 3.2 2.9 2.0 .9 2.0 1.4 1.7 1.1 1.9 3.2 1.5 2.8 2.5 1.6 .7 1.5 1.1 1.4 .9 .7 .6 .9 1.6 1.1 5 5 18 .3 1.9 18 15 2.0 27 19 14 11 39 6 1.4 1.3 21 8 15 22 Nondurable goods Food and kindred products .......... Tobacco manufacturers................ Textile mill products .................. Apparel and other 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........ 5.2 8.1 5.8 4.9 6.2 2.8 4.1 1.7 3.5 5.3 8.9 10.3 3.9 6.7 2.9 3.3 1.6 2.1 3.4 6.0 4.1 2.8 3.9 1.7 2.7 1.0 1.7 1.6 2.6 5.6 .9 2.4 1.0 .5 .4 .3 5.2 7.1 3.5 4.8 6.8 3.9 4.2 2.6 3.1 3.9 5.9 3.4 3.5 2.1 2.2 3.4 5.2 1.6 3.5 4.0 2.0 2.8 1.2 1.4 2.9 4.1 1.2 2.8 38 1.8 28 1.4 1.3 3.5 .9 1.9 .8 .5 .5 .3 5.6 9.1 3.6 5.2 6.2 3.6 3.9 2.2 2.6 2.0 2.7 3.9 1.8 2.9 1.2 1.6 .9 1.8 2.4 .5 1.5 .3 .4 .2 .1 1.3 2.2 3.8 6.0 2.8 3.5 1.8 2.0 4.0 6.1 2.4 4.0 4.4 2.4 3.7 1.4 3.3 23 32 14 22 10 .9 .5 1.1 .7 5.3 7.3 5.8 8.5 5.2 6.5 4.3 5.6 3.0 5.2 3.1 4.9 .6 1.2 2.5 3.0 1.8 1.2 6.1 8.7 5.5 7.5 4.5 7.1 3.6 5.3 2.6 4.5 2.2 4.1 13 2.2 17 1.9 1.9 88 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 2.9 6.2 4.6 7.1 2.3 4.3 3.2 4.7 .4 1.7 3.2 5.2 4.9 8.2 2.0 2.8 25 3.7 h 13 27 11 6 14 7 5 8 6 1.3 14. Hours and earnings, by industry division, 1949-79 [Gross averages, production or nonsupervisory workers on nonagricultural payrolls] Year Average weekly earnings Average weekly hours Average hourly earnings Average weekly earnings Average weekly hours Average hourly earnings Average weekly earnings Average hourly earnings Average weekly earnings Average weekly hours Average hourly earnings Manufacturing Construction Mining Total private Average weekly hours $50.24 53.13 394 39.8 $1.275 1.335 $62.33 67.16 36.3 37.9 $1.717 1.772 $67.56 69.68 37.7 37.4 $1.792 1.863 $53.88 58.32 39.1 40.5 $1.378 1.440 .................. .................. .................. .................. .................. 57.86 60.65 63.76 64 52 67.72 399 39.9 39.6 39.1 39.6 1.45 1.52 1.61 1.65 1.71 74.11 77.59 83.03 82.60 89.54 384 38.6 38.8 38.6 40.7 1.93 2.01 2.14 2.14 2.20 76.96 82.86 86.41 88.91 90.90 38.1 38.9 37.9 37.2 37.1 2.02 2.13 2.28 2.39 2.45 63.34 66.75 70.47 70.49 75.30 40.6 40.7 40.5 39.6 40.7 1.56 1.64 1.74 1.78 1.85 1956 .................. 1957 .................. 1958 .................. 1959’ ................ 1960 .................. 70.74 73.33 75.08 78.78 80.67 39.3 388 385 39.0 38.6 1.80 1.89 1.95 2.02 2.09 95.06 98.25 96.08 103.68 105.04 40.8 40.1 38.9 40.5 40.4 2.33 2.45 2.47 2.56 2.60 96.38 100.27 103.78 108.41 112.67 37.5 37.0 36.8 37.0 36.7 2.57 2.71 2.82 2.93 3.07 78.78 81.19 82.32 88.26 89.72 40.4 39.8 39.2 40.3 39.7 1.95 2.04 2.10 2.19 2.26 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 .................. .................. .................. .................. .................. 82 60 8591 88.46 91.33 95.45 386 38.7 388 38.7 38.8 2.14 2.22 2.28 2.36 2.46 106.92 110.70 114.40 117.74 123.52 40.5 41.0 41.6 41.9 42.3 2.64 2.70 2.75 2.81 2.92 118.08 122.47 127.19 132.06 138.38 36.9 37.0 37.3 37.2 37.4 3.20 3.31 3.41 3.55 3.70 92.34 96.56 99.23 102.97 107.53 39.8 40.4 40.5 40.7 41.2 2.32 2.39 2.45 2.53 2.61 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 .................. .................. .................. .................. .................. 98.82 101.84 107.73 114.61 119.83 38.6 38.0 37.8 37.7 37.1 2.56 2.68 2.85 3.04 3.23 130.24 135.89 142.71 154.80 164.40 42.7 42.6 42.6 43.0 42.7 3.05 3.19 3.35 3.60 3.85 146.26 154.95 164.49 181.54 195.45 37.6 37.7 37.3 37.9 37.3 3.89 4.11 4.41 4.79 5.24 112.19 114.49 122.51 129.51 133.33 41.4 40.6 40.7 40.6 39.8 2.71 2.82 3.01 3.19 3.35 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 .................. .................. .................. .................. .................. 127.31 136.90 145.39 154.76 163.53 369 37.0 36.9 36.5 36.1 345 3.70 3.94 4.24 4.53 172.14 189.14 201.40 219.14 249.31 42.4 42.6 42.4 41.9 41.9 4.06 4.44 4.75 5.23 5.95 211.67 221.19 235.89 249.25 266.08 37.2 36.5 36.8 36.6 36.4 5.69 6.06 6.41 6.81 7.31 142.44 154.71 166.46 176.80 190.79 39.9 40.5 40.7 40.0 39.5 3.57 3.82 4.09 4.42 4.83 1976 1977 1978 1979 .................. .................. .................. .................. 175.45 189 00 203.70 219.30 36.1 36.0 35.8 35.6 4.86 5.25 5.69 6.16 273.90 301.20 332.88 365.50 42.4 434 43.4 43.0 6.46 694 7.67 8.50 283.73 295.65 318.69 342.99 36.8 36.5 36.8 37.0 7.71 8.10 8.66 9.27 209.32 228.90 249.27 268.94 40.1 40.3 40.4 40.2 5.22 5.68 6.17 6.69 1949 .................. 1950 .................. 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 Trans portation and public utilities 1964 .................. 1965 .................. Finance, insurance, and real estate Wholesale and retail trade Services $42.93 44.55 40.5 40 5 $1.060 1.100 $47.63 50.52 37.8 37.7 $1.260 1.340 47 79 49 20 51 35 53.33 55 16 40.5 40.0 39.5 39 5 39.4 1.18 1.23 1.30 1.35 1.40 54.67 57.08 59.57 62.04 63.92 37.7 37.8 37.7 37.6 37.6 1.45 1.51 1.58 1.65 1.70 57 48 59 60 61 76 64.41 66 01 39.1 38 7 38.6 38.8 38.6 1.47 1.54 1.60 1.66 1.71 65.68 67.53 70.12 72.74 75.14 36.9 36.7 37.1 37.3 37.2 1.78 1.84 1.89 1.95 2.02 38.3 38.2 38.1 37.9 37.7 1.76 1.83 1.89 1.97 2.04 77.12 80.94 84 38 85.79 88.91 36.9 37.3 37.5 37.3 37.2 2.09 2.17 2.25 2.30 2.39 $70.03 73.60 36.1 35.9 $1.94 2.05 $118.78 125.14 41.1 41.3 $2.89 3.03 67.41 69.91 72.01 74.66 76.91 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 .................. .................. .................. .................. .................. 128.13 130.82 138.85 147.74 155.93 41.2 40.5 40.6 40.7 40.5 3.11 3.23 3.42 3.63 3.85 79.39 82.35 87.00 91.39 96.02 37.1 36.6 36.1 35.7 35.3 2.14 2.25 2.41 2.56 2.72 92.13 95.72 101.75 108.70 112.67 37.3 37.1 37.0 37.1 36.7 2.47 2.58 2.75 293 3.07 77.04 80.38 83.97 90.57 96.66 35.5 35.1 34.7 34.7 34.4 2.17 2.29 2.42 2.61 2.81 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 .................. .................. .................. .................. .................. 168.82 187.86 203.31 217.48 233.44 40.1 40.4 40.5 40.2 39.7 4.21 4.65 5.02 5.41 5.88 101.09 106.45 111.76 119.02 126.45 35.1 34.9 34.6 34.2 33.9 2.88 3.05 3.23 3.48 3.73 117.85 122.98 129.20 137.61 148.19 36.6 36.6 36.6 36.5 36.5 3.22 3.36 3.53 3.77 4.06 103.06 110.85 117.29 126.00 134.67 33.9 33.9 33.8 33.6 33.5 3.04 3.27 3.47 3.75 4.02 1976 1977 1978 1979 .................. .................. .................. .................. 256.71 278.90 302.80 325.98 39.8 39.9 400 39.9 6.45 6.99 7.57 8.17 133.79 142.52 153 64 164.96 33.7 33.3 32.9 32.6 3.97 4.28 4.67 5.06 155.43 165.26 178.00 190.77 36.4 36.4 36.4 36.2 4.27 4.54 4.89 5.27 143.52 153.45 163.67 175.27 33.3 33.0 32.8 32.7 4.31 4.65 4.99 5.36 1Data include Alaska and Hawaii beginning in 1959. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 89 M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • Current Labor Statistics: Establishment Data 15. Weekly hours, by industry division and major manufacturing group [Gross averages, production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls] Annual average 1979 Industry division and group 1978 TOTAL PRIVATE................................ MINING.................... 1980 Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept" Oct.n 35.8 35.6 35.7 35.6 35.9 35.1 35.1 35.2 35.0 35.0 35.3 35.3 35.5 35.3 35.2 43.4 43.0 43.7 43.6 43.9 43.4 43.2 43.4 42.8 42.7 43.2 41.9 43.1 43.5 43.6 CONSTRUCTION.................... 36.8 37.0 37.7 36.6 37.2 35.3 35.7 36.2 36.7 36.9 37.9 37.7 37.3 38.0 37.8 MANUFACTURING .................. Overtime hours.......................... 40.4 3.6 40.2 3.3 40.2 3.4 40.3 3.4 40.9 3.4 39.8 3.0 39.8 2.9 39.8 3.0 39.4 2.7 39.3 2.5 39.4 2.5 38.8 2.4 39.3 2.7 39 8 2.9 39 7 2.9 41.1 3.8 40.8 3.5 40.8 3.5 40.8 3.4 41.6 3.5 40.3 3.1 40.3 3.0 40.3 3.1 39.9 2.7 39.7 2.5 39.8 2.4 39.1 2.3 39.7 2.6 40.2 2.9 402 2.9 Lumber and wood products ............ Furniture and fixtures.............................. Stone, clay, and glass products................ Primary metal industries................................ Fabricated metal products .................. 39.8 39.3 41.6 41.8 41.0 39.4 38.7 41.5 41.4 40.7 39.8 39.3 41.7 40.9 40.9 38.8 39.3 41.7 40.7 41.0 39.2 39.9 41.8 40.9 41.9 38.1 38.4 40.1 40.7 40.6 38.5 38.4 40.1 40.7 40.4 38.3 38.5 40.7 40.7 40.6 37.1 37.9 40.4 40.6 40.2 37.6 37.3 40.6 39.3 39.9 38.4 37.3 41.0 39.1 40.1 38.2 36.2 40.3 38.6 39.2 39.2 37.6 40.7 39.0 40.0 39 4 38 4 41 2 39 9 40.4 39 1 38 5 41 3 40 2 40.4 Machinery except electrical...................... Electric and electronic equipment ................ Transportation equipment ...................... Instruments and related products .................. Miscellaneous manufacturing ...................... 42.1 40.3 42.2 40.9 38.8 41.8 40.3 41.1 40.8 38.8 41.5 40.3 41.3 40.8 39.1 41.8 40.8 40.8 41.4 39.4 42.7 41.3 42.7 41.7 39.5 41.5 40.2 40.0 41.0 38.8 41.5 40.2 40.4 40.8 38.6 41.5 40.0 40.4 40.6 38.8 41.1 39.6 39.8 40.4 38.4 40.8 39.3 39.9 40.3 38.2 40.8 39.4 39.9 40.5 38.3 40.0 38.5 39.5 39.6 37.8 40.4 39.2 40 0 39.9 38.5 41 1 39.7 40 5 401 39.0 40 8 39 7 41 1 39 9 38.8 39.4 3.2 39.3 3.1 39.4 3.2 39.6 3.3 39.9 3.2 39.0 2.9 38.9 2.8 38.9 2.9 38.7 2.7 38.7 2.5 38.8 2.5 38.5 2.6 38.9 2.9 39 1 3.0 39 0 2.9 Food and kindred products............................ Tobacco manufactures.................. Textile mill products.............................. Apparel and other textile products.................. Paper and allied products........................ 39.7 38.1 40.4 35.6 42.9 39.9 38.0 40.4 35.3 42.6 40.0 38.9 40.8 35.5 42.7 40.2 38.8 41.3 35.6 42.9 40.4 39.4 41.5 35.9 43.5 39.5 37.3 40.9 35.2 42.7 39.1 36.9 40.8 35.4 42.4 39.0 37.7 40.9 35.4 42.4 38.9 38.2 39.9 35.3 42.2 39.7 38.7 39.8 35.3 41.6 39.6 38.3 39.6 35.6 41.7 39.9 36.5 38.5 35.3 41.4 40.3 36.8 39.2 35.4 41.8 40 3 37.7 39 7 35.2 42.4 39 8 39.0 39 6 35 4 42.3 Printing and publishing .............................. Chemicals and allied products........................ Petroleum and coal products ................ Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products Leather and leather products ...................... 37.6 41.9 43.6 40.9 37.1 37.5 41.9 43.8 40.5 36.5 37.5 41.7 44.1 40.5 36.5 37.9 42.2 44.8 40.3 36.8 38.1 42.2 43.5 40.7 37.3 37.2 41.7 36.2 40.3 36.7 37.0 41.6 39.7 39.9 36.8 37.2 41.7 39.4 40.0 36.4 36.8 41.6 41.1 39.7 36.7 36.9 41.3 42.3 39.0 37.0 36.7 41.2 42.3 39.3 37.4 36.8 40.7 42.7 38.6 36.4 37.2 40.9 42.2 40 0 36.6 37 3 41.3 43 2 40 4 36.4 37 1 41 4 43 1 40 7 36.2 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES . 40.0 39.9 40.0 40.2 40.0 39.5 39.4 39.5 39.5 39.3 39.6 39.9 39.7 39.6 39.5 WHOLESALE AND RETAIL TRADE .................. 32.9 32.6 32.4 32.4 32.9 31.9 31.9 32.0 31.8 31.9 32.3 32.5 32.7 32.1 31.9 WHOLESALE TRADE........................ 38.8 38.8 38.9 38.9 39.1 38.5 38.4 38.4 38.4 38.5 38.2 38.2 38.4 38.4 38.4 30.4 31.0 29.8 29.8 29.9 29.7 29.9 30.4 30.7 30.9 30.1 29.9 Durable goods Overtime hours............................ Nondurable goods Overtime hours.................................... 90 1979 RETAIL TRADE 31.0 30.6 30.4 FINANCE, INSURANCE, AND REAL ESTATE .............................. 36.4 36.2 36.2 36.3 36.4 36.2 36.3 36.3 36.2 36.1 36.4 36.2 36.3 36.1 36.0 SERVICES 32.8 32.7 32.6 32.6 32.8 32.5 32.5 32.5 32.4 32.3 32.8 33.1 33.1 32.6 32.5 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 16. Weekly hours, by industry division and major manufacturing group, seasonally adjusted [Gross averages, production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls] 1980 1979 Industry division and group TOTAL PRIVATE Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept.p OcLp 35.6 35.6 35.7 35.6 35.5 35.4 35.3 35.1 35.0 34.9 35.1 35.2 35.1 43.1 43.5 43.6 MINING .................................................................. 43.7 43.6 43.9 43.4 43.2 43.4 42.8 42.7 43.2 41.9 CONSTRUCTION .................................................... 36.8 37.0 37.2 37.3 37.1 36.6 36.7 36.8 37.1 36.8 36.5 37.5 36.9 39.5 2.7 39.6 2.8 MANUFACTURING Overtime hours............................................ 40.1 3.2 40.1 3.3 40.2 3.2 40.3 3.2 40.1 3.0 39.8 3.1 39.8 3.0 39.3 2.6 39.1 2.4 39.0 2.5 39.4 2.7 Durable goods Overtime hours............................................ 40.7 3.3 40.6 3.3 40.7 3.2 40.8 3.3 40.6 3.1 40.3 3.2 40.3 3.0 39.7 2.5 39.5 2.4 39.4 2.4 39.9 2.6 40.0 2.7 40.1 2.8 Lumber and wood products ................................ Furniture and fixtures.......................................... Stone, clay, and glass products .......................... Primary metal industries...................................... Fabricated metal products .................................. 39.2 38.8 41.3 41.1 40.8 38.9 38.9 41.4 40.8 40.7 39.0 38.9 41.5 40.7 40.9 39.4 39.2 41.4 40.8 40.9 39.1 39.0 41.2 40.8 40.8 38.7 38.5 40.9 40.7 40.7 37.3 38.5 40.6 40.6 40.8 37.5 37.6 40.3 39.2 39.9 37.6 37.0 40.4 38.8 39.7 38.1 36.6 40.2 38.6 39.6 38.9 37.4 40.3 39.2 40.1 38.9 38.1 41.0 39.7 40.3 38.6 38.0 40.9 404 40.3 Machinery, except electrical................................ Electric and electronic equipment........................ Transportation equipment.................................... Instruments and related products ........................ Miscellaneous manufacturing .............................. 41.5 40.3 41.0 40.7 38.9 41.5 40.4 40.5 41.0 38.9 41.5 40.5 40.9 41.0 39.0 41.6 40.5 40.9 41.4 39.2 41.5 40.3 40.8 40.9 39.1 41.3 40.0 40.4 40.4 38.6 41.5 39.9 40.5 40.7 38.5 41.0 39.5 39.7 40.3 38.3 40.7 39.2 39.5 40.4 38.2 40.6 39.0 39.6 40.1 38.3 40.8 39.4 40.9 40.1 38.6 41.0 39.5 40.4 40.1 38.8 40.8 39.7 40.8 39.8 38.6 Nondurable goods Overtime hours............................................ 39.3 3.1 39.4 3.2 39.4 3.1 39.5 3.1 39.4 2.9 39.0 3.0 39.1 3.0 38.9 2.6 38.6 2.5 38.5 2.6 38.7 2.8 38.8 2.7 389 2.8 Food and kindred products.................................. Tobacco manufactures ...................................... Textile mill products............................................ Apparel and other textile products ...................... Paper and allied products .................................. 39.9 38.3 40.8 35.4 42.6 39.9 37.8 41.0 35.3 42.7 39.9 38.5 41.0 35.6 42.8 39.8 38.5 41.5 36.0 43.0 39.7 37.9 41.1 35.9 429 39.3 37.7 40.8 35.3 42.6 39.6 38.2 40.3 35.8 42.5 39.9 38.2 39.7 35.3 41.7 39.6 37.3 39.1 35.2 41.4 39.7 38.5 38.8 35.1 41.4 39.8 37.3 39.2 35.1 41.8 39.7 37.0 39.6 35.1 42.2 39.7 38.4 39.6 35.3 42.3 Printing and publishing........................................ Chemicals and allied products ............................ Petroleum and coal products .............................. Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products ........ Leather and leather products .............................. 37.4 41.7 43.5 40.2 36.5 37.5 42.0 44.4 40.0 36.6 37.4 41.8 43.4 40.0 37.0 37.8 42.0 36.9 40.7 37.2 37.4 41.9 40.7 40.0 37.2 37.2 41.8 39.7 39.9 36.9 37.2 41.5 41.1 40.1 37.3 37.1 41.3 42.5 39.3 36.7 36.8 41.1 42.3 39.2 36.7 36.9 40.8 42.2 39.0 36.1 37.1 41.0 42.2 40.2 36.5 36.9 41.3 42.5 40.2 36.4 37.0 41.4 42.5 40.4 36.2 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES 40.0 40.2 40.0 39.5 39.4 39.5 39.5 39.3 39.6 39.9 39.7 39.6 39.5 WHOLESALE AND RETAIL TRADE.......................... 32.6 32.6 32.6 32.6 32.4 32.3 32.0 32.1 31.9 31.8 32.0 32.1 32.0 38.9 38.8 38.5 38.5 38.6 38.0 38.0 38.2 38.4 38.2 30.6 30.4 30.3 30.0 30.1 30.0 29.8 30.1 30.1 30.1 WHOLESALE TRADE 38.8 38.9 38.9 RETAIL TRADE 30.6 306 30.6 FINANCE, INSURANCE, AND REAL ESTATE .............................................................. 36.2 36.3 36.4 36.2 36.3 36.3 36.2 36.1 36.4 36.2 36.3 36.1 36.0 32.6 32.7 32.8 32.7 32.7 32.7 32.6 32.5 32.6 32.6 32.6 32.6 32.5 SERVICES https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 91 M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • Current Labor Statistics: Establishment Data 17. Hourly earnings, by industry division and major manufacturing group [Gross averages, production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls] Annual average 1979 1980 Industry division and group TOTAL PRIVATE........................................ 1978 1979 Oct Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept" O ctp $6.57 $6.61 $6.64 $6.68 $6.79 $6.84 $5.69 $6.16 $6.31 $6.34 $6.38 $6.42 $6.46 $6.51 $6.53 MINING............................................ 7.67 8.50 8.59 8.73 8.75 8.88 8.90 8.95 9.10 9.08 9.16 9.08 9.18 9.28 9.42 CONSTRUCTION.............................. 8.66 9.27 9.50 9.52 9.58 9.49 9.61 9.68 9.69 9.77 9.81 9.91 10.05 10.18 10.22 MANUFACTURING ............................................ 6.17 6.69 6.82 6.87 6.97 6.96 7.00 7.06 7.09 7.13 7.20 7.29 7.30 7.42 7.48 Durable goods.............................................. Lumber and wood products .......................... Furniture and fixtures...................................... Stone, clay, and glass products ...................... Primary metal industries.................................. Fabricated metal products ............................ 6.58 5.60 4.68 6.33 8.20 6.35 7.13 6.08 5.06 6.85 8.97 6.84 7.25 6.23 5.19 7.01 9.11 6.98 7.29 6.22 5.21 7.08 9.26 7.01 7.42 6.24 5.26 7.11 9.28 7.14 7.39 6.21 5.27 7.06 9.30 7.09 7.46 6.33 5.32 7.14 9.44 7.14 7.54 6.35 5.37 7.27 9.45 7.24 7.56 6.28 5.39 7.34 9.53 7.27 7.60 6.40 5.42 7.45 9.61 7.32 7.69 6.56 5.49 7.53 9.65 7.42 7.77 6.72 5.52 7.60 9.82 7.42 7.78 6.76 5.54 7.64 9.84 7.48 7.93 6.80 5.57 7.68 9.95 7.60 8.01 6.76 5.59 7.74 9.99 7.64 Machinery, except electrical............................ Electric and electronic equipment.................... Transportation equipment................................ Instruments and related products .................... Miscellaneous manufacturing .......................... 6.78 5.82 7.91 5.71 4.69 7.32 6.32 8.54 6.17 5.03 7.44 6.49 8.70 6.32 5.10 7.50 6.52 8.72 6.39 5.13 7.63 6.64 8.93 6.50 5.20 7.66 6.67 8.81 6.57 5.28 7.69 6.71 8.86 6.59 5.30 7.76 6.78 9.04 6.63 5.34 7.81 6.79 9.04 6.63 5.37 7.91 6.78 9.06 6.72 5.40 7.97 6.87 9.24 6.80 5.42 8.05 6.96 9.34 6.86 5.46 8.07 7.02 9.35 6.86 5.46 8.27 7.15 9.59 6.90 5.51 8.36 7.20 9.79 6.93 5.52 Nondurable goods.............................. Food and kindred products.............................. Tobacco manufactures.................................... Textile mill products.................................. Apparel and other textile products .................. Paper and allied products................................ 5.53 5.80 6.13 4.30 3.94 6.52 6.00 6.27 6.65 4.66 4.23 7.13 6.14 6.35 6.33 4.83 4.31 7.36 6.21 6.50 6.97 4.86 4.32 7.43 6.26 6.55 6.98 4.87 4.38 7.50 6.28 6.61 7.08 4.90 4.44 7.49 6.27 6.64 7.36 4.90 4.45 7.52 6.30 6.68 7.57 4.92 4.49 7.55 6.36 6.75 7.79 4.91 4.46 7.63 6.42 6.82 764 4.90 4.45 7.65 6.48 6.84 7.97 4.93 4.51 7.79 6.60 6.89 8.06 5.06 4.50 7.97 6.62 6.90 7.74 5.19 4.60 7.99 6.68 6.93 7.44 5.23 4.70 8.05 6.71 6.95 7.44 5.26 4.71 8.07 Printing and publishing.................................... Chemicals and allied products ........................ Petroleum and coal products .......................... Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products . . . Leather and leather products .......................... 6.51 7.02 8.63 5.52 3.89 6.95 7.60 9.36 5.96 4.22 7.10 7.83 9.48 6.12 4.31 7.13 7.88 9.56 6.14 4.33 7.21 7.92 9.48 6.21 4.35 7.24 7.97 9.46 6.25 4.45 7.29 8.01 9.37 6.25 4.47 7.34 8.05 9.29 6.27 4.51 7.34 8.12 9.83 6.30 4.52 7.44 8.17 10.07 6.34 4.53 7.46 8.24 10.22 6.39 4.54 7.53 8.35 10.25 6.48 4.54 7.63 8.39 10.22 6.57 4.59 7.72 8.44 10.33 6.65 4.59 7.72 8.52 10.34 6.73 4.60 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES.............. 7.57 8.17 8.43 8.51 8.54 8.55 8.58 8.62 8.71 8.72 8.75 8.90 8.95 9.02 9.14 WHOLESALE AND RETAIL TRADE ............................ 4.67 5.06 5.15 5.18 5.18 5.34 5.36 5.40 5.40 5.42 5.43 5.48 5.48 5.55 5.57 WHOLESALE TRADE............................................ 5.88 6.39 6.52 6.58 6.69 6.72 6.77 6.83 6.87 6.89 6.95 6.99 7.01 7.06 7.09 RETAIL TRADE.............................................. 4.20 4.53 4.59 4.62 4.61 4.78 4.78 4.81 4.80 4.82 4.83 4.88 4.89 4.94 4.96 FINANCE, INSURANCE, AND REAL ESTATE ................................................................ 4.89 5.27 5.35 5.41 5.48 5.53 5.60 5.68 5.68 5.70 5.77 5.77 5.82 5.87 5.92 SERVICES................................................................ 4.99 5.36 5.48 5.55 5.61 5.65 5.70 5.75 5.75 5.79 5.81 5.79 5.81 5.92 5.98 18. Hourly Earnings Index for production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls, by industry division [Seasonally adjusted data: 1967=100] 1979 1980 Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Septp Oct.p Sept 1980 to Oct 1980 Oct 1979 to Oct 1980 235.0 237.3 239.4 240.3 242.4 245.2 246.2 248.3 250.9 252.1 254.0 255.1 257.2 0.8 9.4 267.7 224.7 239.9 255.8 227.6 212.9 232.3 272.0 226.5 241.9 258.7 229.7 215.7 234.9 274.6 228.1 244.1 260.1 231.4 217.9 237.8 277.0 225.8 245.2 260.8 234.2 218.4 237.7 278.5 229.8 247.8 262.4 235.2 221.1 239.7 280.9 232.2 250.2 265.9 237.8 225.7 242.7 283.7 233.0 252.4 267.2 238.0 224.9 243.0 284.2 234.2 255.0 268.7 239.8 226.3 245.7 286.3 235.3 258.3 270.6 241.8 230.2 248.4 285.3 236.7 260.6 272.8 243.5 229.0 247.6 288.9 239.0 262.4 273.2 245.3 232.7 249.8 289.4 239.1 264.4 273.7 246.1 233.1 251.4 295.2 241.1 266.0 278.3 247.1 235.1 253.4 2.0 .8 .6 1.7 .4 .9 .8 10.3 7.3 10.9 88 8.6 10.4 9.1 104.1 104.1 103.8 102.7 102.2 102.0 101.4 101.4 101.5 102.0 102.0 101.4 Industry Oct TOTAL PRIVATE (in current dollars) . . Mining........................................ Construction ................................ Manufacturing .............................. Transportation and public utilities . . . Wholesale and retail trade ............ Finance, insurance, and real estate Services ...................................... TOTAL PRIVATE (in constant dollars) 92 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 19. Weekly earnings, by industry division and major manufacturing group [Gross averages, production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls] 1980 1979 Annual average Industry division and group 1978 TOTAL PRIVATE.................................... $203.70 1979 $219.30 OcL $225.27 Mar. Apr. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. $225.70 $229.04 $225.34 $226.75 385.39 384.48 335.00 343.08 350.42 355.62 280.99 279.35 MINING 332.88 365.50 375.38 380.63 384.13 CONSTRUCTION................................................ 318.69 342.99 358.15 348.43 356.38 $229.15 $228.55 388.43 389.48 May June July $229.95 $233.33 $234.39 Aug. Sept." O ctp $237.14 $239.69 $240.77 395.66 403.68 410.71 395.71 380.45 360.51 371 80 373.61 374.87 386.84 386.32 280.21 283.68 282.85 286.89 295.32 296.96 387.72 MANUFACTURING ............................................ 249.27 268.94 274.16 276.86 285.07 277.01 278.60 Durable goods Lumber and wood products.......................... Furniture and fixtures .................................. Stone, clay, and glass products.................... Primary metal industries .............................. Fabricated metal products............................ 270.44 222.88 183.92 263.33 342.76 260.35 290.90 239.55 195.82 284.28 371.36 278.39 295.80 247.95 203.97 292.32 372.60 285.48 297.43 241.34 204.75 295.24 376.88 287.41 308.67 244.61 209.87 297.20 379.55 299.17 297.82 236.60 202.37 283.11 378.51 287.85 300.64 243.71 204.29 286.31 384.21 288.46 303.86 243.21 206.75 295.89 384,62 293.94 301.64 232.99 204.28 296.54 386.92 292.25 301.72 240.64 202.17 302.47 377.67 292.07 306.06 251.90 204.78 308.73 377.32 297.54 303.81 256.70 199.82 306.28 379.05 290.86 308.87 264.99 208.30 310.95 383.76 299.20 318.79 267.92 213.89 316.42 397.01 307.04 322.00 264.32 215.22 319.66 401.60 308.66 Machinery except electrical.......................... Electric and electronic equipment.................. Transportation equipment ............................ Instruments and related products.................. Miscellaneous manufacturing........................ 285.44 234.55 333.80 233.54 181.97 305.98 254.70 350.99 251.74 195.16 308.76 261.55 359.31 257.86 199.41 313.50 266.02 355.78 264.55 202.12 325.80 274.23 381.31 271.05 205.40 317.89 26813 352.40 269.37 204.86 319.14 269.74 357.94 268.87 204.58 322.04 271.20 365.22 269.18 207.19 320.21 268.88 359.79 267.85 206.21 322.73 266.45 361.49 270.82 206.28 325.18 270.68 368.68 275.40 207.59 322.00 267.96 368.93 271.66 206.39 326.03 275.18 374.00 273.71 210.21 339.90 283.86 388.40 276.69 214.89 341.09 285.84 402.37 276.51 214.18 Nondurable goods Food and kindred products .......................... Tobacco manufactures ................................ Textile mill products .................................... Apparel and other textile products................ Paper and allied products ............................ 217.88 230.26 233.55 173.72 140.26 279.71 235.80 250.17 252.70 188.26 149.32 303.74 241.92 254.00 246.24 197.06 153.01 314.27 245.92 261.30 270.44 200.72 153.79 318.75 249.77 264.62 275.01 202.11 157.24 326.25 244.92 261.10 264.08 200.41 156.29 319.82 243.90 259.62 271.58 199.92 157.53 318.85 245.07 260.52 285.39 201.23 158.95 320,12 246.13 262.58 297.58 195.91 157.44 321.99 248.45 270.75 295.67 195.02 157.09 318.24 251.42 270.86 305.25 195.23 160.56 324.84 254.10 274.91 294.19 194.81 158.85 329.96 257.52 278.07 284.83 203.45 162.84 333.98 261.19 279.28 280.49 207.63 165.44 341.32 261.69 276.61 290.16 208.30 166.73 341.36 Printing and publishing.................................. Chemicals and allied products...................... Petroleum and coal products........................ Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products...................................... Leather and leather products........................ 244.78 294.14 376.27 260.63 318.44 409.97 266.25 326.51 418.07 270.23 332.54 428.29 274.70 334.22 412.38 269.33 332.35 342.45 269.73 333.22 371.99 273.05 335.69 366.03 270.11 337.79 404.01 274.54 337.42 425.96 273.78 339.49 432.31 277.10 339.85 437.68 283.84 343.15 431.28 287.96 348.57 446.26 286.41 352.73 445.65 225.77 144.32 241.38 154.03 247.86 157.32 247.44 159.34 252.75 162.26 251.88 163.32 249.38 164.50 250.80 164.16 250.11 165.88 247.26 167.61 251.13 169.80 250.13 165.26 262.80 167.99 268.66 167.08 273.91 166.52 TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES 302.80 325.98 337.20 342.10 341.60 337.73 338.05 340.49 344.05 342.70 346.50 355.11 355.32 357.19 361.03 WHOLESALE AND RETAIL TRADE 153.64 164.96 166.86 167.83 170.42 170.35 170.98 172.80 171.72 172.90 175.39 178.10 179.20 178.16 177.68 WHOLESALE TRADE 228.14 247.93 253.63 255.96 261.58 258.72 259.97 262.27 263.81 265.27 265.49 267.02 269.18 271.10 272.26 148.30 RETAIL TRADE.................................................. 130.20 138.62 139.54 140.45 142.91 142.44 142.44 143.82 142.56 144.12 146.83 149.82 151.10 148.69 FINANCE, INSURANCE, AND REAL ESTATE 178.00 190.77 193.67 196.38 199.47 200.19 203.28 206.18 205.62 205.77 210.03 208.87 211.27 211.91 213.12 191.65 192.31 192.99 194.35 SERVICES.......................................................... https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 163.67 175.27 178.65 180.93 184.01 183.63 185.25 186.88 186.30 187.02 190.57 M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • Current Labor Statistics: Establishment Data 20. Gross and spendable weekly earnings, in current and 1967 dollars, 1960 to date [Averages for production or nonsu oervisory workers on private nonagricultural payrolls] Private nonagricultural workers Year and month Gross average weekly earnings Manufacturing workers Spendable average weekly earnings Worker with no dependents weekly earnings Worker with no dependents Married worker with 3 dependents Current dollars 1967 dollars Current dollars 1967 dollars Current dollars 1967 dollars Current dollars 1967 dollars Current dollars 1967 dollars Current dollars 1967 dollars $80.67 $90.95 $65.59 $73.95 $72.96 $82.25 $89.72 $101.15 $72.57 $81.82 $80.11 $90.32 82.60 85.91 88.46 91.33 95.45 92.19 94.82 96.47 98.31 101.01 67.08 69.56 71.05 75.04 79.32 74.87 76.78 77.48 80.78 83.94 74.48 76.99 78.56 82.57 86.63 83.13 84.98 85.67 88.88 91.67 92.34 96.56 99.23 102.97 107.53 103.06 106.58 108.21 110.84 113.79 74.60 77.86 79.51 84.40 89.08 83.26 85.94 86.71 90.85 94.26 82.18 85.53 87.25 92.18 96.78 91.72 94.40 95.15 99.22 102.41 1970 ................................ 98.82 101.84 107.73 114.61 119.83 101.67 101.84 103.39 104.38 103.04 81.29 83.38 86.71 90.96 96.21 83.63 83.38 83.21 82.84 82.73 88.66 90.86 95.28 99.99 104.90 91.21 90.86 91.44 91.07 90.20 112.19 114.49 122.51 129.51 133.33 115.42 114.49 117.57 117.95 114.64 91.45 92.97 97.70 101.90 106.32 94.08 92.97 93.76 92.81 91.42 99.33 100.93 106.75 111.44 115.58 102.19 100.93 102.45 101 49 99.38 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 127.31 136.90 145.39 154.76 163.53 104.95 109.26 109.23 104.78 101.45 103.80 112.19 117.51 124.37 132.49 85.57 89.54 88.29 84.20 82.19 112.43 121.68 127.38 134.61 145.65 92.69 97.11 95.70 91.14 90.35 142.44 154.71 166.46 176.80 190.79 117.43 123.47 125.06 119.70 118.36 114.97 125.34 132.57 140.19 151.61 94.78 100.03 99.60 94.92 94.05 124.24 135.57 143.50 151.56 166.29 102 42 108.20 107.81 102.61 103.16 1978 ................................ 175.45 189.00 203.70 219.30 102.90 104.13 104.30 100.73 143.30 155.19 165.39 177.55 84.05 85.50 84.69 81.56 155.87 169.93 180.71 194.35 91.42 93.63 92.53 89.27 209.32 228.90 249.27 268.94 122.77 126.12 127.63 123.54 167.83 183.80 197.40 212.43 98.43 101.27 101.08 97.58 181.32 200.06 214.87 232.07 106.35 110.23 110.02 106.60 1979: October............................ November........................ December........................ 225.27 225.70 229.04 99.85 99.17 9.58 181.90 182.22 184.59 80.63 80.06 80.26 198.94 199.27 201.80 88.18 87.55 87.74 274.16 276.86 285.07 121.52 121.64 123.94 215.97 217.80 223.38 95.73 95.69 97.12 236.04 238.08 244.31 104 63 104 60 106.22 1980: January............................ February.......................... March.............................. 225.34 226.75 229.15 96.59 95.88 95.52 181.96 182.98 184.67 77.99 77.37 76.98 199.00 200.07 201.89 85.30 84.60 84.16 277.01 278.60 280.99 118.74 117.80 117.13 217.91 218.99 220.61 93.40 92.60 91.96 238.20 239.40 241.22 102 10 101 23 100.55 April ................................ May ................................ June ................................ 228.55 229.95 233.33 94.21 93.82 94.16 184.25 185.23 187.59 75.95 75.57 75.70 201.43 202.49 205.06 83.03 82.62 82.75 279.35 280.21 283.68 115.15 114.32 114.48 219.49 220.08 222.43 90.47 89.79 89.76 239.97 240.63 243.26 98.92 98 18 98.17 July.................................. August ............................ September p .................... Octoberp ........................ 234.39 237.14 239.69 240.77 94.51 95.01 95.15 188.33 190.25 192.03 192.79 75.94 76.22 76.23 205.86 207.95 209.88 210.70 83.01 83.31 83.32 282.85 286.89 295.32 296.96 114.05 114.94 117.24 221.87 224.61 230.33 231.45 89.46 89.99 91.44 242.63 245.69 252.09 253.33 97.83 98 43 100 08 1960 ................................ 1961 ............................ 1965 .................................. 1966 ................................ 1967 .................................... 1968 .................................... ............................ .......................................... ........................................ .................................... ...................................... 1976 ...................................... 'Not available. NOTE: The earnings expressed in 1967 dollars have been adjusted for changes in price ieve( as measured by the Bureau’s Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers These series are described in “The Spendable Earnings Series: A Technical Note on its Cal- 94 Spendable average weekly earnings Married worker with 3 dependents https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis culation,” Employment and Earnings and Monthly Rep<>rt on the Labor Force, Fe(bruary 1969, pp. 6-13. See also “ Spendable Earnings Formulas, 1978 -80," Employment and Earnings, March 980, PP-10_11- UNEM PLOYM ENT INSURANCE DATA U nemployment ployed. Persons not covered by unemployment insurance (about onethird of the labor force) and those who have exhausted or not yet earned benefit rights are excluded from the scope of the survey. Ini tial claims are notices filed by persons in unemployment insurance programs to indicate they are out of work and wish to begin receiv ing compensation. A claimant who continued to be unemployed a full week is then counted in the insured unemployment figure. The rate of insured unemployment expresses the number of insured unem ployed as a percent of the average insured employment in a 12-month period. insurance data a re c o m p ile d m o n t h ly b y t h e E m p lo y m e n t a n d T r a in in g A d m in is t r a t io n o f t h e U .S . D e p a r t m e n t o f L a b o r fr o m r e c o r d s o f S ta t e a n d F e d e r a l u n e m p lo y m e n t in s u r a n c e c la im s file d a n d b e n e fits p a id . R a ilr o a d u n e m p lo y m e n t in s u r a n c e d a ta a r e p r e p a r e d b y t h e U .S . R a il r o a d R e t ir e m e n t B o a r d . Definitions Data for all programs represent an unduplicated count of insured unemployment under State programs, Unemployment Compensation for Ex-Servicemen, and Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees, and the Railroad Insurance Act. An application for benefits is filed by a railroad worker at the be ginning of his first period of unemployment in a benefit year; no ap plication is required for subsequent periods in the same year. Num ber of payments are payments made in 14-day registration periods. The average amount of benefit payment is an average for all com pensable periods, not adjusted for recovery of overpayments or set tlement of underpayments. However, total benefits paid have been adjusted. Under both State and Federal unemployment insurance programs for civilian employees, insured workers must report the completion of at least 1 week of unemployment before they are defined as unem 21. Unemployment Insurance and employment service operations [All items except average benefits amounts are inthousands] 1980 1979 Item All programs: Insured unemployment...................... State unemployment insurance program:1 Initial claims2 .................................... Insured unemployment (average weekly volume) ............................ Rate of insured unemployment .......... Weeks of unemployment compensated ................................ Average weekly benefit amount for total unemployment.................. Total benefits paid ............................ Unemployment compensation for exservicemen: 3 Initial claims’ .................................... Insured unemployment (average weekly volume) ............................ Weeks of unemployment compensated ................................ Total benefits paid ............................ Unemployment compensation for Federal civilian employees:4 Initial claims...................................... Insured unemployment (average weekly volume) ............................ Weeks of unemployment compensated ................................ Total benefits paid ............................ Sept. Nov. Oct Mar. Feb. Jan. Dec. Apr. June May July 2,164 2,236 2,559 3,047 3,740 3,730 3,652 3,629 3,680 3,790 4,140 1,219 1,641 1,827 2,263 2,837 1,818 1,705 2,190 p 2,248 2,319 2,737 2,024 2.4 2,057 2.4 2,384 2.8 2,864 3.4 3,537 4.1 3,518 4.1 3,356 3.9 3,278 3.8 3,343 3.9 3,455 4.0 3,692 4.3 9,171 13,792 12,801 13,170 12,689 o 12,302 12,441 14,398 6,993 7,638 8,107 $89 07 $606,095 $90.59 $673,965 $92.39 $728,370 23 26 24 24 25 21 21 21 P20 23 27 52 52 54 56 60 58 63 52 50 45 58 211 $19,634 236 $23,325 232 $23,093 233 $23,093 299 $29,635 255 $25,308 249 $24,928 246 $24,518 p220 $22,025 122 $11,761 331 $33,342 13 18 15 15 19 11 12 11 p 12 14 17 25 28 29 31 34 32 30 25 22 20 26 150 $14,118 129 $12,226 123 $11,901 108 $10,323 P88 $8,280 50 $4,665 124 $11,296 Aug. Sept. 3,911 3,961 3,408 3.9 3,087 3.6 55 56 25 29 $99.88 $98.75 $99.52 p $99.55 $96.41 $98.39 $99.15 $94.54 $843,869 $1,283,946 $1,229,877 $1,218,231 $1,232,173 $1,196,836 $1,213,595 $1,397,508 91 $8,453 109 $10,093 118 $11,063 118 $11,047 13 11 10 11 22 7 5 4 6 24 44 13 Railroad unemployment insurance: Applications...................................... Insured unemployment (average weekly volume) ............................ Number of payments ........................ Average amount of benefit paymert........................................ Total benefits paid ............................ 21 32 18 51 20 36 19 41 40 80 39 71 30 68 27 62 23 54 27 55 44 66 39 86 $189.08 $5,747 $189.61 $8,003 $183.38 $6,462 $197.22 $8,085 $199.01 $14,967 $208.73 $14,573 $210.79 $13,884 $201.87 $13,002 $193.44 $9,953 $199.06 $10,140 $207.08 $13,320 $211.87 $17,336 Employment service:6 New applications and renewals.......... Nonfarm placements ........................ 15,525 4,349 1,855 458 3,183 768 4,378 1,044 5,980 1,314 7,285 1,561 8,708 1,853 10,021 2,143 11,446 2,413 12,864 2,730 11nitial claims and State insured unemployment include data under the program for Puerto Rican sugarcane workers. 2 Includes interstate claims for the Virgin Islands. Excludes transition claims under State programs. 3 Excludes data on claims and payments made jointly with other programs. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 4 Includes the Virgin islands. Exludes data on claims and payments made jointly with State programs. 5 Cumulative total for fiscal year (October 1 - September 30). NOTE: Date for Puerto Rico included. Dashes indicate data not available. 95 PRICE DATA P rice fr o m data a r e g a th e r e d b y t h e B u r e a u o f L a b o r S ta t is t ic s r e ta il a n d p r im a r y m a r k e ts in t h e U n it e d S ta te s . P r ic e in d e x e s a r e g iv e n in r e la tio n t o a b a s e p e r io d ( 1 9 6 7 = 100, u n le s s o t h e r w is e n o t e d ) . Definitions The Consumer Price Index is a monthly statistical measure of the average change in prices in a fixed market basket of goods and ser vices. Effective with the January 1978 index, the Bureau of Labor Sta tistics began publishing CPI’s for two groups of the population. One index, a new CPI for All Urban Consumers, covers 80 percent of the total noninstitutional population; and the other index, a revised CPI for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers, covers about half the new index population. The All Urban Consumers index includes, in addition to wage earners and clerical workers, professional, manageri al, and technical workers, the self-employed, short-term workers, the unemployed, retirees, and others not in the labor force. The CPI is based on prices of food, clothing, shelter, fuel, drugs, transportation fares, doctor’s and dentist’s fees, and other goods and services that people buy for day-to-day living. The quantity and quali ty of these items is kept essentially unchanged between major revi sions so that only price changes will be measured. Prices are collected from over 18,000 tenants, 24,000 retail establishments, and 18,000 housing units for property taxes in 85 urban areas across the country. All taxes directly associated with the purchase and use of items are included in the index. Because the CPI’s are based on the expendi tures of two population groups in 1972-73, they may not accurately reflect the experience of individual families and single persons with different buying habits. Though the CPI is often called the “Cost-of-Living Index,” it mea sures only price change, which is just one of several important factors affecting living costs. Area indexes do not measure differences in the level of prices among cities. They only measure the average change in prices for each area since the base period. Producer Price Indexes measure average changes in prices received in primary markets of the United States by producers of commodities in all stages of processing. The sample used for calculating these in dexes contains about 2,800 commodities and about 10,000 quotations per month selected to represent the movement of prices of all com modities produced in the manufacturing, agriculture, forestry, fishing, mining, gas and electricity, and public utilities sectors. The universe includes all commodities produced or imported for sale in commercial transactions in primary markets in the United States. Producer Price Indexes can be organized by stage of processing or by commodity. The stage of processing structure organizes products by degree of fabrication (that is, finished goods, intermediate or semifinished goods, and crude materials). The commodity structure organizes products by similarity of end-use or material composition. To the extent possible, prices used in calculating Producer Price In dexes apply to the first significant commercial transaction in the Unit ed States, from the production or central marketing point. Price data are generally collected monthly, primarily by mail questionnaire. 96 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Most prices are obtained directly from producing companies on a vol untary and confidential basis. Prices generally are reported for the Tuesday of the week containing the 13th day of the month. In calculating Producer Price Indexes, price changes for the vari ous commodities are averaged together with implicit quantity weights representing their importance in the total net selling value of all com modities as of 1972. The detailed data are aggregated to obtain in dexes for stage of processing groupings, commodity groupings, dura bility of product groupings, and a number of special composite groupings. Price indexes for the output of selected SIC industries measure av erage price changes in commodities produced by particular industries, as defined in the Standard Industrial Classification Manual 1972 (Washington, U.S. Office of Management and Budget, 1972). These indexes are derived from several price series, combined to match the economic activity of the specified industry and weighted by the value of shipments in the industry. They use data from comprehensive in dustrial censuses conducted by the U.S. Bureau of the Census and the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Notes on the data Beginning with the May 1978 issue of the Review, regional CPI’s cross classified by population size, were introduced. These indexes will enable users in local areas for which an index is not published to get a better approximation of the CPI for their area by using the appropri ate population size class measure for their region. The cross-classified indexes will be published bimonthly. (See table 24.) For further details about the new and the revised indexes and a comparison of various aspects of these indexes with the old unrevised CPI, see Facts About the Revised Consumer Price Index, a pamphlet in the Consumer Price Index Revision 1978 series. See also The Consumer Price Index: Concepts and Content Over the Years. Report 517, revised edition (Bureau of Labor Statistics, May 1978). For interarea comparisons of living costs at three hypothetical stan dards of living, see the family budget data published in the Handbook o f Labor Statistics, 1977, Bulletin 1966 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1977), tables 122-133. Additional data and analysis on price changes are provided in the CPI Detailed Report and Producer Prices and Price Indexes, both monthly publications of the Bureau. As of January 1976, the Wholesale Price Index (as it was then called) incorporated a revised weighting structure reflecting 1972 val ues of shipments. From January 1967 through December 1975, 1963 values of shipments were used as weights. For a discussion of the general method of computing consumer, producer, and industry price indexes, see BLS Handbook o f Methods for Surveys and Studies, Bulletin 1910 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1976), chapters 13-15. See also John F. Early, “Improving the mea surement of producer price change,” Monthly Labor Review, April 1978, pp. 7 -1 5 . For industry prices, see also Bennett R. Moss, “In dustry and Sector Price Indexes,” Monthly Labor Review, August 1965, pp. 974-82. 22. Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers, annual averages and changes, 1967-79 [1967 = 100] Food and beverages All items Year Index Percent change Index Percent change Apparel and upkeep Housing Index Percent change Index Transportation Percent change Index Percent change Percent change Index Other goods and services Entertainment Medical care index Percent change Index Percent change 1967 1968 1969 1970 .................. .................. .................. .................. 100.0 104.2 109.8 116.3 4.2 5.4 5.9 100.0 103.6 108.8 114.7 3.6 5.0 5.4 100.0 1040 110.4 118.2 4.0 6.2 7.1 100.0 105.4 111.5 116.1 5.4 5.8 4.1 100.0 103.2 107.2 112.7 3.2 3.9 5.1 100.0 106.1 113.4 120.6 6.1 6.9 6.3 100.0 105.7 111.0 116.7 5.7 5.0 5.1 100.0 105.2 110.4 116.8 5.2 4.9 5.8 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 .................. .................. .................. .................. .................. 121.3 125.3 133.1 147.7 161.2 4.3 3.3 6.2 11.0 9.1 118.3 123.2 139.5 158.7 172.1 3.1 4.1 13.2 13.8 8.4 123.4 128.1 133.7 148.8 164.5 4.4 3.8 4.4 11.3 10.6 119.8 122.3 126.8 136.2 142.3 3.2 2.1 3.7 7.4 4.5 118.6 119.9 123.8 137.7 150.6 5.2 1.1 3.3 11.2 9.4 128.4 132.5 137.7 150.5 168.6 6.5 3.2 3.9 9.3 12.0 122.9 126.5 130.0 139.8 152.2 5.3 2.9 2.8 7.5 8.9 122.4 127.5 132.5 142.0 153.9 4.8 4.2 3.9 7.2 8.4 1976 1977 1978 1979 .................. .................. .................. .................. 170.5 181.5 195.3 217.7 5.8 6.5 7.6 11.5 177.4 188.0 206.2 228.7 3.1 6.0 9.7 10.9 174.6 186.5 202.6 227.5 6.1 6.8 8.6 12.3 147.6 154.2 159.5 166.4 3.7 4.5 3.4 4.3 165.5 177.2 1858 212.8 9.9 7.1 4.9 14.5 184.7 202.4 219.4 240.1 9.5 9.6 8.4 9.4 159.8 167.7 176.2 187.6 5.0 4.9 5.1 6.5 162.7 172.2 183.2 196.3 5.7 5.8 6.4 7.2 23. Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers and revised CPI for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers, U.S. city average— general summary and groups, subgroups, and selected items [1967=100 unless otherwise specified] Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (revised) All Urban Consumers General summary All items...................................................................................... 1980 1979 1980 1979 June Sept. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Sept. Apr. May 223.4 242.5 244.9 247.6 247.8 249.4 251.7 223.7 242.6 245.1 247.8 246.4 266.9 176.0 250.6 265.9 204.0 212.1 Aug. Sept. 248.0 249.6 251.9 249.1 265.1 175.4 251.9 267.8 204.4 212.9 252.5 265.8 177.9 253.5 270.0 205.6 214.0 255.1 267.6 181.4 255.2 272.2 208.1 219.0 July Food and beverages .................................................................... Housing........................................................................................ Apparel and upkeep...................................................................... Transportation .............................................................................. Medical care ................................................................................ Entertainment .............................................................................. Other goods and services.............................................................. 231.0 234.6 169.8 221.4 243.7 191.1 201.7 242.8 257.9 177.3 246.8 262.0 202.5 209.8 244.1 261.7 177.5 249.0 263.4 204.0 211.2 245.7 266.7 177.2 249.7 264.7 205.3 212.5 248.3 265.1 176.2 251.0 266.6 206.6 213.5 252.0 265.8 178.6 252.7 268.4 208.0 214.5 254.2 267.7 182.2 254.7 270.6 209.8 220.6 231.2 234.5 169.3 222.4 244.7 190.2 200.6 243.2 257.8 176.1 247.7 263.1 201.3 209.2 244.7 261.7 176.8 249.9 264.9 202.4 210.6 Commodities ................................................................................ Commodities less food and beverages .................................... Nondurables less food and beverages.................................. 214.1 203.3 213.2 194.5 229.9 220.4 239.5 204.9 231.4 222.0 240.3 207.1 232.8 223.2 241.1 208.6 234.1 224.0 241.4 209.8 2367 226.0 242.6 212.4 239.0 228.4 244.1 215.3 214.4 203.5 214.8 193.5 230.1 220.6 241.7 203.3 231.7 222.3 242.6 205.4 233.0 223.4 243.2 206.8 234.4 224.2 243.5 208.0 236.9 226.2 244.8 210.5 239.2 228.4 246.0 213.5 240.7 179.0 276.7 216.6 262.8 204.7 265.3 187.0 313.4 238.1 283.4 214.5 269.2 188.9 319.6 241.5 284.7 215.9 274.2 191.1 328.8 242.6 285.9 216.9 272.4 192.1 323.3 243.8 288.0 218.1 272.5 193.2 321.5 246.4 289.8 219.2 274.8 195.1 322.6 249,4 292.3 225.3 241.0 178.9 278.2 216.8 263.8 204.9 265.8 186.9 315.8 238.0 284.5 214.6 269.9 188.7 322.2 241.5 286.3 216.5 275.1 190.8 331.9 242.7 287.3 217.9 273.1 191.8 325.9 243.9 289.3 218.6 273.3 193.0 324.2 246.3 291.7 219.5 275.4 194.8 325.3 248.2 294.3 225.4 All items less energy .................................................................... All items less food and energy ............................................ Commodities less food and energy.................................... Energy commodities ........................................................ Services less energy........................................................ 219.6 216.7 201.8 209.6 232.7 223.1 252.1 236.7 223.7 255.3 304.3 217.3 211.5 188.2 325.3 238.4 239.9 231.8 218.6 234.6 266.5 242.2 280.0 261.5 232.7 268.0 358.8 233.4 228.5 198.2 402.3 263.5 242.6 233.7 220.2 235.5 267.9 243.2 284.4 265.7 233.6 265.6 363.2 235.7 231.0 199.9 403.0 267.0 245.5 235.4 221.4 236.3 269.3 244.5 290.0 271.0 234.8 264.8 367.8 238.3 233.7 201.2 404.1 271.5 245.1 236.8 222.2 236.6 270.3 245.9 287.6 268.9 238.5 269.2 370.4 238.3 233.1 202.0 4048 269.1 246.3 239.0 224.2 237.8 270.9 248.3 287.4 268.7 243.5 274.5 370.7 240.0 234.3 204.3 404.2 269.0 248.6 241.5 226.6 239.3 271.3 250.2 289.8 271.0 246.2 278.8 370.1 242.5 236.9 207.2 401.7 271.3 219.8 217.2 202.0 211.0 234.2 223.9 252.6 236.9 223.6 258.0 307.0 217.0 211.0 187.5 326.5 238.7 240.2 232.4 218.9 236.7 268.7 243.3 280.8 261.9 232.4 269.5 363.3 232.7 227.5 196.9 404.0 264.2 242.9 234.2 220.5 237.7 270.0 2446 285.4 266.3 233.4 267.5 367.3 235.1 230.0 198.6 404.7 267.8 245.7 235.7 221.6 238.3 271.4 245.7 291.2 271.8 234.7 267.1 371.8 237.6 232.7 199.8 405.6 272:5 245.3 237.4 222.4 238.7 272.2 247.2 288.6 269.4 2384 271.2 373.9 237.6 232.1 200.6 406.1 269.8 246.6 239.6 224.4 239.9 272.9 249.6 288.6 269.4 242.9 275.9 374.2 239.4 233.4 202.9 405.5 269.9 248.7 242.0 226.5 241.1 273.0 251.5 290.7 271.4 2461 280.8 373.1 242.0 235.9 205.7 402.7 271.9 Purchasing power of the consumer dollar, 1967 - $1 .................... $0,448 $0412 $0,408 $0,404 $0,404 $0,401 $0,397 $0,447 $0,412 $0 408 $0,404 $0,403 $0,401 $0,397 Rent, residential.................................................................. Household services less rent .............................................. Transportation services........................................................ Medical care services.......................................................... Other services.................................................................... Special indexes: All items less food ........................................................................ All items less mortgage interest costs ............................................ Commodities less food .................................................................. Nondurables less food .................................................................. Nondurables less food and apparel................................................ Nondurabies ................................................................................ Services less rent ........................................................................ Services less medical ca re ............................................................ Domestically produced farm foods ................................................ Selected beef cuts........................................................................ https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 97 M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • Current Labor Statistics: Consumer Prices 23. Continued— Consumer Price Index— U.S. city average [1967=100 unless otherwise specified] All Urban Consumers General summary Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (revised) 1980 1979 1980 Sept. Apr. May FOOD AND BEVERAGES .............. 231.0 242.8 244.1 245.7 248.3 252.0 254.2 231.2 243.2 244.7 246.4 249.1 252.5 255.1 Food 237.1 249.1 250.4 252.0 254.8 258.7 261.1 237.3 249.5 251.0 252.7 255.5 259.2 261.9 Food at home .............................. Cereals and bakery products................ Cereals and cereal products (12/77 = 100) . . . Flour and prepared flour mixes (12/77 = 100) Cereal (12/77 = 100) ........................ Rice, pasta, and cornmeal (12/77 = 100) .......... Bakery products (12/77 = 100) .................... White bread.............................. Other breads (12/77 = 100) . . . . Fresh biscuits, rolls, and muffins (12/77 = 100) Fresh cakes and cupcakes (12/77 = 100) . . . Cookies (12/77 = 100) ................ Crackers and bread and cracker products (12/77 = 100) .. Fresh sweetrolls, coffeecake, and donuts (12/77 = 100) . . . Frozen and refrigerated bakery products and fresh pies, tarts, and turnovers (12/77 = 100) . 234.7 225.6 120.0 123.4 118.8 118.6 119.2 200.7 119.6 119.0 116.7 115.9 114.8 118.8 245.3 242.0 129.4 127.8 129.4 130.8 127.6 215.1 127.0 126.9 126.5 125.3 122.0 126.6 246.5 244.5 131.5 129.0 131.5 133.8 128.7 216.7 128.3 127.8 127.4 126.1 122.2 128.4 248.0 245.9 133.1 131.1 133.0 135.2 129.1 216.9 128.1 129.5 127.6 126.3 123.6 129.1 251.5 247.8 135.0 132.9 135.5 136.2 129.8 218.4 129.4 129.2 127.9 127.1 125.5 129.5 256.3 249.2 136.3 133.6 137.6 136.8 130.4 217.9 129 7 130.0 129.8 128.7 124.6 131.4 258.9 250.3 137.1 133.3 138.5 138.4 130.9 219.6 130.9 129.2 129.5 129.9 124.2 131.6 234.2 226.6 120.6 125.1 118.7 119.1 119.7 200.5 122.5 118.6 116.8 117.8 114.9 121.6 245.0 242.2 130.1 128.9 129.7 131.9 127.5 215.1 129.3 125.3 125.4 126.3 122.2 128.0 246.1 244.4 132.4 129.9 132.0 135.2 128.3 216.0 130.6 126.4 126.5 126.8 123.0 129.2 247.7 245.7 133.9 131.4 133.3 137.0 128.8 215.4 130.8 127.9 126.9 126.9 124.5 130.0 251.1 248.0 135.5 132.8 135.5 137.9 129.8 217.5 132.3 128.1 127.3 128.3 125.7 130.0 255.6 249 6 136.8 133.9 137.7 138.4 130.5 217.2 133.3 128.9 129.4 130.1 124.7 131.6 258 6 251 1 137 8 134.1 138.6 1402 131.2 2193 134.3 128 1 129.7 131 7 124 5 132.0 June July Aug. Sept. Sept. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. 121.7 129.7 131.0 131.2 131.5 131.4 132.1 118.6 125.3 126.0 127.2 129.6 129.2 129.9 231.0 236.0 238.1 254.2 261.4 261.0 229.2 239.2 251.0 145.6 206.5 194.0 198.1 95.2 258.4 216.6 117.4 240.2 235.9 133.2 121.6 135.6 174.8 169.9 111.8 119.2 309.7 113.9 120.4 170.7 235.1 241.1 242.6 267.0 272.9 277.9 242.7 253.5 256.1 153.3 197.1 182.1 187.0 90.6 255.1 213.5 110.7 243.9 240.6 134.9 121.9 140.1 177.2 174.7 114.5 117.3 325.3 122.9 124.5 161.2 231.5 238.2 239.2 264.8 269.4 273.0 243.4 250.6 256.2 152.4 191.8 177.4 182.4 87.4 250.2 210.0 107.1 240.2 234.8 133.5 121.4 136.3 176.5 172.9 114.4 117.4 324.5 125.4 122.5 148.4 231.2 237.9 238.1 263.8 266.9 268.6 240.9 247.4 264.8 152.5 190.4 173.1 182.7 87.8 246.2 208.1 106.3 239.4 230.9 133.4 121.0 137.6 177.9 176.3 115.7 115.9 329.1 127.3 124.2 147.9 236.7 243.4 243.3 267.9 266.6 277.7 243.2 253.2 270.2 155.9 200.3 186.3 193.1 92.1 249.2 208.6 115.1 239.1 229.1 135.1 120.6 137.2 187.9 193.6 120.9 117.0 330.1 129.2 123.7 154.2 245.4 251.0 251.1 273.1 272.9 279.8 248.8 258.0 274.1 159.0 212.0 201.5 199.9 98.4 262.5 217.0 123.1 247.8 245.8 138.5 123.7 140.4 197.5 205.3 127.8 120.3 331.8 131.2 123.6 178.3 251.8 257.7 257.8 277.5 276.8 287.7 248.0 260.7 280.9 161.8 222.7 220.1 206.2 102.2 277.9 225.1 128.6 254.9 256.1 143.5 125.7 143.8 205.2 214.0 134.0 122.9 335.8 133.2 124.8 179.9 230.5 235.4 237.7 256.4 263.5 267.9 231.0 235.7 253.9 146.6 206.1 195.6 196.1 94.3 258.4 215.3 117.5 236.6 236.1 129.5 119.0 136.9 172.8 165.8 110.9 119.8 304.4 113.5 117.5 170.5 234.3 240.2 241.3 268.2 274.7 286.1 242.1 249.6 257.8 153.1 196.7 183.9 184.7 88.7 258.0 214.5 110.0 239.0 239.3 131.1 118.4 141.3 176.0 170.6 114.7 118.1 325.1 121.8 125.1 161.5 230.7 237.2 238.1 266.3 270.6 280.0 245.5 250.2 257.5 152.2 191.8 177.7 180.9 85.4 253.9 213.0 106.5 235.6 234.0 129.5 117.6 138.4 173.8 168.0 112.7 117.7 323.0 124.0 122.4 148.9 230.4 237.1 237.5 265.6 269.0 275.0 243.8 247.3 268.3 152.4 190.5 175.6 180.6 86.1 249.6 210.1 105.9 235.9 231.0 130.7 118.1 139.3 175.7 170.7 115.6 116.1 324.9 125.7 122.6 147.2 236.1 242.8 242.8 269.6 268.7 285.3 246.2 253.6 274.2 155.2 200.7 189.1 193.3 90.5 252.0 207.6 114.9 236.5 231.5 131.4 118.8 138.2 186.0 189.1 120.8 116.6 326.4 127.3 122.5 153.5 244.3 249.8 250.0 274.1 275.6 287.9 248.2 256.4 278.8 157.6 212.0 205.6 198.5 96.3 263.6 219.1 122.7 244.1 245.9 134.5 121.5 140.8 195.1 199.9 128.1 119.1 327.3 129.3 121.8 177.1 251.2 257.1 257.2 279.1 279.9 295.4 249.0 261.4 282.2 161.2 222.8 223.0 205.0 100.7 280.0 225.9 128.5 251.5 254.3 141.2 123.5 145.0 203.3 209.6 134 1 122.0 333.4 131 0 124.5 178.4 Dairy products ...................................... Fresh milk and cream (12/77 = 100) .. Fresh whole milk...................... Other fresh milk and cream (12/77 = 100) . Processed dairy products (12/77 = 100).................. Butter........................................ Cheese (12/77 = 100)...................... Ice cream and related products (12/77 = 100) .. Other dairy products (12/77 = 100) .............. 211.3 119.0 195.4 118.1 120.1 209.9 120.1 120.1 115.5 222.4 124.7 204.9 123.5 127.0 219.9 126.2 128.6 124.0 226.2 127.0 208.5 125.9 129.1 222.2 127.8 131.9 126.1 227.2 127.1 208.6 126.0 130 4 225.0 128.8 133.7 127.3 228.6 127.7 209.4 126.9 131.4 226.9 130.0 134.6 127.5 229.7 127.9 209.8 127.1 132.5 231.2 130.4 137.0 128.3 230.6 128.0 209.7 127.7 133.6 236.2 132.3 135.7 128.9 212.0 119.5 195.6 119.3 120.5 212.3 120.2 120.7 115.6 223.1 124.9 204.8 124.1 128.0 222.7 126.8 130.4 123.6 226.9 127.2 208.4 126.8 129.9 225.3 128.5 132.9 125.7 227.8 127.4 208.7 127.2 130.7 227.2 129.0 133.8 127.4 229.2 128.0 209.8 127.5 131.9 229.7 130.1 135.5 127.7 229.9 128.0 209.7 127.6 132.9 233.7 130.9 136.1 128.8 2309 128.2 209.8 128 3 134.1 238.8 132.7 135 4 129.3 Fruits and vegetables ........................ Fresh fruits and vegetables.................... Fresh fruits........................ Apples .............................. Bananas ........................ Oranges ...................................... Other fresh fruits (12/77 = 100) .......... Fresh vegetables .................................. Potatoes ............................ Lettuce...................................... Tomatoes ............................ Other fresh vegetables (12/77 = 100) ............ 231.8 234.7 271.6 244.7 210.3 312.3 147.1 200.3 199.3 219.6 178.5 109.5 240.9 245.2 257.0 265.5 242.8 240.6 136.5 234.2 201.7 271.9 201.2 134.6 246.6 255.1 264.7 276.3 249.7 243.9 140.8 246.2 210.1 279.9 230.8 140.1 250.1 260.0 273.9 293.3 242.6 264.4 143.7 247.0 246.3 238.8 230.6 140.2 253.9 265.8 282.7 316.6 232.6 273.9 147.5 250.1 310.5 205.9 209.2 137.1 258.4 273.0 302.3 340.8 234.0 297.1 158.5 245.6 327.1 213.1 205.4 126.2 257.4 269.6 286.3 295.2 238.0 296.5 150.8 253.9 313.2 265.9 214.2 127.1 229.6 232.9 271.2 243.1 208.4 291.8 152.3 198.4 193.4 222.9 179.2 108.0 239.8 244.8 255.6 264.4 243.5 234.3 135.7 235.2 198.2 281.9 197.7 135.3 245.5 254.4 263.8 277.3 244.5 237.6 140.9 246.0 205.6 288.6 2284 139.7 250.2 261.4 274.9 297.4 237.7 251.0 146.5 249.4 244.4 241.7 228.6 143.4 253.0 265.2 282.3 318.7 228.7 261.5 148,7 249.8 309.4 200.6 210.8 138.0 256.6 270.8 300.1 342.2 228.0 285.5 157.9 244.4 325.4 209.3 199.6 127.0 255.8 267.8 284.9 295.3 234.3 284 2 151.9 252.4 309.2 262.5 2108 127.6 230.6 120.6 116.3 119.3 125.5 111.2 109.8 238.4 125.0 119.3 128.3 126.3 114.5 113.3 239.4 125.4 118.1 129.3 127.5 115.2 114.7 241.4 126.4 120.1 129.5 128.3 116.2 116.4 243.0 126.6 118.5 130.6 129.0 117.6 118.4 244.5 126.9 119.2 130.1 130.0 118.8 119.6 246.3 127.4 119.3 130.8 130.7 120.1 119.7 227.9 119.8 114.9 119.7 123.9 109.9 109.4 236.2 124.9 118.4 128.4 126.4 113.2 113.0 237.6 125.7 117.5 129.8 127.8 113.9 114.6 239.7 126.7 118.9 130.4 128.9 115.0 116.3 241.5 126.8 117.8 130.9 129.5 116.6 118.2 242.9 127.2 118.1 130.7 130.7 117.5 119.2 244.6 127.6 118.5 131.0 131.5 118.7 119.4 Meats, poultry, fish, and eggs............ Meats, poultry, and fis h .......................... Meats .................................... Beef and veal............................ Ground beef other than canned ................ Chuck roast ...................................... Round roast ............................ Round steak ...................................... Sirloin steak .............................. Other beef and veal (12/77 = 100) .. Pork.............................. Bacon ................................ Pork chops .................................... Ham other than canned (12/77 = 1 0 0 )................ Sausage .................................... Canned ham ...................................... Other pork (12/77 = 100)...................... Other meats.................................... Frankfurters ............................ Bologna, liverwurst, and salami (12/77 = 100) ............ Other lunchmeats (12/77 = 100).............. Lamb and organ meats (12/77 = 100) . . . . Poultry .................................. Fresh whole chicken .......................... Fresh and frozen chicken parts (12/77 = 100) .. Other poultry (12/77 = 100) ...................... Fish and seafood...................... Canned fish and seafood (12/77 = 100) .. Fresh and frozen fish and seafood (12/77 = 100) Eggs.......................................................................... Processed fruits and vegetables................ Processed fruits (12/77 = 100).......... Frozen fruit and fruit juices (12/77 = 100) ............ Fruit juices and other than frozen (12/77 = 100) .. Canned and dried fruits (12/77 = 100) .. Processed vegetables (12/77 = 100) ............ Frozen vegetables (12/77 = 100) ........................ 98 1979 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 23. Continued— Consumer Price Index— U.S. city average [1967=100 unless otherwise specified] Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (revised) All Urban Consumers General summary 1980 1979 1980 1979 Sept. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Sept. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Fruits and vegetables — Continued Cut corn and canned beans except lima (12/77=100) . . . Other canned and dried vegetables (12/77-100)............ Other foods at hom e...................................................................... Sugar and sweets.......................................................................... Candy and chewing gum (12/77-100) .................................... Sugar and artificial sweeteners (12/77=100)...................... Other sweets (12/77-100) .............................................. Fats and oils (12/77-100) ...................................................... Margarine ........................................................................ Nondairy substitutes and peanut butter (12/77-100) .......... Other fats, oils, and salad dressings (12/77=100) .............. Nonalcoholic beverages .................... '..................................... Cola drinks, excluding diet c o la ........................ .................. Carbonated drinks, including diet cola (12/77=100)............ Roasted coffee ................................................................ Freeze dried and instant coffee.......................................... Other noncarbonated drinks (12/77-100).......................... Other prepared foods .............................................................. Canned and packaged soup (12/77-100).......................... Frozen prepared foods (12/77-100).................................. Snacks (12/77-100)........................................................ Seasonings, olives, pickles, and relish (12/77=100)............ Other condiments (12/77-100) ........................................ Miscellaneous prepared foods (12/77=100) ...................... Other canned and packaged prepared foods (12/77=100) .. 114.7 110.1 276.0 282.0 119.7 115.9 115.3 231.5 245.5 114.6 120.6 367.7 242.7 117.9 425.9 359.9 114.0 212.6 113.1 123.1 118.4 117.4 115.9 116.8 116.7 115.6 114.7 295.1 319.5 126.3 156.9 121.3 238.3 247.9 119.8 124.8 390.3 261.7 125.6 434.0 380.2 120.7 226.6 120.5 130.4 124.8 125.2 127.r 124 4 123.1 116.0 115.1 298.1 326.8 128.9 161.4 123.6 239.5 246.1 121.4 125.8 393.0 265.4 126.2 433.5 381.9 120.7 229.1 122.0 131.3 126.1 125.4 127.9 127.6 124.6 116.6 115.9 301.8 342.0 130.5 180.3 125.8 ¿40.0 249.0 123.1 124.9 395.9 267.8 128.3 432.4 380.2 121.8 230.9 122.9 132.0 127.2 127.5 128.8 128 6 125.2 118.1 117.0 304.3 353.1 131.6 194.2 127.2 239.3 247.0 123.6 124.6 397.4 268.4 129.2 435.3 381.0 122.1 232.3 123.3 132.4 128.3 128.0 130.2 129.3 126.0 119.4 118.0 307.8 355.1 132.6 194.6 128.3 242.0 249.3 124.7 126.2 402.8 275.2 131.3 433.9 380.3 123.1 234.9 123.7 134.6 129.3 129.4 131.8 130.9 127.5 121,4 119.6 309.2 361.1 134.2 200.2 129.2 243.6 249.2 125.8 127.4 403.9 276.7 132.5 426.1 376.1 124.5 235.2 123.8 133.9 129.8 130.7 133.0 130.6 126.9 112.6 108.7 274.7 281.2 119.3 116.4 114.0 230.7 242.8 114.5 120.4 365.0 240.1 115.7 418.2 358.9 112.7 212.4 113.3 121.1 119.0 116.3 117.5 116.3 116.7 114.3 112.7 294.6 320.8 126.5 158.6 120.0 238.3 248.3 120.0 124.4 389.2 260.1 123.4 430.4 379.2 119.6 226.6 120.6 128.8 126.0 124.5 128.1 123.7 123.3 114.2 113.3 298.0 328.0 129.0 163.3 122.2 240.1 248.4 121.6 125.5 392.3 263.2 124.8 430.0 380.4 120.0 229.6 122.5 131.0 127.3 125.5 129.2 127.0 124.3 115.2 114.2 301.4 342.9 130.8 180.7 124.6 240.5 249.4 123.5 124.9 395.1 267.1 125.2 429.2 378.7 120.8 230.8 123.7 130.8 127.9 127.3 129.9 128.3 124.1 117.0 115.6 303.7 354.6 132.0 194.5 126.5 240.6 248.6 124.0 125.0 396.2 265.6 127.4 432.3 379.2 121.1 232.1 123.5 131.3 128.5 127.3 131.6 128.9 125.4 118.1 116.4 307.4 356.6 133.2 195.1 126.9 242.4 251.5 124.8 125.7 403.0 274.7 128.8 430.4 379.7 122.3 234.2 124.2 131.7 129.9 127.8 133.4 130.2 126.8 119.6 117.9 309.1 361.8 134.7 199.7 127.7 244.6 251.8 125.8 127.4 403.6 274.9 130.2 423.1 374.8 123.8 235.6 124.7 131.6 130.4 129.5 135.0 131.1 127.2 Food away from home.......................................................................... Lunch (12/77-100) ...................................................................... Dinner (12/77-100) ...................................................................... Other meals and snacks (12/77-100) ............................................ 247.6 120.7 120.3 118.6 263.0 127.9 127.9 126.4 264.6 128.5 128.7 127.4 266.6 129.3 129.5 129.0 267.8 130.0 130.1 129.3 269.5 131.2 130.7 130.0 271.4 132.1 131.9 130.4 249.3 121.7 120.9 119.9 265.3 128.9 129.1 127.7 267.6 129.9 130.5 128.6 269.9 130.7 131.0 131.1 271.2 131.1 132.0 131.6 272.8 131.8 132.8 132.3 274.9 132.9 133.8 133.3 Alcoholic beverages 174.2 183.9 185.4 186.4 187.2 188.7 189.6 174.9 185.0 186.9 188.0 189.2 190.6 191.7 123.6 190.8 137.6 214.7 111.7 124.5 114.3 171.8 130.4 202.7 105.3 113.4 120.8 185.1 134.6 209.8 107.8 120.5 122.0 187.5 135.1 212.0 108.7 121.7 122.7 188.8 135.4 213.7 108.9 122.5 123.6 189.7 136.6 217.4 109.6 122.9 124.6 191.1 137.8 218.1 111.1 123.6 125.1 191.9 138.5 219.8 111.2 124.8 FOOD AND BEVERAGES Continued Food — Continued Food at home — Continued Alcoholic beverages at home (12/77-100)............................................ Beer and a le .................................................................................. Whiskey ........................................................................................ Wine.............................................................................................. Other alcoholic beverages (12/77-100).......................................... Alcoholic beverages away from home (12/77=100)................................ 113.3 172.3 129.0 195.2 105.5 115.1 119.9 185.9 133.4 206.6 108 2 120.5 120.9 187.7 133.9 208.5 109.0 121.5 121.4 188.2 134.7 211.5 108.7 122.3 122.1 189.2 135.2 212.6 109.6 122.5 123.1 190.1 136.9 213.9 111.2 123.5 HOUSING............................................................................................ 234.6 257.9 261.7 266.7 265.1 265,8 267.7 234.5 257.8 261.7 266.9 265.1 265.8 267.6 Shelter................................................................................................ 247.4 276.0 280.2 286.3 282.9 283.3 285.3 248.2 277.2 281.6 288.0 284.3 284.8 286.8 186.9 188.7 190.8 191.8 193.0 194.8 Rent, residential.................................................................................... 179.0 187.0 188.9 191.1 192.1 193.2 195.1 178.9 Other rental costs ................................................................................ Lodging while out of town................................................................ Tenants’ insurance (12/77-100) .................................................... 239.3 251.8 113.7 260.7 279.3 119.9 261.9 279.9 121.2 264.2 282.1 122.6 265.7 283.8 123.1 267.5 286.4 122.2 268.9 287.0 124.7 238.6 249.9 114.1 260.5 278.0 120.1 261.7 278.6 121.4 263.9 280.8 122.7 265.5 282.3 123.3 267.3 285.1 122.7 268.6 285.6 125.2 Homeownership.................................................................................... Home purchase.............................................................................. Financing, taxes, and insurance ...................................................... Property insurance .................................................................. Property taxes ........................................................................ Contracted mortgage interest c o s t............................................ Mortgage interest rates...................................................... Maintenance and repairs ................................................................ Maintenance and repair services .............................................. Maintenance and repair commodities ........................................ Paint and wallpaper, supplies, tools, and equipment (12/77-100) ................................................ Lumber, awnings, glass, and masonry (12/77-100)............ Plumbing, electrical, heating, and cooling supplies (12/77-100).................................................... Miscellaneous supplies and equipment (12/77-100) .......... 271.9 229.8 323.0 3167 184.7 396.7 169.7 262.5 284.4 211.5 307.7 246.5 390.6 338.9 188.4 499.4 199 4 282.9 307.9 224.3 312.9 249.7 399.7 344.9 187.6 513.6 202.4 284.9 310.1 225.8 320.4 252.6 416.1 351.8 187.7 538.9 210.3 285.9 310.6 228.0 315.4 253.9 399.6 355.5 188.3 512.2 199.0 287.6 312.1 230.3 315.4 258.1 393.6 355.9 190.3 501.8 192.0 288.5 312.4 232.7 317.6 261.5 393.5 359.8 191.2 500.9 188.9 291.6 315.9 234.9 273.3 230.0 325.6 318.5 186.1 397.1 169.7 263.4 287.2 210.8 310.0 246.5 395.3 340.4 190.1 500.9 199.8 281.7 307.7 224.3 315.4 249.8 404.9 346.4 189.3 515.6 202.8 283.4 309.1 226.5 323.4 253.0 422.0 352.7 189.4 541.5 210.8 283.8 308.5 2288 317.9 254.3 405.0 357.2 190.0 514.6 199.6 285 1 309.0 231.3 318.1 258.6 398.8 357.9 192.0 504.2 192.5 287.7 312.1 233.2 320.2 262 1 398.9 362.9 193.0 503.6 189.5 290.3 315.6 233.9 117.0 115.2 126.6 118.8 128.7 118.0 131.3 118.9 133.4 119.1 134.4 120.1 135.6 122.2 116.1 115.7 126.0 119.7 128.7 118.4 130.9 118.5 132.2 119.3 133.1 120.4 132.7 121.8 111.9 112.9 119.1 118.2 119.3 118.7 119.9 119.1 121.1 120.1 122.7 122.1 123.2 122.7 112.6 111.2 120.0 119.4 122.0 120.1 123.8 120.7 125.9 122.5 126.6 123.9 126.1 125.2 Fuel and other utilities 251.2 270.5 275.9 282.2 285.5 286.8 288.2 251.7 271.0 276.4 283.0 286.1 287.4 288.7 Fuels ........................ .......................................................................... Fuel oil, coal, and bottled g as.......................................................... Fuel o il.................................................................................... Other fuels (6/78 - 100) ........................................................ Gas (piped) and electricity .............................................................. Electricity................................................................................ Utility (piped) gas .................................................................... 306.6 461.6 482.5 114.4 270.1 230.6 317.5 337.8 556.4 580.7 139.6 288.0 241.5 347.9 346.4 556.0 580.4 139.4 298.2 248.1 364.6 355.8 558.7 583.2 140.1 308.8 261.9 366.7 360.8 560.4 585.1 140.4 314.3 267.4 371.8 362.5 561.5 586.1 140.8 316.1 268.3 375.2 364.5 561.5 585.4 142.1 318.4 2692 380.2 306.6 462.5 483.3 114.6 2699 231.1 315.8 337.6 557.1 580.7 140.8 287.6 241.5 346.4 346.0 557.1 580.5 141.3 297.5 2480 362.3 355.8 559.8 583.3 141.9 308.5 262.3 364.9 360.3 561.9 585.6 142.1 313.5 267.6 368.6 362 1 562.7 586,4 142.5 315.4 268.6 372.0 363.8 562.9 585.9 143.8 317.4 269.6 376.1 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 99 M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • Current Labor Statistics: Consumer Prices 23. Continued— Consumer Price Index— U.S. city average [1967 = 100 unless otherwise specified] All Urban Consumers General summary 1979 Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (revised) 1980 1979 1980 Sept. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Sept. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept Other utilities and public services .............. Telephone services ................................ Local charges (12/77 = 100) ............................ Interstate toll calls (12/77 = 100) .................. Intrastate toll calls (12/77 = 1 0 0 )...................... Water and sewerage maintenance .................... 159.8 132.4 100.4 98.4 101.4 245.3 162.3 133.4 103.5 97.3 99.0 255.2 163.1 134.0 104.3 97.3 99.4 256.5 164.9 135.5 105.3 99.5 99.6 259.3 165.9 136.3 105.4 101.6 99.5 261.3 166.5 136.5 105.4 101.9 99.9 263.5 167.1 137.0 106.0 102.1 100.1 264.5 159.8 132.4 100.5 98.4 101.3 245.5 162.3 133.2 103.3 97.4 98.9 256.2 163.1 133.9 104.0 97.4 99.3 257.6 164.9 135.4 105.1 99.5 99.5 260.5 165.9 136.1 105.2 101.6 99.3 262.4 166.4 136.4 105.2 101.9 99.7 264.5 167.1 136.9 105.9 102.1 100.0 265.5 Household furnishings and operations ................ 192.2 203.0 204.2 205.5 206.2 207.2 209.2 190.6 200.7 201.9 202.9 203.5 204.5 206.0 Housefurnishings ............................................ Textile housefurnishings................................ Household linens (12/77 = 100) .............. Curtains, drapes, slipcovers, and sewing materials (12/77 = 100) . Furniture and bedding ...................... Bedroom furniture (12/77 = 100) ............ Sofas (12/77 = 100) .................................. Living room chairs and tables (12/77 = 100) ............ Other furniture (12/77 = 100).................. Appliances including TV and sound equipment . . . . Television and sound equipment (12/77 = 100) ............ Television .................................... . Sound equipment (12/77 = 100) ...................... Household appliances...................................... Refrigerators and home freezer.......................... Laundry equipment (12/77 = 100) .......................... Other household appliances (12/77 = 100).................. Stoves, dishwashers, vacuums, and sewing machines (12/77 = 100).................................... Office machines, small electric appliances, and air conditioners (12/77 = 100).................... Other household equipment (12/77 = 100).................... Floor and window coverings, infants’ laundry cleaning and outdoor equipment (12/77 = 100) .................. Clocks, lamps, and decor items (12/77 = 100) ............ Tableware, serving pieces, and nonelectric kitchenware (12/77 = 100) .......................... Lawn equipment, power tools, and other hardware (12/77 = 100) . 164.1 175.3 106.7 112.0 178.3 114.8 107.1 105.1 113.9 136.2 104.7 102.9 107.5 155.8 154.1 110.9 109.1 172.7 188.2 114.8 119.9 190.9 124.3 111.6 110.9 124.0 139.3 105.7 104.0 108.3 161.4 160.6 117.5 111.5 173.4 187.3 114.4 119.3 191.9 125.0 111.4 110.8 125.6 139.9 105.7 104.1 108.3 162.6 162.7 118.2 112.1 174.6 189.4 116.0 120.1 193.6 126.2 113.0 110.6 127.1 140.2 105.6 104.2 107.9 163.4 163.2 119.1 112.7 174.7 188.2 114.6 120.2 192.8 125.4 112.2 110.7 126.6 140.5 105.8 104.4 108.2 163.7 163.6 119.6 112.6 175.2 189.1 114.1 121.9 192.6 125.8 111.3 111.6 125.7 141.4 106.6 105.0 109.1 164.6 164.4 120.2 113.3 177.3 194.1 118.4 123.6 195.7 127.9 112.7 114.1 127.5 142.0 107.0 105.0 109.8 165.5 164.8 120.9 114.2 163.5 174.9 106.3 112.2 178.5 113.0 108.6 106.7 114.2 135.7 104.4 101.9 107.4 155.2 156.5 111.2 107.2 171.5 186.3 113.8 118.9 189.4 120.9 111.8 112.6 123.1 139.7 105.4 102.8 108.6 162.3 163.5 117.8 111.6 172.2 186.1 113.4 119.0 190.1 121.7 112.0 112.6 123.5 140.2 105.4 102.8 108.7 163.4 166.0 118.5 111.8 172.9 189.6 116.2 120.5 190.8 123.1 112.7 111.7 123.9 140.1 105.2 103.1 108.0 163.6 166.8 118.9 111.7 172.9 188.7 114.8 121.0 189.7 122.6 111.7 111.3 123.0 140.1 105.0 1027 108.0 163.8 166.4 118.7 112.1 173.5 189.6 114.7 122.4 189.9 123.6 110.4 112.3 122.5 140.6 105.2 103.3 107.9 164.5 168.0 120.1 112.0 175.0 192.5 117.7 122.7 192.0 124.5 111.1 115.1 123.6 141.2 105.7 103.2 108.8 165.2 169.1 120.0 112.5 108.6 110.0 110.3 111.2 111.6 111.8 111.8 107.7 111.6 111.9 111.4 112.8 111.4 111.8 109.7 110.9 113.1 118.4 114.2 119.0 114.4 120.2 113.8 121.3 115.1 121.7 117.0 123.0 106.8 110.3 111.6 117.0 111.7 117.8 112.0 118.5 111.3 119.7 112.6 120.5 113.4 121.6 111.1 108.0 118.2 115.6 117.6 117.6 120.2 118.8 120.8 119.0 121.7 119.8 123.0 120.6 105.8 107.0 113.1 112.6 113.2 114.4 114.3 115.9 114.7 116.6 115.3 117.1 116.8 118.2 114.7 107.6 123.4 113.5 124.1 114.0 125.4 113.7 126.4 115.9 125.8 117.1 128.2 117.2 114.5 109.5 121.4 115.9 121.7 117.4 122.2 117.6 124.0 118.7 125.1 119.6 126.3 120.3 Housekeeping supplies...................................... Soaps and detergents ................................ Other laundry and cleaning products (12/77 = 100) Cleansing and toilet tissue, paper towels and napkins (12/77 = 100) . . Stationery, stationery supplies, and gift wrap (12/77 = 100) . Miscellaneous household products (12/77 = 100) .. Lawn and garden supplies (12/77 = 100).............. 224.1 215.1 112.3 116.4 109.9 113.3 112.7 240.7 233.2 117.6 126.2 115.6 122.0 123.8 243.6 235.0 119.8 128.6 116.3 123.0 125.2 245.4 234.9 121.1 129.4 116.9 124.4 126.8 247.3 237.2 122.3 130.2 117.6 125.4 127.6 249.9 240.1 124.4 132.2 117.4 127.7 127.5 252.0 243.7 125.6 133.8 118.0 129.0 127.1 222.6 214.5 112.4 117.1 108.3 111.6 109.9 238.1 231.1 118.1 128.1 114.9 119.2 116.5 241.2 232.1 119.5 130.8 116.0 120.9 118.9 243.0 232.3 120.8 131.5 116.5 122.1 121.0 245.2 234.4 122.3 132.7 117.9 123.5 120.7 247.8 236.8 123.9 135.1 117.4 125.5 121.4 249,6 241.1 125.0 135.8 1169 126.6 120.5 Housekeeping services............................ Postage ........................................ Moving, storage, freight, household laundry, and drycleaning services (12/77 = 100) ........ Appliance and furniture repair (12/77 = 100) .................... 253.4 257.3 266.0 257.3 267.6 257.3 269.1 257.3 270.4 257.3 271.6 257.3 273.3 257.3 252.1 257.2 264.3 257.3 265.6 257.3 267.0 257.3 268.1 257.3 269.0 253.7 270.2 257.3 118.1 111.7 128.3 116.5 129.4 117.2 130.5 117.7 131.0 118.7 131.3 119.4 132.8 119.8 118.6 111.1 127.8 116.2 128.5 116.7 129.2 117.4 129.7 117.8 129 7 118.3 130.3 118.7 182.2 169.3 176.1 176.8 176.0 175.4 177.9 181.4 HOUSING—Continued Fuel and other utilities —Continued APPAREL AND UPKEEP 169.8 177.3 177.5 177.2 176.2 178.6 Apparel commodities.............................. 164.2 170.2 170.1 169.7 168.5 171.0 174.9 163.9 169.5 169.8 168.8 168.0 170.7 174.4 161.5 162.7 102.7 100.0 96.5 110.6 107.2 99.0 104.8 102.7 109.4 104.5 155.9 103.9 174.1 171.1 99.8 106.2 96.7 102.4 102.8 100.3 167.2 166.9 105.0 101.1 96.5 116.6 111.5 99.4 108.9 104.4 113.3 110.7 155.9 103.9 168.3 167.8 101.1 111.5 90.4 102.6 99.8 101.4 166.9 168.0 105.7 101.2 97.3 117.9 112.2 100.2 109.7 105.2 114.3 111.3 154.1 102.4 162.0 163.9 100.3 111.8 88.0 102.7 99.4 101.8 166.4 166.8 104.8 99.7 96.3 118.2 110.8 99.5 109.5 104.6 114.6 111.3 153.0 101.7 158.1 163.3 99.5 112.1 86.5 102.1 98.1 100.7 165.0 165.9 103.9 97.1 96.0 118,4 110.7 99.2 110.0 104.4 114.7 112.6 150.6 99.8 158.8 153.9 96.8 113.2 85.5 102.0 98.9 99.7 167.8 167.9 105.6 99.2 96.7 119.3 114.9 99.5 109.5 106.0 114.6 110.3 153.7 101.7 164.0 158.3 98.5 114.2 86.5 104.5 103.4 102.0 171.8 171.7 108.1 103.2 99.9 120.8 116.9 101.2 111.4 108.1 116.6 111.9 159.0 105.7 168.9 168.5 102.2 114.6 95.4 105.8 102.1 105.3 161.2 163.2 103.2 98.3 99.1 108.6 107,1 102.5 103.9 102.0 108.8 103.5 154.4 103.0 175.7 158.5 100.4 107.4 98.1 101.1 98.5 102.1 166.3 167.3 105.2 97.3 97.0 114.2 111.7 104.2 108.7 107.2 111.6 108.8 1547 103.3 167.8 154.1 101.6 111.7 98.2 101.1 96.8 100.5 166.4 168.9 106.3 97.1 97.2 116.4 113.7 105.2 109.6 107.7 112.7 109.9 154.1 103.0 162.4 154.5 101.2 112.2 98.2 100.5 95.3 999 165.3 168.1 105.5 95.4 97.1 115.4 112.9 105.0 109.8 107.8 113.3 110.1 151.2 100.8 155.2 152.5 99.2 112.3 91.7 99.6 93.8 98.5 164.4 167.2 104.7 93.2 97.1 115.7 111.2 104.8 110.0 107.4 113.3 110.9 149.9 99.6 157.5 146.2 97.1 112.8 90.1 100.0 95.6 98.2 167.3 168.4 106.1 95.2 98.0 116.3 115.1 105.0 108.6 107.1 112.9 108.2 154.1 102.5 170.2 151.1 99.7 114.3 91.3 102.3 99.5 100.7 171.1 171.6 108.3 98.3 100.0 117.5 117.4 107.1 110.2 109.6 113.7 109.4 159.8 107.0 177.0 156.8 104.6 114.8 105.7 103.3 97.3 104.2 105.7 109.5 110.0 111.4 111.4 111.2 113.0 103.5 108.9 110.0 110.9 110.4 109.6 111.3 Apparel commodities less footwear.................... Men’s and boys’ .................................... Men’s (12/77 = 100) .......................... Suits, sport coats, and jackets (12/77 = 100) .................... Coats and jackets (12/77 = 100).............................. Furnishings and special clothing (12/77 = 100) .................. Shirts (12/77 = 100) .................................... Dungarees, jeans, and trousers (12/77 = 100) .................... Boys’ (12/77 = 100) ................................................ Coats, jackets, sweaters, and shirts (12/77 =100) ............ Furnishings (12/77 = 100) .................................. Suits, trousers, sport coats, and jackets (12/77 = 100) ........ Women’s and girls’ .............................................. Women’s (12/77 = 100)...................................... Coats and jackets .................................................... Dresses ............................................................ Separates and sportswear (12/77 = 100)............................ Underwear, nightwear, and hosiery (12/77 = 100)................ Suits (12/77 = 100)...................................... Girls (12/77 = 100) ............................................ Coats, jackets, dresses, and suits (12/77 = 100)............ Separates and sportswear (12/77 = 100)...................... Underwear, nightwear, hosiery, and accessories (12/77 = 100)............................................ 100 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 23. Continued— Consumer Price Index— U.S. city average [1967 = 100 unless otherwise specified] Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (revised) All Urban Consumers General summary 1980 1979 1980 1979 Sept. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept Sept Apr. May June July Aug. Sept Other apparel commodities ............................................................ Sewing materials and notions (12/77 - 100) ............................ Jewelry and luggage (12/77 = 100) ........................................ 223.4 172.6 102.3 115.6 234.3 201.9 107.9 140.1 237.4 202.7 109.1 140.4 240.9 205.3 110.2 142.2 243.0 205.5 109.3 142.8 243.9 209.9 110.2 146.5 242.4 210.5 110.9 146.8 226.0 174.9 100.4 118.9 241.1 198.5 106.9 138.1 242.8 197.4 108.6 136.3 246.8 201.0 110.9 138.6 249.2 200.8 108.8 139.4 252.6 204.1 110.0 142.0 248.3 204.4 110.7 142.0 Men's (12/77 - 100) .................................................................... Boys’ and girls' (12/77 = 100) .................................................. Womens' (12/77 - 100)................................................................ 180.1 115.0 111.6 112.0 188.3 119.7 119.5 115.6 189.3 120.0 121.3 115.8 189.0 121.3 121.0 114.6 189.5 121.1 123.5 113.8 190.3 121.3 122.8 115.4 193.2 123.6 123.3 117.7 179.4 116.3 111.6 109.6 188.1 122.4 119.5 112.6 189.3 122.7 121.5 112.9 188.9 123.6 121.3 111.7 189.3 123.2 123.1 111.3 190.0 123.4 123.9 111.7 193.3 124.9 124.6 115.1 Laundry and drycleaning other than coin operated (12/77 = 100)............ Other apparel services (12/77 = 100) .................................................. 210.2 123.6 113.0 230.0 135.5 123.3 232.2 136.9 124.5 233.6 137.5 125.5 234.4 137.7 126.3 235.4 138.3 126.9 237.3 140.0 126.9 208.7 123.2 112.3 226.0 134.1 120.4 230.8 135.6 125.0 231.8 137.3 123.9 232.6 137.5 124.7 233.7 138.4 125.0 234.5 139.1 125.1 TRANSPORTATION 221.4 246.8 249.0 249.7 251.0 252.7 254.7 222.4 247.7 249.9 250.6 251.9 253.5 255.2 254.1 APPAREL AND UPKEEP - Continued Apparel commodities Continued Apparel commodities less footwear—Continued 222.0 247.0 249.2 249.7 250.5 251.6 253.2 222.7 248.0 250.1 250.8 251.5 252.7 166.1 202.9 301.0 247.1 119.4 177.0 196.7 374.7 264.1 129.1 178.9 199.3 375.4 266.1 130.6 178.5 200.7 376.2 267.3 131.4 179.2 203.4 376.7 269.0 131.8 181.1 206.4 375.9 271.1 133.0 181.7 214.6 373.0 273.8 133.8 165.9 202.9 302.3 247.5 119.2 177.7 196.8 376.3 264.3 128.4 179.6 199.3 377.1 266.1 129.7 179.4 200.8 377.6 268.0 130.8 180.0 203.4 377.8 269.7 131.3 181.9 206.4 377.1 272.2 132.4 182.3 214.6 373.9 273.9 133.0 Automobile finance charges (12/77 = 100) .............................. Automobile rental, registration, and other fees (12/77 = 100) . . . State registration .............................................................. Drivers’ license (12/77 = 100) .......................................... Vehicle Inspection (12/77 - 100) ...................................... Other vehicle related fees (12/77 - 100) .......................... 118.1 116.9 116.7 201.7 177.7 114.4 114.9 156.4 119.1 210.1 233.5 117.7 107.8 144.0 104.5 114.6 116.1 126.1 124.7 124.4 221.3 194.1 129.8 124.8 171.2 127.1 230.6 245.2 148.6 111.5 146,4 104.7 119.7 122.7 126.6 125.9 125.1 224.5 195.3 132.2 125.4 172.6 126.5 234.5 247.1 155.0 112.1 146.4 104.7 120.4 124.0 127.5 126.1 125.9 225.0 195.5 134.1 125.3 172.3 126.8 235.0 248.5 153.7 112.9 146.4 104.7 121.5 126.1 128.1 127.3 126.4 224.5 197.7 136.3 126.6 174.9 126.6 233.8 249.1 149.7 113.3 146.4 104.9 122.6 126.8 129.0 128.4 127.3 224.7 198.3 136.3 127.0 175.9 126.2 233.9 250.2 148.2 114.0 146.5 104.9 122.8 128.3 130.9 129.4 128.7 226.0 200.9 137.5 128.8 178.8 127.3 234.9 251.3 148.6 114.5 146.5 104.9 122.8 129.8 119.0 116.8 117.0 202.3 178.7 114.5 115.7 158.1 118.6 210.6 233.5 117.0 108.4 143.9 104.3 115.5 120.3 127.4 124.2 124.6 223.1 195.8 129.1 126.2 174.9 125.1 232.6 244.9 147.8 112.2 146.5 104.4 120.3 127.8 127.8 125.4 125.4 226.7 196.7 131.5 126.5 175.6 125.0 236.8 246.9 153.8 113.1 146.5 104.4 121.0 130.0 128.8 126.2 126.2 227.3 196.8 133.6 126.3 174.9 125.4 237.6 248.2 153.5 114.0 146.5 104.4 122.1 132.7 129.9 127.2 126.6 226.7 200.1 135.5 128.4 178.9 125.7 236.0 248.7 149.1 114.7 146.5 104.6 123.3 134.6 131.5 128.4 127.5 226.8 200.6 136.1 128.7 179.9 125.2 236.0 249.9 147.5 115.4 146.5 104.6 123.5 136.6 131.8 129.5 128.5 227.6 201.9 135.6 129.8 181.5 125.8 236.7 250.9 147.5 115.8 146.5 104.6 123.5 137.8 Public.................................................................................................. 205.2 235.9 239.5 242.2 250.5 261.5 271.0 204.1 229.7 232.9 234.9 245.8 256.9 264.4 276.9 294.2 222.6 263.3 255.3 289.8 297.9 234.1 266.2 255.4 310.3 304.7 234.8 266.8 255.5 214.2 268.0 190.2 233.9 221.3 263.9 291.0 200.8 261.6 237.2 270.0 293.4 202.0 265.7 251.1 275.4 293.6 201.9 267.6 255.5 275.5 293.9 221.8 269.2 255.4 287.9 298.0 233.8 273.0 255.6 308.6 304.5 234.4 273.6 255.6 Private................................................................................................ Automobile maintenance and repair........................................................ Body work (12/77 = 100).............................................................. Automobile drive train, brake, and miscellaneous mechanical repair (12/77 = 100) ................................................ Maintenance and servicing (12/77 = 100) ...................................... Power plant repair (12/77 = 100) .................................................. Other private transportation .................................................................. Other private transportation commodities ........................................ Motor oil, coolant, and other products (12/77 = 100) ................ Automobile parts and equipment (12/77 = 100)........................ Other parts and equipment (12/77 - 100) ........................ Other private transportation services................................................ Intercity train fare .................................................................................. 214.1 268.0 190.5 228.5 221.0 264.3 291.5 203.0 256.4 237.3 270.0 293.6 204.6 259.9 250.0 275.5 293.8 204.4 262.0 255.2 MEDICAL CARE 243.7 262.0 263.4 264.7 266.6 268.4 270.6 244.7 263.1 264.9 265.9 267.8 270.0 272.2 166.4 167.9 169.1 170.2 171.3 156.7 166.0 167.2 168.5 169.7 170.8 171.8 157.5 122.4 126.3 116.9 144.4 114.1 115.0 110.0 153.5 120.4 122.7 115.9 154.6 120.7 123.5 116.8 155.8 122.0 124.2 117.3 156.6 122.3 124.7 117.6 157.4 121.6 125.4 118.2 158.5 123.4 125.4 118.9 131.3 122.6 132.4 124.2 133.7 12Ò.5 134.8 126.1 137.0 127.6 138.1 128.1 Intercity bus fare .................................................................................. Intracity mass transit ............................................................................ Medical care commodities.................................................................. Anti-infective drugs (12/77 = 100).................................................. Tranquillizers and sedatives (12/77 = 100)...................................... Circulatories and diuretics (12/77 = 100)........................................ Hormones, diabetic drugs, biologlcals, and prescription and supplies (12/77 = 100) ...................................... Pain and symptom control drugs (12/77 = 100) .............................. Supplements, cough and cold preparations, and respiratory agents (12/77 = 100)................................................ - 155.8 164.9 143.5 113.1 114.9 109.3 152.2 118.5 122.9 114.2 153.5 118.7 124.1 114.6 154.8 120.5 124.9 115.1 155.6 121.2 125.5 115.4 156.4 120.5 126.1 116.0 120.9 114.8 131.3 121.4 133.2 122.9 134.3 124.2 135.5 124.5 138.2 125.2 138.9 125.6 120.8 116.0 110.9 117.1 118.2 118.6 119.3 119.9 120.5 112.2 118.5 119.5 120.2 120.9 121.2 121.8 122.6 119.9 190.4 119.9 123.3 120.5 191.2 120.8 112.8 109.3 174.7 111.2 119.2 115.3 185.4 116.3 120.1 116.3 186.9 117.1 121.0 117.3 188.4 117.5 122.0 117.8 190.1 119.0 122.9 118.4 191.6 119.9 123.6 119.0 192.4 121.2 Nonprescription drugs and medical supplies (12/77 = 100) .................... Eyeglasses (12/77 = 100) ............................................................ Internal and respiratory over-the-counter drugs ................................ Nonprescription medical equipment and supplies (12/77 = 100)........ 112.0 109.2 173.0 110.8 118.4 115.0 184.4 115.3 119.5 116.5 186.0 116.5 120.6 118.2 187.3 117.5 121.7 118.7 189.1 119.1 Medical care services 262.8 283.4 284.7 285.9 288.0 289.8 292.3 263.8 284.5 286.3 287.3 289.3 291.7 294.3 230.3 248.4 217.2 112.4 248.2 264.8 237.2 121.7 250.3 267.5 238.8 122.2 251.8 269.2 240.3 122.9 253.5 270.9 241.1 125.0 254.7 272.2 242.2 126.0 257.3 274.2 245.8 126.7 233.1 251.5 220.7 111.7 251.2 269.7 238.9 121.1 253.5 272.3 241.2 121.6 255.1 273.9 243.1 122.2 256.1 275.4 243.0 123.6 257.8 277.6 244.5 123.9 260.4 280.5 247.3 124.5 302.0 119.6 376.4 118.8 325.8 129.7 408.0 128.8 326.3 130.4 410.1 129.5 327.2 131.4 412.6 130.6 329.7 133.4 418.2 132.8 332.3 135.4 424.0 135.1 334.7 137.1 428.4 137.0 301.3 118.9 374.1 118.0 325.3 128.6 403.6 128.0 326.5 129.7 406.7 129.1 326.5 130.3 408.5 129.7 329.8 132.6 414.9 132.3 333.3 134.9 422.4 134.4 335.6 136.4 427.2 136.0 Other professional services (12/77 = 100)...................................... Other medical care services.................................................................. Hospital and other medical services (12/77 = 100).......................... Other hospital and medical care services .................................. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 101 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • Current Labor Statistics: Consumer Prices 23. Continued— Consumer Price Index— U.S. city average [1967=100 unless otherwise specified] All Urban Consumers General summary Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (revised) 1980 Sept. Apr. May July Entertainment co m m o d itie s .............................................. 192.0 205.7 207.0 209.3 210.8 212.8 189.9 202.8 203.4 Reading materials (12/77 = 100)........................................................ Newspapers ................................................................................ Magazines, periodicals, and books (12/77 = 100).......................... 111.9 214.5 115.0 120.1 234.8 120.8 121.5 237.2 122.4 122.3 239.0 123.1 123.0 240.0 124.1 123.2 240.7 124.0 126.1 242.3 129.3 111.4 214.2 114.Í 119.7 234.3 120.6 121.1 236.4 122.3 Sporting goods and equipment (12/77 = 100)...................................... Sport vehicles (12/77 = 100) ...................................................... Indoor and warm weather sport equipment (12/77 = 100).............. Bicycles ...................................................................................... Other sporting goods and equipment (12/77 = 100) ...................... 111.3 NA 106.1 165.6 109.3 118.7 118.5 119.9 118.6 119.8 120.9 122.2 113.5 183.6 116.5 121.1 NA 113.8 184.7 117.2 107.5 NA 104.7 164.7 108.5 114.1 113.0 110.5 179.8 114.0 114.0 112.5 110.3 180.9 114.6 Toys, hobbies, and other entertainment (12/77 = 100).......................... Toys, hobbies, and music equipment (12/77 = 100) ...................... Photographic supplies and equipment (12/77 = 100)...................... Pet supplies and expense (12/77 = 100)...................................... 110.4 110.4 108.É Aug. Sept. Sept. ENTERTAINMENT.............................................................................. Apr. May July Aug. Sept. 204.5 204.8 206.4 208.6 121.8 238.2 122.8 122.5 239.3 123.7 122.7 239.9 123.7 125.5 241.5 129.3 114.2 114.2 112.5 110.6 181.4 116.1 115.3 113.5 111.7 183.2 116.9 115.8 NA 120.3 117.E 121.7 123.8 201.3 111.3 178.6 113.1 112.0 111.1 179.7 113.7 180.6 114.6 119.5 120.7 112.4 181.6 115.0 118.4 117.3 119.4 118.5 121.0 119.0 122.8 123.2 121.8 120.4 122.5 123.9 122.6 121.4 123.1 124.4 110.4 109.6 108.8 112.9 118.0 116.5 118.9 120.0 118.1 115.8 120.5 120.9 119.0 117.0 111.6 120.1 120.8 119.2 120.1 120.6 119.6 121.8 121.7 121.4 119.1 115.9 122.4 122.9 Entertainment services 190.2 198.5 200.1 201.4 203.1 204.3 206.1 191.8 199.9 201.8 204.3 204.8 205.2 208.4 Fees for participant sports (12/77 = 100)............................................ Admissions (12/77 = 100).................................................................. Other entertainment services (12/77 = 100)........................................ 113.0 115.2 109.4 119.0 118.7 114.Í 120.2 118.8 116.4 120.9 120.4 116.6 122.1 121.3 117.4 123.2 122.1 117.4 124.5 122.6 118.3 113.4 116.3 110.9 119.3 120.1 115.1 120.5 121.0 116.5 121.5 123.2 118.2 121.9 123.2 118.8 121.8 124.2 119.1 124.7 124.1 120.8 209.6 211.2 212.5 213.5 220.6 200.6 209.2 210.6 212.1 214.0 219.0 204.0 204.4 204.3 201.4 117.6 202.9 119.0 206.8 120.3 207.0 121.7 206.8 122.7 204.1 OTHER GOODS AND SERVICES........................................................ 120.6 Tobacco products 203.4 Cigarettes.......................................................................................... Other tobacco products and smoking accessories (12/77 = 100) 193.6 112.2 Personal care 199.0 Toilet goods and personal care appliances............................................ Products for the hair, hairpieces and wigs (12/77 = 100)................ Dental and shaving products (12/77 = 100) .................................. Cosmetics, bath and nail preparations, manicure and eye makeup implements (12/77 = 100) .............................. Other toilet goods and small personal care appliances (12/77 = 100) 191.4 114.3 201 8 117.9 120.5 110.4 108.6 Personal care services........................................................................ Beauty parlor services for women.................................................. Haircuts and other barber shop services for men (12/77 = 100) 204.5 206.0 120.2 206.4 120.7 207.0 122.0 121.0 205.1 120.7 122.3 207.9 121.4 124.0 115.7 115.4 116.5 117.4 116.7 117.6 206.4 207.7 115.5 217.2 218.6 121.7 218.8 220.4 122.2 Personal and educational expenses 223.3 228.7 School books and supplies.................................................................... Personal and educational services.......................................................... Tuition and other school fees .......................................................... College tuition (12/77 = 100) .................................................. Elementary and high school tuition (12/77 = 100) .................... Personal expenses (12/77 = 100).................................................. 201.5 228.6 117.7 116.9 120.9 115.1 297.1 283.5 219.3 276.6 111.6 110.2 181.4 115.3 121.1 200.5 206.8 122.8 111.0 209.0 121.7 125.2 210.3 191.0 119.1 119.4 2196 220.6 123.4 229.2 207.1 234.0 118.6 117.9 120.9 126.1 369.3 335.2 233.4 295.7 211.6 112.6 193.7 215.4 201.6 117.2 112.1 184.9 117.4 121.3 119.0 121.8 125.2 203.2 118.5 206.4 119.5 203.9 206.6 120.5 118.8 204.5 119.7 120.4 122.0 208.8 122.5 123.6 210.4 123.6 124.0 209.5 211.8 216.6 121.8 110.6 125.3 112.5 201.8 117.9 119.3 119.6 119.9 121.3 120.8 110.6 110.3 115.2 117.2 116.2 119.0 116.6 119.1 117.9 120.4 118.5 121.5 119.7 122.1 220.9 222.1 123.9 221.7 222.5 124.8 223.1 224.5 124.8 205.8 207.4 114.7 217.2 218.6 121.5 218.1 219.4 122.0 219.1 220.2 122.8 219.8 221.0 123.0 220.7 222.0 123.4 222.9 225.0 123.9 229.5 229.9 231.4 249.5 223.5 228.7 229.4 229.8 230.3 231.8 249.8 207.1 234.7 118.6 117.9 120.9 127.8 207.1 235.0 118.6 117.9 120.9 128.7 207.2 235.5 118.7 118.0 120.9 129.5 207.7 237.1 119.4 118.7 122.0 130.7 221.0 256.2 131.6 130.7 134.4 130.5 205.0 228.4 117.9 116.8 120.7 114.4 210.9 233.4 118.7 117.9 120.7 123.3 210.9 234.2 118.7 117.9 120.7 125.1 210.9 234.8 118.7 117.9 120.7 126.4 210.9 235.4 118.8 118.0 120.7 127.4 211.5 237.1 119.5 118.7 121.8 128.5 224.8 256.1 131.8 130.7 134.3 129.7 370.1 342.6 238.9 297.6 370.9 353.8 244.8 298.6 371.5 342.3 249.1 300.1 370.7 338.3 251.9 3008 367.9 338.6 254.8 303.6 298.3 283.1 219.5 277.8 370.8 335.2 232.6 295.1 371.6 342.8 237.9 296.5 372.2 354.0 244.0 296.7 372.5 342.6 248.4 297.5 371.8 338.7 251.2 299.7 368.7 339.0 253.6 302.3 120.0 120.0 Special indexes: Gasoline, motor oil, coolant, and other products...................................... Insurance and finance .......................................................................... Utilities and public transportation............................................................ Housekeeping and home maintenance services ...................................... 102 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 24. Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers: Cross classification of region and population size class by expenditure category and commodity and service group [December 1977 = 100] Size class A (1.25 million or more) Category and group | 1980 1980 1980 1980 Apr. Size class D (75,000 or less) Size class C (75,000 - 385,000) Size class B (385,000-1.250 million) June | Aug. Apr. | June | Aug. Apr. | June | Aug. Apr. June Aug. EXPENDITURE CATEGORY All Items ............................................................................ Food and beverages .................................................... Housing ...................................................................... Apparel and upkeep .................................................... Transportation.............................................................. Medical care................................................................ Entertainment .............................................................. Other goods and services ............................................ 125.0 124.5 126.1 112.5 133.8 122.4 116.7 114.7 127.1 126.2 129.6 111.5 135.3 123.0 117.7 116.1 129.1 129.5 131.2 112.0 138 0 125.1 118.3 117.2 129.0 127.1 130.0 111.1 140.8 122.4 117.9 117.5 131.0 128.6 133.1 111.3 141.7 123.2 120.2 119.0 134.8 131.0 139.7 113.1 143.5 124.4 121.1 120.0 132.7 128.8 140.2 112.7 136.2 122.5 115.7 119.6 135.6 130.5 144.9 113.2 138.2 123.5 116.5 121.9 138.3 133.4 148.4 113.9 140.3 125.0 118.9 123.3 127.4 125.2 127.9 113.0 138.1 122.7 121.5 116.0 131.0 127.6 133.5 115.0 140.2 124.4 123.8 116.8 134.1 130.4 138.7 115.0 141.4 125.2 124.4 118.3 COMMODITY AND SERVICE GROUP Commodities...................................................................... Commodities less food and beverages .......................... Services ............................................................................ 126.5 127.8 122.9 128.4 129.7 125.4 130.4 131.0 127.4 130.8 132.5 126.3 132.1 133.8 129.2 136.1 138.5 132.8 131.6 132.9 134.5 133.8 135.4 138.5 136.9 138.6 140.4 128.0 129.3 126.5 131.5 133.3 130.2 135.1 137.3 132.5 North Central EXPENDITURE CATEGORY All Items ............................................................................ Food and beverages .................................................... Housing ...................................................................... Apparel and upkeep .................................................... Transportation.............................................................. Medical care................................................................ Entertainment .............................................................. Other goods and services ............................................ 133.2 126.8 141.1 109.2 138.1 125.3 118.9 116.2 136.7 128.1 147.5 108.5 140.1 126.1 120.1 117.9 136.8 131.5 145.4 109.0 141.0 127.8 122.4 118.6 130.9 124.9 135.8 111.2 137.6 125.0 114.0 121.5 134.4 126.7 141.2 111.0 140.7 125.8 117.1 123.2 134.7 129.8 139.4 112.9 141.3 128.8 118.6 124.4 128.9 127.0 130.4 110.7 139.3 125.7 118.7 116.7 131.9 128.7 135.6 111.0 140.4 126.6 121.3 117.5 132.9 131.8 135.3 112.0 141.6 129.1 122.7 118.8 128.7 128.9 129.1 113.6 137.4 127.4 116.1 119.8 131.9 129.6 134.5 114.6 139.8 128,9 117.3 121.6 131.7 133.9 131.5 113.6 140.4 133.7 116.9 122.9 COMMODITY AND SERVICE GROUP Commodities...................................................................... Commodities less food and beverages .......................... Services ............................................................................ 130.9 132.8 136.6 132.9 135.2 142.3 134.5 135.9 140.3 127.9 129.2 135.6 129.9 131.2 141.7 132.4 133.4 138.4 128.1 128.5 130.3 129.7 130.1 135.5 131.9 131.9 134.5 126.0 124.8 132.9 128.0 127.3 138.1 129.8 128.0 134.8 South EXPENDITURE CATEGORY All Items ............................................................................ Food and beverages .................................................... Housing ...................................................................... Apparel and upkeep .................................................... Transportation.............................................................. Medical care................................................................ Entertainment .............................................................. Other goods and services ............................................ 130.7 126.4 133.9 116.4 139.7 121.9 115.7 119.3 133.5 128.5 138.5 116.4 140.9 124.1 116.3 120.9 134.8 132.3 138.2 116.7 143.5 125.4 119.5 122.3 131.7 127.0 136.7 112.9 138.4 123.3 119.8 118.1 134.7 127.9 141.4 112.6 140.6 125.8 122.5 119.5 135.4 131.3 140.5 114.1 142.0 127.5 124.0 121.3 131.3 127.8 136.6 108.2 137.2 126.4 118.3 118.8 133.1 129.1 138.9 107.3 139.7 127.5 120.3 120.2 133.7 132.8 137.1 109.4 141.1 128.8 122.0 121.6 128.3 126.2 129.7 104.7 136.5 131.2 124.4 121.9 131.4 128.1 134.0 107.2 138.7 133.9 128.0 123.9 131.9 132.4 132.4 105.6 140.4 133.9 130.5 125.1 COMMODITY AND SERVICE GROUP Commodities...................................................................... Commodities less food and beverages .......................... Services ............................................................................ 129.3 130.6 132.6 130.9 132.0 137.2 133.1 133.5 137.1 129.0 129.8 135.8 130.6 131.7 140.9 132.7 133.3 139.5 128.7 129.1 135.3 129.7 130.0 138.4 131.9 131.5 136.4 127.2 127.7 129.8 129.0 129.3 135.1 131.3 130.9 132.7 West EXPENDITURE CATEGORY All items .......................................................................... Food and beverages .................................................. Housing .................................................................... Apparel and upkeep .................................................. Transportation............................................................ Medical care.............................................................. Entertainment ............................................................ Other goods and services .......................................... 132.8 126.5 136.3 115.7 141.2 128.8 117.8 121.2 136.1 127.7 142.5 114.5 141.1 129.5 119.5 121.7 135.5 130.5 139.2 116.4 142.8 130.6 120.8 122.8 134.1 128.8 139.1 115.8 139.2 126.9 123.1 121.5 136.0 130.2 141.4 118.4 140.7 127.9 123.9 124.3 136.8 133.1 140.9 119.5 142.4 129.0 125.9 125.7 131.4 125.7 134.8 107.7 141.2 126.7 121.0 117.7 133.6 127.6 137.9 107.4 142.1 129.4 122.4 119.0 134.2 129 5 137.2 108.5 143.6 132.2 125.2 120.2 130.4 128.0 129.7 121.8 139.6 128.9 127.5 122.5 134.3 129.6 135.9 123.6 141.7 132.5 130.3 124.4 135.4 132.9 135.6 126.3 143.5 134.1 131.5 124.5 COMMODITY AND SERVICE GROUP Commodities.................................................................... Commodities less food and beverage.......................... Services .......................................................................... 129.5 130.8 137.2 130.4 131.6 143.6 132.3 133.1 139.7 131.5 132.7 137.7 132.5 133.5 140.8 134.6 135.2 140.0 129.0 130.4 134.8 130.1 131.1 138.5 132.2 133.3 137.1 129.8 130.6 131.2 131.7 132.6 138.2 134.1 134.6 137.3 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 103 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • Current Labor Statistics: Consumer Prices 25. Consumer Price Index— U.S. city average, and selected areas [ 1 967=100 unless otherwise specified] All Urban Consumers Area1 U.S. city average2 Anchorage, Alaska (10/67=100) Atlanta, Ga................................. Baltimore, Md............................. Boston, Mass............................. Buffalo, N.Y................................ Chicago, lll.-Northwestem Ind. Cincinnati, Ohio-Ky.-Ind......... Cleveland, O hio.................. Dallas-Ft. Worth, Tex............ Denver-Boulder, Colo............ Detroit, Mich......................................... Honolulu, Hawaii ................................ Houston, Tex........................................ Kansas City, Mo-Kansas .................... Los Angeles-Long Beach, Anaheim, Calif. 1979 Sept Apr. May June July Aug. Sept Sept 242.5 244.9 247.6 247.8 249.4 251.7 223.7 213.2 226.5 235.3 224.9 218.1 221.3 229.0 240.1 243.1 251.6 240.8 220.7 Philadelphia, Pa.-N.J. Pittsburgh, Pa........... Portland, Oreg.-Wash. St. Louis, Mo.-lll......... San Diego, Calif......... 232.2 222.2 240.4 San Frandsco-Oakland, Calif. Seattle-Everett, Wash........... Washington, D.C.-Md.-Va. . . . 222.6 222.9 248.2 227.4 260.8 243.8 244.6 248.4 249.1 129.7 250.3 244.3 233.1 237.4 240.9 246.8 256.7 234.5 232.5 239.4 246.4 237.2 242.5 246.1 253.7 248.7 255.1 230.1 268.6 250.8 247.3 238.9 239.8 244.1 250.1 240.8 246.0 250.7 252.7 245.0 269.9 248.0 249.6 241.2 ..¿hou iin-iuuc mn uiuy mo Donnai uiy uui ine enure puraon or me stanaaro Metropolitan Statistical Area, as defined for the 1970 Census of Population, except that the Standard Consolidated Area is used for New York and Chicago. 224.9 217.9 250.1 259.9 220.6 230.8 253.9 258.5 133.6 251.6 257.3 241.8 269.7 243.5 245.2 261.6 256.7 227.5 266.5 247.8 250.1 210.9 255.0 244.4 236.8 250.1 256.4 258.0 117.4 226.0 219.5 248.2 230.9 246.5 252.4 240.9 235.4 247.3 251.4 223.7 228.4 242.2 249.1 236.9 233.7 218.1 215.4 104 1979 223.4 Miami, Fla. (11/77=100) .......... Milwaukee, WIs........................... Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minn.-Wis. . New York, N.Y.-Northeastern N.J. Northeast, Pa. (Scranton).......... https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (revised) 1980 266.6 243.6 259.5 223.5 249.6 223.0 133.1 258.4 118.7 228.7 241 8 243.1 217.8 217.1 Apr. May July Aug. Sept 249.6 239.3 244.7 233.3 234.6 250.8 240.9 239.6 248.0 248.4 249.6 250.5 254.5 248.0 228.4 257.3 242.2 247.8 255.8 228.0 262.8 246.3 253.4 247.0 259.1 265.8 130.9 255.2 245.7 232.4 252.1 251.5 134.7 255.9 248.4 236.7 238.4 243.2 134.9 263.2 250.6 240.7 241.5 246.9 247.2 220.3 256.9 252.4 271.8 232.6 222.5 237.7 255 242.6 264 252.2 245.9 265.7 255.4 252.7 267.7 258.1 249.2 221.0 224.4 246.8 242.0 251.6 248.7 254 251 237.9 242.2 243.8 246.8 245.3 247.3 251 248.3 251.0 255.1 247.2 2Average of 85 cities. 26. Producer Price Indexes, by stage of processing [1967 = 100] Commodity grouping 1980 Annual average 1979 Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb Mar. Apr. May June1 July Aug. Sept. 216.1 224.2 226.3 228,1 232.4 235.7 238.5 240.5 241.6 r 243.0 246.6 249.0 248.9 252.2 251.8 245.8 253.2 242.9 284.7 204.9 195.5 241.3 253.6 245.9 231.3 244.8 284.9 211.0 196.6 248.2 1979 Oct. FINISHED GOODS Finished goods.................................................................... Finished consumer goods.............................................. Finished consumer foods .......................................... Crude .................................................................. Processed ............................................................ Nondurable goods less foods .................................... Durable goods.................................................... • Consumer nondurable goods less food and energy . . . . Capital equipment ........................................................ 215.7 226.3 231.4 223.8 225.9 181.9 (2) 216.7 224.7 226.7 215.5 225.5 243.3 189.0 177.6 222.8 227.1 230.5 228.1 228.6 245.5 190.0 178.3 223.9 229.1 232.1 227.9 230.3 247.9 191.8 179.1 225.3 233.5 231.4 226.0 229.7 254.7 199.1 182.9 229.3 237.6 231.6 220.1 230.4 262.7 202.1 185.1 230.5 240.8 233.1 230.9 231.1 270.9 200.3 187.0 232.2 242.1 228.9 222.3 227.2 276.9 201.2 189.3 236.2 243.4 230.0 226.1 228.1 279.6 201.0 190.6 236.6 r 245.0 231.0 '223.6 229.4 '281.0 '203.5 '192.1 '237.7 249.1 239.5 230.7 238.0 282.8 205.3 193.4 240.2 251.8 249.9 240.7 243.0 284.3 206.3 194.6 241.9 242.8 255.0 256.3 258.7 265.9 271.6 273.7 275.1 276.4 '278.2 280.3 282.6 284.1 286.3 262.2 255.5 255.5 295.5 228.6 '264.1 '260.4 '256.3 '298.2 '230.0 264.7 262.6 256.9 297.9 231.2 267.2 277.5 258.8 298.1 234.5 268.4 275.9 258.3 301.4 236.2 271.8 296.4 259.6 305.0 237.6 INTERMEDIATE MATERIALS Intermediate materials, supplies, and components.................. Materials and components for manufacturing.................. Materials for food manufacturing................................ Materials for nondurable manufacturing .................... Materials for durable manufacturing............................ Components for manufacturing .................................. 234.1 223.6 220.1 271.3 206,8 244.3 225.5 231.4 2847 213.2 245.5 227.8 233.4 284.6 214.8 247.8 230.4 235.3 287.8 216.3 255.5 226.0 241.1 303.7 219.2 259.8 245.6 244.0 306.5 223.2 259.5 240.1 247.4 301.4 225.3 260.3 238.7 253.0 296.6 227.7 Materials and components for construction .................... 246.9 254.7 254.0 253.7 257.7 262.1 265.5 265.6 265.7 '267.1 269.2 271.1 271.5 272.1 488.8 364.3 617.2 '493.0 '373.0 -616.4 504.9 378.4 635.3 508.1 381.3 638.9 510.2 3859 638.2 507.1 384.9 632.7 Processed fuels and lubricants...................................... Manufacturing industries............................................ Nonmanufacturing industries...................................... Supplies...................................................................... Manufacturing industries............................................ Nonmanufacturing industries...................................... Feeds .................................................................. Other supplies ...................................................... 360.9 298.9 422.9 410.6 322.5 500.6 416.5 325.2 510.0 424.6 332.2 519.1 444.0 340.5 550.3 464.0 351.4 579.9 481.0 356.6 609.5 486.9 358.3 620.0 235.3 242.6 243.8 247.1 250.9 251.6 253.8 262.6 263.8 '265.5 267.1 266.5 266.8 270.0 217.6 204.4 224.7 224.1 221.5 2249 212.2 231.7 228.9 228.9 226.4 213.7 233.3 2269 231.2 229.2 216.3 236.1 230.4 233.9 232.5 220.9 238.7 224.4 238.3 239.0 222.5 247.8 223'3 249.6 240.8 223.7 249.8 218.9 252.9 241.7 227.1 249.5 206.6 255.2 241.8 228.5 248.9 210.5 253.7 '243.2 '230.6 '249.9 '207.7 '255.6 246.2 232.3 253.6 223.0 256.6 248.2 232.2 256.7 235.4 257.6 251.7 233.1 261.5 251.9 259.8 253.7 234.4 263.8 256.3 261.6 282.2 289.5 290.8 296.2 296.8 308.4 303.5 297.0 300.7 '299.6 316.3 327.7 331.8 336.0 242.9 242.5 263.3 276.6 276.7 279.1 CRUDE MATERIALS Crude materials for further processing.................................. Foodstuffs and feedstuffs.............................................. Nonfood materials........................................................ 2472 247.5 246.4 249.7 243.0 252.6 245.9 235.5 ( 2) 3689 374.9 384.2 398.9 414.3 412.7 413.9 410.5 407.9 416.8 424.3 436.3 444.1 329.3 340.3 232.8 324.4 -334.7 '234.1 331.3 342.3 235.3 340.5 352.6 235.8 348.1 360.6 239.6 353.5 366.0 245.3 Nonfood materials except fuel.................................... Manufacturing industries ........................................ 284.5 293.3 207.0 298.1 307.8 212.6 304.6 314.9 214.8 311.6 322.5 216.6 330.1 342.1 226.0 341.7 354.9 228.7 339.8 352.5 229.9 337.0 349.1 232.4 Crude fu e l................................................................ Manufacturing industries ........................................ Nonmanufacturing industries .................................. 568.2 607.6 548.3 612.9 662.5 585.5 617.4 667.8 589.3 634.5 6883 603.9 636.3 690.3 605.7 664.8 725.7 628.8 664.1 724.5 628.8 678.9 742.2 641.3 690.3 756.1 650.8 '695.6 ' 762.9 655.1 711.0 781.9 667.8 713.2 784.5 669.8 740.5 818.0 692.3 756.1 837.9 704.7 ( 2) 208.2 ( 2) 221.3 220.6 202.8 2228 223.1 204.7 224.6 225.3 206.1 230.5 232.3 209.4 234.6 238.3 211.2 237.8 242.3 211.9 241.7 246.2 211.5 242.8 247.6 212.4 ' 244.3 '249.5 '214.0 246.4 251.4 218.0 247.9 252.7 220.7 247.4 252.3 220.9 251.7 255.0 223.2 244.0 ( 2) 256.8 2464 258.1 247.1 260.5 249.1 268.4 255.3 273.7 259.8 276.2 260.5 278.0 261.4 278.6 262.6 '280.5 -264.2 282.3 265.5 283.9 267.8 285.2 269.3 286.6 272.0 223.2 226.0 226.9 229.8 224.8 237.5 232.4 227.3 239.7 242.1 248.7 262.7 267.1 282.2 390.5 ( 2) 417.0 2437 424.1 243.8 4350 246.9 452.9 244.0 469.3 254.8 469.0 248.4 469.9 238.7 464.7 241.5 '463.8 '239.0 470.5 237.0 479.3 268.7 491.5 270.7 502.5 273.5 SPECIAL GROUPINGS Finished consumer goods excluding foods...................... Finished consumer goods less energy............................ Intermediate materials less foods and feeds.......................... 1Data for June 1980 have been revised to reflect the ava liability of late reports and corrections by respondents. All data are subject io revision 4 months after original publication. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 2 Not available. r=revised. 105 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • Current Labor Statistics: Producer Prices 27. Producer Price Indexes, by commodity groupings [1967=100 unless otherwise specified] Code Commodity group and subgroup Annual 1979 1980 1979 Oct. Nov. Dec. All commodities .......................... All commodities (1957 - 59 = 100) 235.6 250.0 245.6 260.6 247.2 262.3 249.7 267.3 254.9 270.2 260.2 275.6 Farm products and processed foods and feeds commodities 229.8 236.5 230.6 249.0 232.3 250.6 234.6 253.1 231.9 260.6 01 01-1 01 -2 01-3 01 -4 01-5 01 -6 01-7 01 -8 01- FARM PRODUCTS AND PROCESSED FOODS AND FEEDS Farm products ................................................................ Fresh and dried fruits and vegetables ............................ Grains.......................................................................... Livestock .................................................................... Live poultry.................................................................. Plant and animal fibers.................................................. Fluid milk .................................................................... Eggs............................................................................ Hay, hayseeds, and oilseeds ........................................ 9 farm products ................................................ Other 241.4 229.0 214.8 260.3 194.3 209.9 250.1 176.5 244.3 289.0 239.6 218.0 229.0 251.7 162.0 212.9 260.8 155.9 235.6 313.6 240.2 216.5 226.6 248.3 195.5 215.4 262.5 178.7 229.8 318.3 242.5 210.7 227.9 252.5 194,7 222.0 264.0 198.4 230.3 319.4 02 02 - 1 02-2 02-3 02-4 02-5 02-6 02-7 02-8 02-9 Processed foods and feeds............ Cereal and bakery products........ Meats, poultry, and fish .............. Dairy products............................ Processed fruits and vegetables .. Sugar and confectionery ............ Beverages and beverage materials Fats and o ils .............................. Miscellaneous processed foods .. Manufactured animal feeds ........ 222.5 210.3 242.0 211.2 221.9 214.7 210.7 243.3 216.5 219.4 224.8 219.8 234.2 218.1 223.4 218.9 218.9 246.0 220.8 224.0 227.1 222.5 239.3 219.3 222.4 222.9 221.2 241.9 222.2 222.4 03 03-1 03-2 03-3 03-4 03-81 03- Textile products and apparel ................................ Synthetic fibers (12/75 = 100).......................... Processed yarns and threads (12/75 = 100) Gray fabrics (12/75 = 100).............................. Finished fabrics (12/75 = 100) ........................ Apparel............................................................ 82 housefurnishings.................................... Textile 168.7 119.0 109.2 127.1 107.4 160.4 190.4 172.0 124.7 112.1 129.7 108.9 162.2 196.3 04 04-1 04-2 04-3 04- Hides, skins, leather, and related products Hides and skins.................................. Leather.............................................. Footwear .......................................... 4 leather and related products . . . . Other 252.4 535.4 356.7 218.0 205.0 05 05-1 05-2 05-3 05-4 05-61 05- Fuels and related products and power C oal............................................ Coke .......................................... Gas fuels1 .................................. Electric power.............................. Crude petroleum 2 ........................ 7 Petroleum products, refined3 ........ 06 06-1 06-21 06-22 06-3 06-4 06-5 06-6 06- Feb. Apr. May 261.9 277.4 262.8 278.! 237.0 265.9 234.9 268.6 236.4 219.0 214.6 247.8 195.2 239.0 262.3 165.6 218.1 301.1 242.3 220.6 223.3 257.2 184.6 269.5 263.8 150.4 224.7 304.7 229.3 223.6 242.8 219.9 222.6 234.4 221 6 235.6 223.1 224.9 228.5 225.4 239.6 221.0 222.9 235.0 224.0 225.1 225.4 219.7 172.8 124.2 112.5 130.7 109.7 163.1 196.5 173.1 124.7 112.7 132.3 109.9 162.6 197.1 175.2 127.0 114.6 132.7 110.5 165.5 199.0 253.9 478.8 343.6 227.5 209.7 248.9 447.6 319.8 227.9 208.4 249.2 443.9 324.8 227.9 208.0 408 1 450.9 429.2 544.1 270.2 376.5 444,8 468.5 454.6 431.2 619.9 283.5 436.7 533.7 476.9 455.1 431.2 637.0 281.9 450.4 545.4 487.9 458.6 431.2 662.4 287.0 470.8 555.2 Chemicals and allied products........................ Industrial chemicals4 .................................. Prepared paint............................................ Paint materials .......................................... Drugs and pharmaceuticals ........................ Fats and oils, inedible ................................ Agricultural chemicals and chemical products Plastic resins and materials ........................ 7 chemicals and allied products............ Other 222.3 264.0 204.4 241.2 159.4 376.7 214.4 235.9 191.8 234.2 285.7 206.7 253.6 162.8 3669 224.3 260.0 197.0 236.0 288.4 209.4 256.6 163.0 344.3 229.5 261.4 198.8 07 07-1 07-11 07-12 07-13 07- Rubber and plastic products . . . Rubber and rubber products .. Crude rubber ...................... Tires and tubes.................... Miscellaneous rubber products 2 products (6/78 = 100) Plastic 194.3 209.2 221.4 205.9 206.4 110.0 203.0 220.3 236.5 218.3 214.7 114.0 08 08-1 08-2 08-3 08-4 Lumber and wood products Lumber........................ Millwork ...................... Plywood...................... Other wood products . . . 300.4 354.3 254.3 250.5 235.4 308.8 370.3 255.6 254.0 237.7 I n d u s t r ia l June 1 July Aug. Sept. 264.Í '265.6 280.3 «281.1 269.Í 286.3 273.1 289.8 274.1 290.8 277.0 293.9 229.3 271.: 233.! 271.« «234.3 «273.5 246.1 275.6 254.8 277.3 256.3 278.2 258.8 281.2 239.3 218.5 217.9 251.8 180.1 254.9 263.1 184.2 215.9 311.5 228.9 223.2 210.8 230.5 171.9 266.9 265.4 153.3 205.1 304.8 233.5 233.4 244.0 «233.5 219.0 215.3 233.3 240.0 171.3 166.6 272.7 247.0 265.4 265.5 140.5 146.8 206.9 207.4 311.0 309.4 253.9 247.5 244.8 260.5 227.2 267.0 265.8 159.3 251.4 292.4 263.6 253.8 256.5 275.7 224.5 274.6 271.6 176.9 261.5 282.7 266.6 266.0 260.6 266.8 241.0 295.2 275.5 1884 280.7 283.9 263.4 240.4 269.2 263.0 222.9 278.5 280.9 175.2 284.4 282.9 233.1 229.9 239.6 220.8 223.3 287.5 224.8 226.4 223.5 219.8 231.6 231.8 239.2 223.0 223.7 264.1 225.9 222.6 224.7 2166 228.6 232.4 226.0 227.5 224.6 275.0 227.9 214.5 225.1 205.0 233.1 234.7 224.5 228.5 225.4 327.8 231.2 212.0 223.7 207.2 '233.9 «233.2 «226.6 «229.5 «227.2 '325.4 «234.3 ' 212.8 «223.4 «205.0 241.1 234.6 248.5 230.5 229.5 313.7 234.4 221.7 223.6 220.6 249.1 235.5 259.9 233.0 230.6 347.1 237.3 236.8 224.0 230.1 249.8 238.0 257.7 234.1 231.9 341.4 236.2 237.8 226.9 243.8 255.4 241.3 255.8 238.4 234.5 399.9 236.7 231.1 230.6 247.2 176.5 127.2 118.0 132.3 181.2 130.4 166.8 199.7 179.3 129.1 119.3 136.8 113.2 168.0 201.3 184.3 136.3 121.9 134.8 116.5 174.1 210.7 185.2 137.8 122.6 136.6 116.7 174.8 201.6 182.0 «183.0 133.2 «134.5 124.2 «122.8 136.5 '134.8 115.3 115.8 170.2 172.7 202.6 202.7 211.0 186.2 139.3 123.4 139.2 116.8 174.7 217.1 187.8 140.9 124.2 142.5 118.2 175.5 218.0 255.7 468.8 347.6 229.1 213.1 250.9 404.8 340.3 228.0 214.8 246.8 348.7 311.0 231.8 217.8 243.5 328.6 297.6 231.9 216.2 240.7 '240.9 289.7 315.7 290.4 284.4 231.9 '231.9 217.4 «215.9 244.9 356.6 292.2 232.9 216.3 251.1 398.4 314.2 233.9 217.4 247.8 356.1 300.2 235.7 217.6 247.3 381.5 272.5 236.8 221.9 508.0 459.3 430.6 532.7 459.6 430.6 716.6 299.3 515.1 620.4 553.5 461.7 430.6 716.6 305.5 522.8 659.0 566.6 465.2 430.6 730.1 310.1 533.9 678.0 572.1 466.5 430.6 745.1 316.5 540.1 680.9 «576.5 '466.6 430.6 '749.2 «326.0 549.0 '681.7 585.4 467.8 430.6 763.3 331.4 550.9 693.3 589.5 469.0 430.6 762.3 333.8 566.3 697.5 593.0 472.1 430.6 785.3 338.6 570.8 695.5 592.5 471.0 430.6 801.1 337.6 579.6 689.6 238.2 292.3 210.7 256.8 164.4 327.1 232.9 262.5 201.4 248.7 307.9 223.3 263.4 167.6 302.2 248.0 272.1 211.3 252.8 313.3 228.7 267.5 168.9 299.9 256.1 274.5 215.0 259.8 322.1 231.5 272.1 172.6 298.2 258.5 287.6 223.1 262.5 328.5 238.8 273.9 172.8 294.7 258.5 288.4 224.8 '262.8 «329.5 238.8 '275.0 '174.4 255.8 '257.6 '287.6 «226.9 262.7 327.8 236.8 277.0 175.4 260.0 258.2 286.2 228.0 264.3 329.0 239.1 278.2 175.7 307.6 259.6 282.0 229.9 263.2 326.2 239.6 278.9 176.7 304.5 260.4 277.1 229.4 264.6 329.0 239.6 279.5 178.3 302.0 260.0 276.7 231.3 204.9 223.7 237.2 223.1 217.1 114.3 205.9 224.3 240.2 223.1 217.7 115.2 210.7 231.5 263.9 231.6 217.8 116.7 212.7 231.5 255.8 231.6 220.6 119.0 214.1 233.4 264.7 231.8 222.1 119.7 215.0 234.7 263.9 233.2 224.0 119.9 «217.3 '236.8 '264.1 «235.6 '226.4 121.4 218.3 239.4 262.5 237.0 231.8 121.1 219.9 240.7 263.4 237.0 234.6 122.4 221.2 242.5 266.3 239.9 234.8 122.8 222.7 245.4 270.7 244.7 234.8 123.0 298.9 355.6 252.3 242.2 239.9 290.1 339.5 250.3 237.9 240.5 294.7 341.4 258.0 243.4 243.4 294.9 340.6 262.2 240.0 243.1 275.6 310.1 257.5 219.8 241.7 272.1 279.8 301.4 313.0 251.8 253.0 230.6 '241.7 240.7 238.7 288.9 327.3 255.9 251.1 236.9 295.3 333.5 260.3 262.3 236.2 291.8 326.6 264.5 253.6 236.8 288.7 319.2 265.4 253.1 236.7 INDUSTRIAL COMMODITIES See footnotes at end of table. 106 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 2 2 2 111.1 122.1 137.0 114.5 170.0 27. Continued— Producer Price Indexes, by commodity groupings [1967 = 100 unless otherwise specified] Code Commodity group and subgroup INDUSTRIAL COMMODITIES Annual average 1979 Oct Nov. Dec. 1979 Apr. May June1 July Aug. Sept Oct Continued 09 09-1 09-11 09-12 09-13 09-14 09-15 09- Pulp, paper, and allied products.............................................. Pulp, paper, and products, excluding building paper and board Woodpulp.......................................................................... Wastepaper ...................................................................... Paper ................................................................................ Paperboard........................................................................ Converted paper and paperboard products .......................... Building paper and board.................................................... 2 219.0 220.7 314.3 206.6 229.6 202.1 2099 182.4 227.5 229.0 337.5 206.7 238.7 211.3 217.3 183.5 229.5 231.1 338.0 220.0 241.8 212.8 219.0 183.6 231.7 233.4 338.0 221.2 242.7 215.4 221.9 184.6 237.4 239.2 356.6 222.9 245.5 221.8 227.7 186.2 239.2 240.8 356.4 223.4 247.2 223.7 229.5 191.7 242.6 244.1 356.8 224.9 250.3 227.4 233.0 198.7 247.8 249.4 385.6 242.5 253.5 232.1 236.7 201.3 249.2 250.6 385.6 226.1 256.1 235.5 237.6 206.8 251.1 252.4 387.7 206.6 257.9 238.9 239.8 208.9 252.4 253.7 388.6 194.0 258.5 237.5 242.4 211.8 252.2 253.6 388.6 193.8 258.8 238.1 242.0 209.2 252.7 254.1 390.6 192.5 258.9 239.2 242.5 209.6 254.4 255.8 329.1 192.8 262.5 241.0 243.4 212.1 10 1010-13 10-2 10-3 10-4 10-5 10-6 1010-8 Metals and metal products .................................................... Iron1and steel .................................................................... Steel mill products.............................................................. Nonferrous metals.............................................................. Metal containers ................................................................ Hardware .......................................................................... Plumbing fixtures and brass fittings...................................... Heating equipment............................................................ Fabricated structural metal products.................................. 7 Miscellaneous metal products............................................ 259.3 283.5 280.4 261.7 269.2 218.7 217.1 187.1 248.9 231.4 269.6 289.2 288.3 283.1 279.9 224.0 223.5 192.2 256.3 238.5 271.1 292.0 288.8 284.1 280.9 225.5 225.4 193.1 256.7 238.6 273.6 292.8 289.3 291.9 280.9 226.2 226.5 195.6 257.7 239.1 284.6 297.4 293.6 326.3 283.3 228.2 232.8 199.5 258.9 240.6 288.9 300.3 294.2 337.7 284.4 230.4 236.7 202.6 259.7 241.6 286.8 301.8 295.5 321.4 288.5 231.5 242.4 202.6 265.1 244.2 284.4 307.2 304.1 298.3 304.1 237.3 243.8 204.2 269.1 246.1 281.8 304.8 305.5 289.7 302.7 238.4 247.5 204.0 269.9 246.7 281.9 303.4 305.8 288.8 302.7 240.5 248.6 205.0 270.1 250.4 281.5 300.4 301.0 289.0 303.0 241.9 249.6 206.1 271.9 251.8 282.7 302.3 301.0 288.9 303.2 242.6 250.4 208.0 272.6 254.1 286.2 304.3 301.0 297.9 303.2 245.1 250.5 208.8 273.8 255.8 290.4 310.4 307.5 303.9 304.4 245.8 250.6 210.0 276.2 257.1 11 11 - 1 11-2 11-3 11-4 11-6 11-7 11- Machinery and equipment .................................................... Agricultural machinery and equipment................................ Construction machinery and equipment.............................. Metalworking machinery and equipment ............................ General purpose machinery and equipment........................ Special industry machinery and equipment ........................ Electrical machinery and equipment .................................. Miscellaneous machinery.................................................. 9 213.9 232.1 256.2 241.3 236.4 247.0 178.9 208.9 220.0 240.0 263.9 249.6 242.8 253.8 184.3 213.6 221.3 243.4 265.4 252.2 244.2 254.9 184.9 214.9 223.4 244.2 268.8 254.6 247.6 256.1 186.6 216.3 227.6 248.4 276.0 258.9 251.0 260.6 190.6 220.3 230.2 249.9 278.3 261.8 253.3 263.2 194.3 221.1 232.5 252.0 279.5 264.1 256.7 265.5 196.5 223.2 236.4 254.4 284.2 270.2 261.1 271.9 198.9 227.2 237.6 256.4 285.9 272.9 262.8 273.0 199.9 227.3 239.2 257.1 287.6 275.4 r 264.8 r 274.3 r 201.6 r 228.2 241.3 257.3 290.9 278.0 265.8 277.2 203.5 230.7 242.2 258.9 292.8 278.9 266.6 277.3 204.7 231.5 244.3 262.5 295.0 280.2 268.9 283.2 206.0 233.1 246.4 262.8 298.4 282.2 271.9 286.2 207.0 236.1 12 1212-2 12-3 12-4 1212-6 Furniture and household durables ........................................ Household furniture.......................................................... 1 Commercial furniture........................................................ Floor coverings................................................................ Household appliances ...................................................... Home 5 electronic equipment .............................................. Other household durable goods ........................................ 171.3 186.3 221.8 147.9 160.9 91.3 228.2 175.1 190.1 223.3 152.1 163.2 90.3 245.6 176.4 193.0 223.3 152.8 164.5 90.3 248.2 177.9 194.8 225.1 152.9 165.3 90.5 254.4 183.4 197.4 226.9 159.0 166.5 91.0 287.4 185.6 198.5 231.4 158.5 168.9 91.2 295.3 185.7 198.9 232.8 160.8 169.9 91.3 288.3 184.4 200.3 233.6 162.2 171.1 91.4 267.3 185.4 203.0 233.9 161.9 173.2 92.0 265.6 '1865 '204.0 235.5 '162.1 '175.5 '91.8 '266.5 186.7 204.3 237.1 163.2 174.8 89.3 271.1 187.3 206.3 237.1 163.5 175.0 88.9 273.0 187.8 206.6 237.4 163.9 176.2 89.1 273.2 189.1 207.7 241.2 164.5 176.6 88.9 277.8 13 1313-2 13-3 13-4 13-5 13-6 13-7 13-8 13- Nonmetallic mineral products................................................ Flat11 glass ........................................................................ Concrete ingredients ........................................................ Concrete products............................................................ Structural clay products excluding refractories.................... Refractories .................................................................... Asphalt roofing ................................................................ Gypsum products ............................................................ Glass containers .............................................................. Other 9 nonmetallic minerals................................................ 248.6 183.9 244.0 244.1 217.9 236.5 325.3 252.3 261.1 313.7 256.2 184.7 248.3 250.1 221.1 244.6 337.5 255.3 265.2 341.2 257.4 185.4 249.6 250.6 221.8 247.4 347.4 256.2 265.2 342.2 259.6 186.4 251.0 253.2 226.7 248.0 346.5 255.0 274.2 342.2 268.4 191.0 265.0 265.4 229.6 248.5 356.6 255.4 274.3 351.8 274.0 191.0 266.6 266.7 231.0 251.1 372.5 262.2 274.3 381.7 276.5 191.4 267.5 269.1 231.4 253.9 388.8 283.7 195.3 271.7 272.9 235.0 261.7 408.9 284.0 195.3 272.4 275.2 230.0 264.4 401.1 284.0 194.3 272.5 275.9 230.2 269.6 412.0 284.8 199.5 272.7 275.9 229.8 271.4 409.4 286.0 199.7 274.6 277.5 230.2 271.4 406.2 287.8 200.7 277.8 276.9 233.4 274.1 408.4 274.3 387.0 294.3 399.6 294.3 400.7 '283.4 '193.6 '273.2 ' 275.8 '230.1 ' 265.8 '400.9 257.1 '294.3 '394.8 294.6 396.1 294.6 397.1 294.6 400.7 305.0 400.6 14 1414- Transportation equipment (12/68 = 100).............................. Motor 1 vehicles and equipment .......................................... Railroad equipment .......................................................... 4 188.1 190.5 277.3 194.2 197.1 286.3 194.8 197.4 288.2 195.6 198.2 289.0 198.7 200.7 297.5 198.2 200.1 299.3 198.8 200.7 302.1 203.2 205.4 309.9 202.5 204.5 310.5 '203.1 '205.2 '312.2 204.9 207.1 316.4 208.6 211.4 316.4 204.2 205.3 3204 215.8 217.8 323.3 15 1515-2 15-3 15-4 15-51 15-9 Miscellaneous products........................................................ Toys, 1 sporting goods, small arms, ammunition.................... Tobacco products ............................................................ Notions............................................................................ Photographic equipment and supplies ................................ Mobile homes (12/74 = 100)............................................ Other miscellaneous products .......................................... 208.7 176.2 217.8 191.8 153.7 138.1 263.7 218.9 181.1 222.1 195.7 157.4 142.9 288.3 221.4 181.2 222.2 195.8 161.2 144.0 293.3 227.4 183.0 226.6 196.8 164.3 144.1 308.8 242.9 190.9 236.6 203.1 165.9 144.7 351.6 262.9 193.5 237.2 203.2 218.6 146.8 378.3 256.1 194.5 237.3 207.2 219.1 147.1 351.3 252.8 195.4 238.1 216.8 212.3 149.4 340.9 251.7 196.0 247.7 217.0 199.6 150.4 340.2 '258.0 '197.5 '248.1 217.0 '201.7 150.6 '360.2 261.3 200.3 247.6 221.7 202.0 151.2 369.4 259.9 201.0 247.6 223.8 202.3 151.4 363.3 264.4 201.6 247.6 223.9 201.3 151.0 380.5 265.0 202.0 248.9 224.0 201.2 152.0 381.0 1 Data for June 1980 have been revised to reflect the availability of late reports and corrections by respondents. All data are subject to revision 4 months after original publication. 2 Prices for natural gas are lagged 1 month. 3 Includes only domestic production. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 267.6 264.0 256.5 253.1 251.8 251.8 249.5 4 Most prices for refined petroleum products are lagged 1 month. 5 Some prices for industrial chemicals are lagged 1 month. r=revised. 107 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • Current Labor Statistics: Producer Prices 28. Producer Price Indexes, for spe<:ial commodity groupings [1967=100 unless otherwise specified] Commodity grouping Annual average 1979 Oct Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June1 July Aug. Sept Oct 234.4 226.4 227.2 218.3 113.9 112.6 168.9 245.3 226.9 228.9 225.9 116.4 113.3 171.2 247.0 230.0 231.8 226.9 117.0 114.6 171.6 249.5 232.2 234.2 228.5 117.2 115.3 172.9 255.7 231.2 233.3 234.7 118.9 119.2 175.3 260.9 235.8 238.6 238.0 119.3 119.4 177.4 262.9 234.8 236.9 238.9 121.3 120.3 182.1 264.8 231.9 234.1 240.5 122.2 121.1 182.4 265.9 237.3 239.0 240.6 122.9 121.5 182.8 '267.5 237.7 239.9 '242.0 '123.7 122.2 '187.1 270.3 245.4 247.1 243.3 125.4 123.1 188.5 273.0 253.9 255.5 244.8 125.8 125.5 189.4 273.9 254.2 254.8 245.4 126.9 126.1 189.7 277.3 258.3 261.2 248.8 127.9 126.4 189.9 1979 1980 All commodities — less farm products All foods Processed foods Industrial commodities less fuels Selected textile mill products (Dec. 1975 = 100) Hosiery ...................... Underwear and nightwear.......... Chemicals and allied products, including synthetic rubber and manmade fibers and yams . . . . Pharmaceutical preparations .. Lumber and wood products, excluding millwork and other wood products ........ Special metals and metal products . Fabricated metal products . . . Copper and copper products............ Machinery and motive products . . . . 212.4 152.0 224.3 155.6 226.3 155.4 228.7 156.9 236.3 159.2 239.2 160.3 243.2 161.7 250.0 165.6 252.8 165.9 '253.8 '167.6 253.8 167.8 254.7 168.2 253.8 168.8 255.3 170.8 325.0 234.6 236.8 299.3 207.0 337.3 243.4 244.0 212.2 213.4 323.3 244.5 244.6 213.8 214.3 310.8 246.3 245.3 217.1 215.9 308.6 253.7 247.2 227.7 219.7 313.9 256.0 2484 260.7 220.9 312.2 255.1 252.0 240.9 222.5 284.7 255.8 255.9 222.0 226.7 282.0 254.0 256.8 212.2 227.1 293.5 '254.4 '258.6 '208.5 '228.3 306.4 254.9 260.0 211.7 230.2 314.3 257.5 261.3 209.0 232.5 306.7 257.0 262.7 214.1 231.7 301.4 264.6 264.2 216.9 238.1 Machinery and equipment, except electrical Agricultural machinery, including tractors Metalworking machinery ........ Numerically controlled machine tools (Dec. 1971 = 100) Total tractors........................ Agricultural machinery and equipment less parts Farm and garden tractors less parts . . . Agricultural machinery excluding tractors less parts Industrial valves ................ Industrial fittings .................... Abrasive grinding wheels............ Construction materials ............ 234.2 237.4 259.1 199.8 251.6 232.7 236.1 238.7 256.0 261.7 226.2 251.4 240.8 246.3 269.5 208.5 261.2 241.0 247.6 245.4 261.8 272.6 239.0 258.5 242.5 250.8 272.7 2088 262.5 244.9 250.5 251.3 263.1 276.8 239.0 256.7 244.8 251.5 276.0 211.2 266.2 245.8 251.1 252.0 266.1 276.8 239.0 255.4 249.1 256.1 281.9 213.1 273.0 250.0 256.0 256.4 271.0 276.8 239.0 259.3 251.1 257.2 284.4 215.4 275.1 251.5 257.5 257.3 273.5 280.4 244.0 262.6 253.5 260.0 287.5 216.7 276.6 254.1 261.5 258.9 280.0 282.8 244.0 265.1 258.2 261.9 293.6 223.8 280.8 256.2 263.7 260.7 287.8 289.9 261.4 262.3 259.6 263.9 296.8 226.9 282.9 258.0 264.7 263.6, 288.4 291.5 261.3 261.8 '261.2 '264.7 '299.7 '228.5 '284.0 '258.7 '264.8 '265.0 '290.1 295.9 261.3 '264.2 263.2 264.1 303.6 228.7 286.1 258.9 264.9 263.7 289.5 295.9 261.3 266.5 264.1 266.4 304.7 229.3 289.3 260.8 269.3 264.3 289.6 295.9 261.3 268.9 266.7 270.8 306.5 230.0 294.0 264.6 276.3 266.6 290.1 295.9 261.3 268.8 269.4 271.1 309.4 231.7 296.4 264.9 276.3 267.0 291.8 298.4 268.4 2694 1 Data for June 1980 have been revised to reflect the availability of late reports and corrections by respondents. All data are subject to revision 4 months after original publication. 29. Producer Price Indexes, by durab ility of product [1967 = 100] Annual Commodity grouping 1979 1980 1979" Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June1 July Aug. Sept. Oct. Total durable goods ............ Total nondurable goods.......... 226.9 241.7 234.6 253.7 235.3 256.2 237.0 259.3 243.8 263.2 247.1 270.2 247.0 273.4 247.7 274.4 247.1 277.6 '248.7 '278.8 250.3 285.3 252.1 289.9 252.9 291.1 257.2 292.7 Total manufactures...................... Durable.......................... Nondurable ........................ 228.8 226.1 231.1 239.0 234.0 244.0 240.6 234.6 246.6 242.6 236.2 249.0 248.4 242.9 253.9 253.2 245.7 260.8 255.2 245.6 265.2 257.0 246.7 267.9 258.3 246.7 270.7 '259.8 '248.5 '271.7 262.5 250.1 275.6 265.0 251.7 279.3 265.4 252.3 279.4 268.8 256.5 281.8 Total raw or slightly processed goods Durable........................ Nondurable.......................... 270.4 262.1 2701 278.7 259.2 279.2 281.0 265.8 281.2 285.9 267.8 286.3 287.6 282.8 286.9 295.9 305.3 294.2 295.4 303.4 293.8 290.4 286.0 289.8 292.7 262.2 294.0 '293.8 249.9 '296.1 307.5 253.9 310.4 314.8 263.1 317.6 319.5 273.1 321.9 319.5 282.7 321.1 July Aug. Sept. 1Data for June 1980 have been revised to reflect the availability of late reports and corrections by respondents. All data are subject to revision 4 months after original publication. 30. Producer Price Indexes for the output of selected SIC industries [1967=100 unless otherwise specified] 1972 SIC code Industry description Annual average 1979 Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. 134.8 234.4 451.3 459.8 217.6 125.8 140.2 275.0 455.1 522.1 224.0 126.7 140.2 252.1 455.5 533.9 224.7 124.2 142.0 300.0 458.9 551.3 225.6 129.3 142.0 308.3 459.2 582.7 238.8 136.6 147.3 335.4 459.6 598.0 243.2 136.6 247.4 219.6 187.1 228.8 238.9 211.9 163.1 240.1 241.5 213.4 188.3 241.7 243.9 220.0 188.5 243.1 240.8 211.9 186.1 241.8 240.1 207.8 178.2 242.8 1979 Apr. May 152.6 330.0 461.7 600.6 243.9 136.6 152.6 337.5 464.6 612.5 248.6 136.6 152.6 337.5 466.0 619.6 249.3 136.6 152.6 '322.9 '466.0 '631.5 '250.0 136.6 155.8 331.2 467.2 637.8 249.6 136.6 155.8 329.1 468.2 650.0 250.6 136.6 155.8 335.4 471.2 666.4 251.9 136.6 155.8 338.7 470.0 680.6 261.4 137.2 238.9 209.4 173.5 243.4 225.6 197.9 164.5 252.7 227.2 193.3 164.7 253.7 '230.0 '190.9 164.2 255.7 249.1 213.4 214.2 256.3 265.2 232.8 212.1 268.6 257.1 239.3 226.0 265.8 257.9 246.4 211.3 273.2 MINING 1011 1092 1211 1311 1442 1455 Iron ores (12/75 = 100)........ Mercury ores (12/75 = 100)........ Bituminous coal and lignite .................. Crude petroleum and natural gas . . . . Construction sand and gravel . . . . Kaolin and ball clay (6/76 = 100) 2011 2013 2016 2021 Meat packing plants ................ Sausages and other prepared meats . . . Poultry dressing plants.......... Creamery butter.............................. MANUFACTURING See footnote at end of table. 108 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis , 30. Continued — Producer Price Indexes for the output of selected SIC industries [1967 = 100 unless otherwise specified] 1980 Annual average 1979 Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June1 July Aug. Sept. Oct 196.8 177.5 212.9 158.2 184.2 227.3 123.6 224.3 204.7 242.9 193.6 179.9 212.2 156.2 184.4 231.8 124.3 223.3 210.6 262.3 193.9 180.1 212.2 157.3 184.1 218.1 125.0 248.4 223.2 262.3 195.4 180.9 213.4 157.6 181.7 217.5 122.0 260.5 224.6 262.3 192.9 181.5 213.6 159.0 183.6 233.0 122.6 374.9 293.2 262.3 195.7 185.0 214.7 156.4 181.6 258.0 121.5 276.0 305.7 281.9 201.9 191.3 216.3 157.5 175.0 260.4 116.5 320.2 296.6 282.0 201.9 192.1 217.3 156.4 182.3 254.5 116.9 456.1 339.9 282.0 r 202.5 195.2 r 219.9 156.3 r 180.8 236.0 r 116.2 402.4 '348.0 282.0 205.1 195.2 222.6 157.7 189.6 225.3 122.6 381.8 343.5 282.4 208.6 195.5 223.5 159.6 193.1 219.9 127.0 484.0 366.3 282.4 209.8 196.1 225.4 159.9 Beet sugar .................................................................. Chewing gum .............................................................. 189.2 172.5 208.6 174.2 173.1 204.0 120.4 210.3 202.6 245.8 215.5 199.5 228.5 162.6 201.5 237.2 129.5 588.2 429.4 322.4 2074 2075 2077 2083 2085 2091 2092 2095 2098 2111 Animal and marine fats and oils .................................... M a lt............................................................................ Distilled liquor, except brandy (12/75 = 100) ................ Canned and cured seafoods (12/73 = 100) .................. Fresh or frozen packaged fish ...................................... Roasted coffee (12/72 = 100)...................................... Macaroni and spaghetti ................................................ Cigarettes.................................................................... 207.4 245.0 338.4 203.7 113.7 146.4 381.6 254.5 199.7 225.0 214.9 244.7 333.7 214.9 117.1 154.3 400.1 280.0 210.4 229.2 204.7 242.4 315.2 228.2 118.1 155.6 391.4 287.5 221.5 229.2 205.6 241.9 300.7 228.2 118.1 159.8 388.4 287.5 227.7 234.3 182.4 235.1 298.1 244.1 118.6 160.9 389.7 281.3 227.7 245.8 184.4 230.4 292.6 244.1 118.7 164.0 385.5 273.9 227.7 245.9 170.4 222.3 297.4 244.1 118.7 165.7 391.6 274.0 227.7 2460 154.7 211.9 274.0 244.1 118.7 170.2 370.5 273.9 230.5 246.3 150.4 212.9 262.9 244.1 118.9 173.1 360.0 273.9 230.5 257.3 155.1 '208.6 '238.9 244.1 '120.5 175.3 '361.2 283.1 230.5 '257.4 190.1 224.6 274.4 244.1 118.9 175.9 365.2 274.5 230.5 257.2 213.5 242.9 297.1 244.1 127.7 177.5 365.7 274.7 230.5 257.2 232.9 274.9 307.0 244.1 127.7 355.5 263.9 239.3 257.2 218.7 278.5 311.0 267.4 127.9 180.0 354.3 257.0 243.6 257.6 2121 2131 2211 2221 2251 2254 2257 2261 2262 Cigars ........................................................................ Chewing and smoking tobacco...................................... Weaving mills, cotton (12/72 = 100) ............................ Weaving mills, synthetic (12/77 = 100) ........................ Women’s hosiery, except socks (12/75 = 100).............. Knit underwear mills .................................................... Circular knit fabric mills (6/76 = 100)............................ Finishing plants, cotton (6/76 = 100) ............................ Finishing plants, synthetics, silk (6/76 = 100) ................ 147.3 248.4 195.3 115.0 97.5 173.3 95.2 121.8 107.2 149.8 260.4 201.1 116.8 98.2 174.3 96.9 126.1 109.3 150.4 260.8 201.6 117.3 100.3 174.6 98.4 126.3 109.7 150.4 260.8 201.9 117.2 100.2 178.3 98.6 126.6 109.8 151.2 260.9 204.4 118.1 103.3 182.5 99.3 128.7 110.3 154.2 265.1 206.9 118.3 103.3 184.1 100.4 129.6 109.4 154.4 267.3 209.5 122.7 104.3 186.5 103.4 131.9 110.4 155.3 279.2 211.3 123.0 105.0 186.8 104.0 132.4 110.7 155.3 278.6 212.9 122.4 105.4 187.1 104.4 134.5 111.8 '159.8 '278.6 '212.9 '121.2 105.4 '190.4 '105.0 '134.6 '112.1 157.2 274.7 217.4 122.3 105.4 192.5 105.1 137.2 173.7 157.2 274.9 218.7 124.2 108.8 192.8 105.4 137.2 114.1 157.2 274.9 221.4 126.1 108.8 194.0 105.5 136.8 115.1 161.0 290.1 223.0 129.9 108.9 194.1 106.4 139.0 117.3 2272 2281 2282 2284 2298 2311 2321 2322 2323 2327 Tufted carpets and rugs................................................ Yam mills, except wool (12/71 = 100) .......................... Throwing and winding mills (6/76 = 100) ...................... Thread mills (6/76 = 100)............................................ Cordage and twine (12/77 = 100)................................ Men’s and boys’ suits and coats.................................... Men's and boys’ shirts and nightwear ............................ Men's and boys’ underwear.......................................... Men’s and boys’ neckwear (12/75 = 100) .................... Men's and boys' separate trousers................................ 128.0 176.7 107.4 123.7 107.0 204.2 194.0 188.9 106.5 161.5 129.8 181.2 110.4 128.4 114.9 206.6 196.1 190.0 110.9 162.9 130.1 183.0 109.6 128.4 114.9 206.8 196.6 190.0 110.9 163.4 130.1 183.7 109.2 128.6 114.9 206.7 196.3 194.0 110.9 163.5 134.7 188.0 110.1 128.7 115.0 209.0 197.7 199.8 112.4 164.2 134.5 197.8 110.6 129.2 117.2 208.1 196.2 202.0 112.4 174.2 137.0 199.5 112.0 130.0 118.5 208.3 199.3 204.0 112.4 174.3 137.3 203.7 114.8 134.6 123.6 209.7 204.0 204.2 112.4 174.9 137.1 204.5 118.1 143.0 123.8 210.9 203.7 204.3 112.4 174.9 '137.4 202.8 '115.8 '142.9 125.0 '211.6 '205.1 208.5 '112.4 175.1 137.6 203.0 113.4 143.0 125.0 214.9 205.4 211.1 106.3 175.3 137.9 204.3 114.2 143.1 125.0 214.9 205.7 211.1 112.4 1/5.3 138.3 205.7 115.3 143.1 125.0 214.9 206.7 212.8 112.4 175.3 139.0 207.8 115.8 143.8 127.1 215.9 206.9 212.8 112.4 175.3 2328 2331 2335 2341 2342 2361 2381 2394 2396 2421 Men's and boys’ work clothing ...................................... Women’s and misses’ blouses and waists (6/78 = 100) . Women’s and misses’ dresses (12/77 - 100)................ Women's and children’s underwear (12/72 - 100) ........ Brassieres and allied garments (12/75 = 100) .............. Children's dresses and blouses (12/77 = 100).............. Fabric dress and work gloves........................................ Canvas and related products (12/77 = 100).................. Automotive and apparel trimmings (12/77 - 100).......... Sawmills and planing mills (12/71 - 100)...................... 208.6 102.0 107.0 144.3 116.9 104.8 241.4 109.3 111.3 251.0 213.4 103.0 108.7 146.7 117.8 105.7 245.4 112.3 114.3 262.2 219.1 105.9 108.8 147.4 117.8 105.7 246.9 112.1 114.3 250.2 219.6 106.8 108.8 147.7 118.8 105.6 246.9 120.1 114.3 237.9 225.1 107.1 112.9 149.4 119.7 105.3 257.7 122.1 114.3 234.8 233.6 106.6 113.8 150.0 122.9 105.3 261.7 122.8 114.3 239.5 235.4 106.7 113.8 153.1 124.9 105.5 265.0 123.4 122.3 239.1 241.2 107.6 113.9 153.1 125.4 106.3 267.5 123.4 122.3 215.8 241.8 107.6 113.9 153.2 125.4 105.6 271.1 123.4 122.3 209.4 '242.6 107.8 114.0 '155.0 '126.6 ' 108.0 271.1 123.4 122.3 218.1 244.8 111.4 114.0 155.4 128.2 112.4 271.1 123.4 122.3 228.8 244.1 112.6 115.4 156.8 129.4 112.4 271.1 123.4 122.3 233.9 243.8 112.6 115.4 155.7 129.4 111.9 271.1 124.5 122.3 228.0 243.9 112.8 116.3 156.0 129.4 112.3 271.1 125.6 122.3 222.1 2436 2439 2448 2451 2492 2511 2512 2515 2521 2611 Softwood veneer and plywood (12/75 = 100)................ Structural wood members, n.e.c. (12/75 - 100) ............ Wood pallets and skids (12/75 = 100).......................... Mobile homes (12/74 = 100)........................................ Particleboard (12/75 = 100) ........................................ Wood household furniture (12/71 =100) ...................... Upholstered household furniture (12/71 - 100).............. Mattresses and bedsprings............................................ 152.3 151.2 166.5 138.2 139.1 165.5 150.0 165.7 215.3 200.6 153.1 158.2 167.9 143.0 139.5 169.3 151.8 168.9 217.6 213.5 142.9 158.2 171.0 144.0 136.8 172.3 153.8 172.3 217.6 213.9 138.9 158.2 170.5 144.1 134.5 174.5 155.7 172.3 221.9 213.9 138.5 158.2 169.8 144.8 136.9 177.5 155.9 169.9 226.2 225.2 143.7 158.2 167.0 146.9 150.7 178.2 158.7 170.5 233.8 225.1 139.8 158.3 166.3 147.2 158.9 178.9 158.7 170.5 233.8 225.5 121.9 158.2 164.6 149.5 161.9 180.0 160.9 172.8 233.9 243.8 130.3 152.1 162.8 150.5 167.3 182.2 161.1 176.0 233.9 243.9 140.5 152.1 159.7 '150.7 171.7 '183.5 '162.5 '176.0 '234.0 '243.9 148.7 152.1 157.1 151.2 168.7 183.8 163.3 180.7 236.1 246.6 157.2 152.2 156.0 151.4 167.4 185.7 163.4 186.3 236.1 246.6 150.3 155.5 154.9 151.1 162.5 186.0 163.4 186.3 236.2 246.6 149.2 158.9 154.6 152.1 158.6 187.0 164.9 186.3 240.3 248.3 2621 2631 2647 2654 2655 2812 2821 2822 2824 2873 Paper mills, except building (12/74 = 100).................... Paperboard mills (12/74 = 100) .................................. Sanitary paper products................................................ Sanitary food containers .............................................. Fiber cans, drums, and similar products (12/75 = 100) .. Alkalies and chlorine (12/73 - 100).............................. Plastics materials and resins (6/76 = 100).................... 130.2 119.8 277.7 188.7 134.8 208.8 121.2 210.3 117.6 103.4 135.1 125.4 286.3 195.8 138.5 214.1 132.9 225.7 123.6 108.0 136.5 126.3 288.4 198.2 138.5 216.7 133.8 228.0 123.2 111.7 136.8 127.6 290.9 199.9 142.3 217.3 134.1 230.4 122.6 113.5 139.0 131.3 295.8 202.6 143.2 220.4 138.5 240.9 124.1 114.3 139.8 132.3 303.9 204.8 143.2 226.5 139.7 244.2 124.7 119.8 142.5 134.6 311.7 208.9 143.3 233.7 140.8 244.7 126.9 122.1 145.0 137.9 316.7 212.9 146.6 241.2 146.4 256.8 128.5 123.6 145.8 139.5 319.3 215.5 148.7 246.5 147.3 259.3 131.7 124.5 '146.2 '141.2 '321.2 '217.2 150.6 ' 250.0 '146.9 '259.6 '132.8 123.4 146.7 140.4 328.4 219.4 155.2 250.4 146.3 258.9 133.6 122.6 146.9 140.9 332.0 221.5 155.2 261.9 144.6 259.4 135.1 123.7 146.9 141.6 332.1 223.4 155.2 261.8 141.9 259.1 136.7 123.7 148.5 142.5 333.6 223.4 155.5 262.8 141.8 259.9 138.6 130.3 2874 2875 2892 2911 2951 2952 3011 Phosphatic fertilizers .................................................... 193.8 203.8 239.4 163.6 134.3 162.5 176.4 213.2 218.3 250.8 196.4 145.6 147.6 186.9 221.6 227.0 251.7 201.0 145.6 152.2 191.2 223.4 227.1 252.5 204.8 145.7 151.9 191.4 229.2 233.2 253.6 213.9 150.0 156.1 193.0 233.2 239.8 255.2 228.4 161.5 162.7 198.7 235.0 242.5 260.2 242.3 167.9 169.9 198.8 237.2 245.2 271.4 250.5 172.7 178.2 199.1 236.3 248.5 272.8 253.0 172.7 174.8 200.1 '235.7 '249.0 '273.7 '253.3 '172.6 175.0 '202.2 234.9 248.3 273.6 255.8 173.7 180.1 203.3 240.2 247.5 273.3 257.0 175.0 179.0 203.3 240.5 249.7 273.2 256.3 175.9 177.6 205.7 239.2 249.3 273.4 254.5 176.5 178.5 209.5 1972 SIC code 2022 2024 2033 2034 2041 2044 2048 2061 2063 2067 Industry description MANUFACTURING Continued Cheese natural and processed (12/72 = 100) .............. Ice cream and frozen desserts (12/72 = 100) .............. Canned fruits and vegetables........................................ Dehydrated food products (12/73 = 100)...................... Flour mills (12/71 - 100) ............................................ Rice milling.................................................................. Prepared foods, n.e.c. (12/75 = 100)............................ Pulp mills (12/73 - 100).............................................. Nitrogenous fertilizers (12/75 = 100) ............................ Petroleum refining (6/76 = 100) .................................. Paving mixtures and blocks (12/75 = 100).................... Asphalt felts and coatings (12/75) - 100) .................... Tires and inner tubes (12/73 = 100) ............................ https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 1979 225.9 130.0 458.9 384.7 3024 109 M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • Current Labor Statistics: Producer Prices 30. C o n tin u e d — P ro d u c e r P ric e In d e x e s fo r th e o u tp u t o f s e le c te d S IC in d u stries [1967 = 100 unless otherwise specified] 1972 SIC code 3021 3031 3079 3111 Industry description Annua averag 1979 1979 1980 Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. Aug. Sept. Oct. 173.7 r 173.8 186.5 r 186.5 120.5 r 122.2 137.9 134.6 145.4 r 145.4 158.5 '158.5 213.8 213.8 140.8 140.9 160.8 158.9 294.2 '294.2 181.9 184.4 121.9 137.7 152.5 158.6 214.3 140.9 159.5 294.5 182.1 183.7 123.1 147.9 152.5 159.5 214.3 140.9 162.6 294.5 182.1 183.9 123.6 141.0 152.5 161.6 215.2 140.9 162.8 294.5 182.7 182.0 123.7 129.1 154.9 161.7 217.1 140.9 163.8 304.9 312.6 2764 130.4 273.9 203.1 227.6 313.4 295.1 151.4 259.3 313.8 278.5 117.6 275.6 204.1 236.1 313.4 293.9 151.5 259.4 '313.8 278.5 117.6 '275.9 '204.4 235.8 318.6 '294.7 '152.7 259.4 310.5 278.5 117.6 280.7 205.1 237.2 318.2 294.3 152.6 259.4 310.3 277.6 117.6 281.1 205.4 240.4 318.2 294.3 152.6 259.5 309.4 278.5 117.6 281.3 205.2 241.1 318.7 296.1 153.2 260.4 309.0 282.6 120.1 281.6 205.3 241.5 327.4 297.6 155.4 259.3 275.5 155.6 268.1 203.9 154.2 304.1 118.0 277.2 283.2 277.2 278.8 157.1 264.6 212.0 157.4 312.0 118.7 285.9 286.8 279.8 281.5 157.3 257.0 211.8 159.7 313.3 118.6 288.1 286.9 280.5 282.5 '157.7 257.5 213.5 161.2 '313.5 118.7 288.2 '290.4 '282.5 282.5 159.6 253.5 215.2 162.8 308.5 117.0 282.2 292.5 280.4 282.6 159.9 252.3 215.7 164.9 308.4 117.1 282.3 292.6 280.6 283.5 158.8 252.2 217.2 164.9 308.5 117.2 282.3 292.6 280.7 282.8 160.9 250.0 218.8 167.9 314.8 117.3 288.1 294.3 288.2 272.4 267.0 253.1 153.5 158.9 141.0 277.3 174.6 242.1 132.4 279.6 267.8 238.6 155.5 160.9 141.1 279.9 176.4 243.1 132.7 274.3 276.0 227.4 157.8 167.7 143.8 295.1 178.0 245.5 133.5 268.2 268.6 287.0 '290.1 222.8 '220.2 157.6 '157.8 167.7 167.7 145.2 '146.7 295.2 294.9 181.5 '181.9 249.7 249.9 133.8 '137.8 255.8 293.3 223.3 158.2 168.3 147.2 295.6 183.3 250.9 138.1 255.8 310.7 224.1 157.6 168.3 147.6 295.9 185.2 251.4 140.1 260.9 313.7 220.2 157.6 168.1 147.6 296.1 185.6 251.3 140.4 269.9 327.6 222.2 161.4 173.1 150.5 297.9 186.6 251.5 140.5 143.2 226.1 216.9 301.7 260.5 134.6 245.8 314.2 225.6 266.1 143.2 226.6 219.6 301.8 261.8 135.7 247.1 316.2 226.1 268.1 142.6 228.6 223.1 303.5 266.1 136.3 247.8 318.9 229.1 269.4 141.7 229.2 229.4 313.0 270.6 138.6 256.0 329.8 232.6 274.3 141.4 229.2 229.9 313.1 271.6 139.5 257.3 333.1 234.1 275.1 '144.6 '230.3 '231.8 313.8 '271.7 '140.3 '258.2 337.4 ' 242.8 '279.2 149.8 230.1 231.8 317.2 275.1 141.5 259.4 342.6 244.2 284.9 152.1 230.6 232.0 317.2 276.3 142.5 262.0 343.8 243.8 285.9 150.1 231.7 232.3 319.9 281.8 143.5 263.4 344.7 246.4 286.2 150.6 232.8 234.7 325.0 283.8 145.1 265.2 350.8 248.3 287.1 124.4 200.6 192.9 201.0 145.3 171.6 200.3 126.3 116.3 153.5 126.3 202.6 201.2 204.2 147.5 172.9 201.3 128.7 117.0 154.0 126.6 205.2 201.6 205.8 147.8 176.6 203.3 129.3 118.5 156.6 127.4 207.0 205.1 206.6 148.6 177.5 206.0 129.4 118.6 158.3 129.0 213.4 212.3 207.5 152.6 180.5 207.0 129.7 119.3 160.3 131.2 213.6 212.1 208.2 153.0 181.5 209.2 119.4 161.7 '131.1 217.0 '213.7 208.6 '153.5 '182.9 211.0 '134.7 '122.0 162.3 133.5 222.1 216.3 208.8 158.3 186.2 212.3 134.7 121.7 160.1 134.4 222.1 216.4 217.0 158.9 189.5 212.3 134.1 121.7 161.5 134.7 222.2 216.5 217.0 159.9 190.9 211.4 134.6 121.9 165.5 136.3 223.7 217.4 217.1 164.7 194.0 213.8 134.7 122.8 166.1 144.7 122.6 238.7 211.9 131.6 129.8 227.4 85.6 135.8 126.7 145.8 122.6 240.8 215.0 131.9 130.5 227.7 864 138.0 127.3 146.1 122.6 248.5 212.9 133.4 133.0 229.1 86.8 147.7 127.4 149.7 129.2 252.4 215.2 134.3 133.2 229.4 88,5 149.1 128.8 151.3 129.2 251.8 215.3 136.2 134.6 229.7 89.3 151.3 131.8 148.6 129.2 252.3 217.4 138.0 139.4 254.0 90.4 157.0 131.9 149.3 129.2 251.3 218.2 138.5 140.2 254.7 91.2 160.7 133.0 ' 155.8 '129.2 '258.1 '220.4 '139.2 '140.7 '255.2 '92.0 '160.5 135.2 151.9 129.4 266.4 222.3 139.6 140.5 255.1 91.6 164.3 135.1 151.9 129.4 268.0 222.8 140.9 140.8 255.2 91.3 164.5 136.1 152.1 129.4 267.8 223.0 141.9 143.3 255.7 91.7 174.0 136.9 152.2 129.7 268.9 223.8 142.3 143.4 264.6 91.7 170.0 137.7 140.7 173.1 130.1 112.9 186.3 125.2 124.8 134.1 142.1 174.1 130.4 113.0 186.6 125.2 124.8 134.1 145.1 174.2 132.7 122.7 198.7 126.2 128.3 138.6 146.4 176.5 131.6 125.4 203.8 128.2 128.3 138.7 146.7 176.6 131.8 125.6 204.0 128.3 128.3 138.7 146.5 176.8 135.5 127.7 205.0 131.5 128.4 143.2 146.8 176.4 134.5 128.4 205.3 133.3 130.3 143.3 148.7 176.4 134.6 128.4 205.9 136.4 132.2 143.3 149.0 176.4 136.8 126.7 204.4 136.4 132.2 146.1 149.2 176.7 138.1 126.7 204.5 136.4 132.2 146.6 149.7 176.8 131.1 126.7 204.5 136.4 132.9 146.6 150.0 176.9 144.0 126.6 204.7 135.0 132.9 146.6 3143 3144 3171 3211 3221 170.0 109.9 167.5 135.8 152.7 194.5 128.9 151.7 261.1 173.5 178.8 114.3 161.9 135.8 160.4 202.3 131.8 152.6 265.2 173.5 179.2 114.6 150.8 135.9 160.3 204.0 131.8 153.3 265.2 173.5 179.5 115.6 153.5 135.9 160.3 204.0 131.8 153.9 274.2 173.5 179.7 116.6 164.3 143.5 160.3 205.6 131.9 157.6 274.3 173.6 180.0 117.0 160.8 145.4 157.9 206.3 131.9 157.6 274.3 173.6 184.9 119.1 146.7 145.4 158.5 213.5 132.1 157.9 274.3 173.7 185.9 120.3 140.8 145.4 158.5 213.8 132.1 160.8 294.2 3241 3251 3253 3255 3259 3261 3262 3263 3269 3271 Cement, hydraulic............ Brick and structural clay tile . Ceramic wall and floor tile (12/75 = 100) Clay refractories................ Structural clay products, n.e.c. Vitreous plumbing fixtures . . . . Vitreous china food utensils Fine earthenware food utensils . Pottery products, n.e.c. (12/75 = 100) Concrete block and brick . . . . 283.1 258.6 117.2 242.1 189.2 207.4 295.2 244.9 132.5 233.0 285.4 261.3 120.2 251.0 192.8 214.5 298.0 246.0 133.3 240.0 285.5 261.3 120.2 252.9 192.3 215.7 305.4 248.4 135.5 240.0 286.2 262.7 130.3 254.0 196.5 217.3 308.2 294.3 150.1 240.2 305.7 268.3 130.4 255.1 196.3 219.2 308.2 294.3 150.1 249.5 305.9 270.4 130.4 259.4 198.1 224.6 308.2 294.3 150.1 250.6 306.3 271.9 130.4 263.7 196.4 226.7 308.2 294.3 150.1 252.3 3273 3274 3275 3291 3297 3312 3313 3316 3317 3321 Ready-mixed concrete.............. Lime (12/75 = 100) . . . . Gypsum products ............ Abrasive products (12/71 = 100) Nonclay refractories (12/74 = 100) Blast furnaces and steel mills . . . Electrometallurgical products (12/75 = 100) Cold finishing of steel shapes Steel pipes and tubes............ Gray iron foundries (12/68 = 100) 248.2 141.0 252.8 187.8 145.6 288.8 111.9 265.5 268.6 255.8 254.0 144.6 255.9 195.1 150.1 296.4 116.2 271.7 272.7 267.1 254.6 144.3 256.8 195.3 152.3 297.1 117.5 273.4 273.1 269.6 257.0 144.6 255.6 196.5 152.3 297.7 117.6 273.9 273.2 269.7 270.8 149.5 255.9 199.4 152.6 302.4 117.8 274.1 280.5 273.7 272.6 153.5 262.8 203.3 153.3 302.9 117.8 277.1 281.0 276.9 3333 3334 3351 3353 3354 3355 3411 3425 3431 3465 Primary zin c.......... Primary aluminum................ Copper rolling and drawing .. Aluminum sheet plate and foil (12/75 = 100) Aluminum extruded products (12/75 = 100) Aluminum rolling, drawing, n.e.c. (12/75 = 100) Metal cans.......... Fland saws and saw blades (12/72 = 100) Metal sanitary ware........ Automotive stampings (12/75 = 100) 265.7 243.1 213.2 148.9 149.3 132.4 264.1 163.3 224.8 128.5 265.2 256.0 226.3 150.7 155.2 136.9 273.8 167.1 230.1 132.4 257.8 263.2 222.6 151.3 157.4 139.9 274.6 169.5 231.7 132.4 265.7 266.6 225.0 151.7 158.0 140.5 274.7 169.8 232.9 132.4 266.1 267.0 231.0 153.2 158.8 140.7 276.6 173.1 237.8 132.4 3482 3493 3494 3498 3519 3531 3532 3533 3534 3542 Small arms ammunition (12/75 = 100) Steel springs, except wire ............ Valves and pipe fittings (12/71 = 100) Fabricated pipe and fittings .......... Internal combustion engines, n.e.c. Construction machinery (12/76 = 100) Mining machinery (12/72 = 100) Oilfield machinery and equipment., Elevators and moving stairways Machine tools, metal forming types (12/71 = 100) 132.2 219.8 204.8 289.2 243.3 125.1 229.4 291.6 215.9 242.8 133.2 223.7 210.4 297.3 254.2 128.9 233.1 300.5 219.4 249.8 133.6 224.1 212.5 2974 254.9 129.4 2354 302.8 220.6 253.7 143.2 225.6 214.3 297.4 254.9 130.9 236.4 309.1 220.9 256.7 3546 3552 3553 3576 3592 3612 3623 3631 3632 3633 Power driven hand tools (12/76 = 100) Textile machinery (12/69 = 100) Woodworking machinery (12/72 = 100) Scales and balances, excluding laboratory Carburetors, pistons, rings, valves (6/76 = 100) Transformers ............ Welding apparatus, electric (12/72 = 100) Household cooking equipment (12/75 = 100) Household refrigerators, freezers (6/76 = 100) Household laundry equipment (12/73 = 100) 119.3 194.7 185.4 194.2 139.6 168.1 192.2 122.2 113.6 148.8 122.0 199.3 192.6 1957 142.8 171.2 196.9 124.4 115.1 150.9 122.8 200.6 192.7 199.5 145.1 170.4 198.6 125.9 115.7 152.3 3635 3636 3641 3644 3646 3648 3671 3674 3675 3676 Household vacuum cleaners .. Sewing machines (12/75 = 100) Electric lamps............ Noncurrent-carrying wiring devices (12/72 = 100) Commercial lighting fixtures (12/75 = 100) Lighting equipment, n.e.c. (12/75 = 100) Electron tubes receiving type .. Semiconductors and related devices Electronic capacitors (12/75 = 100) Electronic resistors (12/75 = 100) 141.7 121.4 235.2 204.6 126.5 126.0 220.3 84.8 125.2 124.4 144.5 122.6 244.8 210.5 131.4 129.6 227.2 85,1 133.9 126.6 3678 3692 3711 3942 3944 3955 3995 3996 Electronic connectors (12/75 = 100) Primary batteries, dry and wet Motor vehicles and car bodies (12/75 = 100) Dolls (12/75 = 100) .. Games, toys, and children’s vehicles , Carbon paper and inked ribbons (12/75 = 100) Burial caskets (6/76 = 100) Hard sudace floor coverings (12/75 = 100) 131.7 170.1 125.1 110.8 182.7 118.6 122.5 126.3 138.9 173.1 130.2 112.9 186.2 123.1 123.1 131.0 3142 1Data for June 1980 have been revised to reflect the availability of late reports and correctkms by respondents. All data are subject to revision 4 months after original publication Digitized for 110 FRASER https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis June July Rubber and plastic footwear (12/71 = 100) Reclaimed rubber (12/73 = 100) Miscellaneous plastic products (6/78 = 100) Leather tanning and finishing (12/77 = 100) H o u s e slippers (12/75 = 100) ,. Men's footwear, except athletic (12/75 = 100) Women’s footwear, except athletic Women’s handbags and purses (12/75 = 100) Flat glass (12/71 = 10 0 ) .. Glass containers.......... 171.1 May r=revised 133.1 PRODUCTIVITY DATA are compiled by the Bureau of Labor Statistics from establishment data and from estimates of com pensation and output supplied by the U.S. Department of Commerce and the Federal Reserve Board. P r o d u c t iv it y d a t a Definitions Output is the constant dollar gross domestic product produced in a given period. Indexes of output per hour of labor input, or labor pro ductivity, measure the value of goods and services produced per hour of labor. Compensation per hour includes wages and salaries of em ployees plus employers’ contributions for social insurance and private benefit plans. The data also include an estimate of wages, salaries, and supplementary payments for the self-employed, except for nonfinancial corporations, in which there are no self-employed. Real com pensation per hour is compensation per hour adjusted by the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers. Unit labor cost measures the labor compensation cost required to produce one unit of output and is derived by dividing compensation by output. Unit nonlabor payments include profits, depreciation, in terest, and indirect taxes per unit of output. They are computed by subtracting compensation of all persons from the current dollar gross domestic product and dividing by output. In these tables, Unit nonlabor costs contain all the components of unit nonlabor payments except unit profits. Unit profits include corporate profits and invento ry valuation adjustments per unit of output. The implicit price deflator is derived by dividing the current dollar estimate of gross product by the constant dollar estimate, making the deflator, in effect, a price index for gross product of the sector reported. 31. The use of the term “man-hours” to identify the labor component of productivity and costs, in tables 31 through 34, has been discontin ued. Hours of all persons is now used to describe the labor input of payroll workers, self-employed persons, and unpaid family workers. Output per all-employee hour is now used to describe labor productiv ity in nonfinancial corporations where there are no self-employed. Notes on the data In the private business sector and the nonfarm business sector, the basis for the output measure employed in the computation of output per hour is Gross Domestic Product rather than Gross National Product. Computation of hours includes estimates of nonfarm and farm proprietor hours. Output data are supplied by the Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. Department of Commerce, and the Federal Reserve Board. Quarterly manufacturing output indexes are adjusted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics to annual estimates of output (gross product originating) from the Bureau of Economic Analysis. Compensation and hours data are from the Bureau of Economic Analysis and the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Beginning with the September 1976 issue of the Review, tables 31 — 34 were revised to reflect changeover to the new series— private busi ness sector and nonfarm business sector— which differ from the previously published total private economy and nonfarm sector in that output imputed for owner-occupied dwellings and the household and institutions sectors, as well as the statistical discrepancy, are omitted. For a detailed explanation, see J. R. Norsworthy and L. J. Fulco, “New sector definitions for productivity series,” Monthly Labor Review, October 1976, pages 40-42. Annual indexes of productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, 1950-79 Item Private business sector: Output per hour of all persons ...................... Compensation per hour ............................... Real compensation per hour......................... Unit labor cost............................................ Unit nonlabor payments ............................... Implicit price deflator ................................... Nonfarm business sector: Output per hour of all persons ...................... Compensation per hour ............................... Real compensation per hour......................... Unit labor cost............................................ Unit nonlabor payments ............................... Implicit price deflator ................................... Nonfinancial corporations: Output per hour of all employees .................. Compensation per hour ............................... Real compensation per hour......................... Unit labor cost............................................ Unit nonlabor payments ............................... Implicit price deflator ................................... Manufacturing: Output per hour of all persons ...................... Compensation per hour ............................... Real compensation per hour......................... Unit labor cost............................................ Unit nonlabor payments ............................... Implicit price deflator ................................... 1979 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 61.2 42.6 59.2 69.6 73.1 70.8 70.6 56.1 69.9 79.4 80.4 79.8 79.0 72.2 81.4 91.4 85.4 89.3 95.1 88.7 93.9 93.3 95.9 94.2 104.4 123.3 106.0 118.2 105.8 113.9 111.5 139.8 111.6 125.4 118.9 123.2 113.6 151.3 113.6 133.2 124.9 130.3 110.2 165.2 111.8 149.8 130.3 143.1 112.6 181.7 112.7 161.3 150.3 157.5 116.6 197.6 115.9 169.5 157.9 165.5 118.7 213.3 117.5 179.7 165.5 174.8 119.3 231.4 118.4 194.0 174.3 187.2 118.3 253.1 116.4 214.0 184.4 203.8 67.2 45.6 63.3 68.0 71.4 69.1 74.6 59.0 73.6 79.1 80.1 79.4 81.2 74.5 84.1 91.7 84.4 89.2 96.0 89.4 94.6 93.2 95.8 94.1 103.2 121.9 104.8 118.1 106.0 114.0 110.1 138.4 110.5 125.7 117.4 122.9 112.0 149.2 112.1 133.2 117.8 127.9 108.6 163.0 110.4 150.1 124.7 141.4 110.7 179.3 111.2 161.9 145.9 156.4 114.6 194.2 113.9 169.5 156.0 164.8 116.4 209.6 115.5 180.1 163.8 174.5 116.9 227.5 116.4 194.6 169.9 186.1 115.7 247.9 114.0 214.4 178.6 202.1 (’ ) (’ ) V) (’ ) ( 1) (’ ) <’ ) ( ') n (’ ) (’ ) 80.6 76.0 85.7 94.3 90.8 93.1 96.9 90.1 95.3 93.0 100.1 95.5 103.7 121.8 104.7 117.4 103.5 112.5 110.6 136.7 109.1 123.7 114.8 120.5 112.9 147.6 110.9 130.7 116.8 125.8 108.7 161.7 109.5 148.8 124.8 140.2 112.2 177.9 110.4 158.6 148.1 154.9 115.8 192.7 113.0 166.4 156.8 163.0 117.0 208.0 114.6 177.7 164.4 173.0 118.0 225.0 115.2 190.6 170.6 183.5 117.5 244.9 112.7 208.4 179.5 198.1 65.8 45.6 63.3 69.4 82.3 73.3 75.0 61.2 76.3 81.6 88.6 83.8 79.8 78.0 88.0 97.7 92.3 96.1 98.4 91.1 96.4 92.6 103.3 95.9 105.0 122.3 105.1 116.5 96.2 110.3 115.7 136.6 109.0 118.1 107.4 114.8 118.9 146.5 110.1 123.2 106.4 118.0 113.0 161.7 109.5 143.1 105.6 131.6 118.8 181.1 112.3 152.4 128.4 145.1 124.0 196.1 115.0 158.2 139.6 152.5 127.7 212.7 117.2 166.6 147.4 160.7 128.2 229.9 117.6 179.4 152.4 171.1 129.2 250.8 115.3 194.1 154.4 181.9 ( 1) ' Not available. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis I ll M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • Current Labor Statistics: Productivity 32. Annual changes in productiv ity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, 1969-79 Private business sector: Output per hour of all persons . . Compensation per hour . Real compensation per hour. . . Unit labor cost.......... Unit nonlabor payments........ Implicit price deflator........ Nonfarm business sector: Output per hour of all persons . . . . Compensation per hour . Real compensation per hour.. Unit labor cost........ Unit nonlabor payments.......... Implicit price deflator . . . Nonfinancial corporations: Output per hour of all employees .. Compensation per hour Real compensation per hour.. Unit labor cost.............. Unit nonlabor payments........ Implicit price deflator . . . Manufacturing: Output per hour of all persons .. Compensation per hour . Real compensation per hour . Unit labor cost........ Unit nonlabor payments .. . Implicit price deflator........ 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1950-79 1960-79 0.2 6.9 1.4 6.6 1.0 4.7 0.7 7.2 1.2 6.4 1.2 4.7 3.3 6.7 2.3 3.3 6.8 4.4 3.4 6.2 2.8 2.8 5.3 3.6 1.9 8.2 1.9 6.2 5.0 5.8 -3.0 9.2 -1.6 12.5 4.4 9.8 2.1 10.0 .8 7.7 15.3 10.1 3.5 8.8 2.8 5.0 5.1 5.0 1.8 8.0 1.4 6.0 4.8 5.6 0.5 8.5 0.8 8.0 5.3 7.1 -0.8 9.4 -1.7 10.3 5.8 8.9 2.5 5.9 2.5 3.3 3.0 3.2 2.1 6.9 2.0 4.7 4.2 4.5 -.2 6.4 1.0 6.7 .4 4.5 .2 6.8 .8 6.5 1.6 4.9 3.0 6.7 2.3 3.5 6.7 4.5 3.6 6.4 3.0 2.7 3.8 3.1 1.7 7.8 1.5 6.0 .3 4.1 -3.1 9.2 -1.6 12.7 5.9 10.5 2.0 10.0 .8 7.9 17.0 10.6 3.5 8.3 2.4 4.7 6.9 5.4 1.5 7.9 1.4 6.3 5.0 5.9 .5 8.6 .8 8.0 3.7 6.6 -1.1 9.0 -2.1 10.2 5.1 8.6 2.1 5.6 2.2 3.4 2.9 3.3 1.9 6.7 1.7 4.7 4.0 4.5 .4 6.8 1.3 6.3 0 4.1 .0 6.8 .8 6.8 .5 4.6 3.3 6.2 1.8 2.7 7.3 4.2 3.1 5.7 2.4 2.5 3.3 2.8 2.1 7.9 1.6 5.7 1.8 4.4 -3.7 9.6 -1.3 13.8 6.8 11.5 3.2 10.0 .8 6.6 18.7 10.5 3.2 8.3 2.4 4.9 5.8 5.2 1.1 7.9 1.4 6.8 4.9 6.1 .9 8.2 .5 7.3 3.8 6.1 -.4 8.9 -2.2 9.3 5.2 7.9 ( ') ( ') n 1.9 6.5 1.6 4.5 3.6 4.2 1.3 6.6 1.2 5.2 -4.4 2.3 -.1 7.1 1.1 7.2 -3.2 4.2 5.2 6.2 1.9 .9 9.2 3.1 4.8 5.2 1.8 .4 2.3 1.0 2.8 7.2 .9 4.3 -1.0 2.8 -5.0 10.4 -.5 16.1 -.7 11.5 5.1 12.0 2.6 6.6 21.6 10.2 4.4 8.3 2.4 3.8 8.8 5.1 3.0 8.4 1.9 5.3 5.5 5.4 .4 8.1 .4 7.7 3.4 6.5 0.8 9.1 -2.0 8.2 1.3 6.3 2.5 5.5 2.1 2.9 1.9 2.6 2.5 6.5 1.5 3.9 2.5 3.5 ------------------------ ----------------------------------------------' Not available. 33. Annual rate of change Year Item n n O r = revised. Quarterly indexes of produc ivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, seasonally adjusted [1967=100] Annual Quarterly indexes Item Private business sector: Output per hour of all persons .. Compensation per hour Real compensation per hour. .. Unit labor cost. . . . Unit nonlabor payments . . . Implicit price deflator............ Nonfarm business sector: Output per hour of all persons . .. Compensation per hour . Real compensation per hour Unit labor cost. . . . Unit nonlabor payments.......... Implicit price deflator . . . Nonfinancial corporations: Output per hour of all employees Compensation per hour . . . Real compensation per hour.. Total unit costs___ Unit labor cost .......... Unit nonlabor costs........ Unit profits .......... Implicit price deflator.......... Manufacturing: Output per hour of all persons .. Compensation per hour . .. Real compensation per hour. . . Unit labor cost........ 1Not available. 112 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 1978 1979 1980 1978 1979 1 II III IV I II III IV 119.3 231.4 118.4 194.0 174.3 187.2 118.3 253.1 116.4 214.0 184.4 203.8 118.5 224.6 118.8 189.4 164.8 180.9 119.1 228.8 118.3 192.1 173.9 185.8 119.7 233.7 118.2 195.2 177.0 188.9 119.8 238.4 117.9 199.0 181.3 192.9 118.9 244.8 117.9 205.9 180.8 197.2 118.3 250.4 117.0 211.7 183.7 202.0 117.8 255.7 115.8 217.0 185.6 206.1 117.7 260.3 114.2 221.1 188.3 209.7 117.7 267.6 112.9 227.5 190.0 214.5 '116.8 275.3 '112.5 '235.6 '192.3 220.6 »117.3 »280.8 »112.7 »239.5 »200.4 »226.0 116.9 227.5 116.4 194.6 169.9 186.1 115.7 247.9 114.0 214.4 178.6 202.1 116.2 221.0 116.9 190.2 161.1 180.2 116.7 224.9 116.3 192.8 169.1 184.7 117.4 229.5 116.1 195.6 173.0 187.8 117.6 234.4 115.9 199.3 176.1 191.4 116.6 240.2 115.7 206.0 174.3 195.1 115.4 244.9 114.4 212.1 177.6 200.3 115.0 249.9 113.2 217.3 180.5 204.7 115.2 255.6 112.1 221.8 182.5 208.4 114.9 262.2 110.6 228.2 185.9 213.7 '113.8 269.0 109.9 '236.3 '190.0 '220.4 »114.6 »274.4 »110.2 »239.6 »197.6 »225.2 118.0 225.0 115.2 193 3 190.6 201.8 127.2 183.5 117.5 244.9 112.7 210.4 208.4 216.6 127.8 198.1 116.9 219.0 115.8 190.8 187.3 201.5 107.1 178.3 118.0 222.6 115.1 191.6 188.7 200.8 129.2 182.3 118.5 226.9 114.8 194.0 191.5 201.6 132.7 184.9 118.8 231.3 114.4 196.8 194.8 203.1 138.7 188.2 118.1 237.3 114.3 202.3 201.0 206.5 130.3 191.6 117.3 242.1 113.1 208.0 206.4 213.2 129.2 196.3 117.2 247.1 111.9 213.2 210.8 220.5 127.5 200.4 117.1 252.1 110.6 218.0 215.3 226.1 124.0 204.0 117.1 258.8 109.2 224.3 221.1 234.4 120.5 208.9 '116.5 265.7 108.5 '233.6 '228.0 '250.8 '108.3 215.0 C) (’ ) (’ ) (’ ) n <1) (M n 128.2 229.9 117.6 179.4 129.2 250.8 115.3 194.1 r 126.4 223.9 118.4 177.2 127.7 227.1 117.5 ' 177.8 129.3 231.7 117.2 179.1 r 129.4 236.6 117.0 r 182.8 r 128.4 242.3 116.7 r 188.8 '128.7 248.0 115.9 192.6 r 129.5 252.7 114.4 r 195.1 129.1 258.0 113.2 ' 199.9 r 128.2 264.6 111.6 '206.4 '126.7 274.1 112.0 '216.4 r = revised. 1 II III »125.8 »282.0 »113.2 »224.2 34. Percent change from preceding quarter and year in productivity, hourly compensation, unit costs, and prices, seasonally adjusted at annual rate [1967 = 100] __________________________________ _________________________________ ____________________________ __________________ Percent change from same quarter year ago Quarterly percent change at annual rate Item Private business sector: Output per hour of all persons .................... Compensation per hour .............................. Real compensation per hour........................ Unit labor c o s t............................................ Unit nonlabor payments .............................. Implicit price deflator .................................. Nonfarm business sector: Output per hour of all persons .................... Compensation per hour .............................. Real compensation per hour........................ Unit labor co s t............................................ Unit nonlabor payments .............................. Implicit price deflator .................................. Nonfinancial corporations: Output per hour of all employees ................ Compensation per hour .............................. Real compensation per hour........................ Total unit costs .......................................... Unit labor costs ...................................... Unit nonlabor costs.................................. Unit profits.................................................. Implicit price deflator .................................. Manufacturing: Output per hour of all persons .................... Compensation per hour .............................. Real compensation per hour........................ Unit labor co s t............................................ ' Not available. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 11979 to II 1979 I11979 to III 1979 III 1979 to IV 1979 IV 1979 to 11980 11980 to I11980 I11980 to III 1980 111978 to 111979 III 1978 to III 1979 IV 1978 to IV 1979 11979 to 11980 111979 to 111980 III 1979 to III 1980 -2.0 9.5 -2.9 11.8 6.5 10.1 -1.4 8.7 -4.1 10.3 4.2 8.3 -0.3 7.5 -5.4 7.8 5.9 7.2 -0.3 11.7 -4.5 12.1 3.8 9.4 '- 2 .7 '12.0 ' -1.5 '15.1 '4.9 '11.9 "1.4 "8.3 "1.0 "6.8 "17.9 "10.0 -0.7 9.4 -1.1 10.2 5.7 8.7 -1.6 9.4 -2.1 11.2 4.8 9.1 -1.7 9.2 -3.2 11.1 3.9 8.7 -1.0 9.3 -4.2 10.5 5.1 8.8 -1.2 9.9 -3.9 '11.3 '4.7 9.2 " -0.5 "9.8 " - 2 .6 "10.4 "8.0 "9.6 -3.9 8.1 -4.2 12.5 7.7 11.0 -1.5 8.5 -4.4 10.1 6.6 9.0 0.8 9.5 -3.6 8.6 4.6 7.4 -1.1 10.7 -5.3 12.0 7.5 10.6 '- 3 .7 '10.8 -2.6 '15.0 '9.1 '13.2 "2.6 "8.4 "1.1 "5.7 "17.0 "8.9 -1.1 8.9 -1.6 10.1 5.0 8.5 -2.0 8.9 -2.5 11.1 4.3 9.0 -2.0 9.1 -3.3 11.3 3.7 8.9 -1.4 '9.8 -4.4 10.8 6.6 9.5 ' —1.4 9.8 -4.0 '11.4 '7.0 '10.0 " -0.4 "9.8 " -2 .6 "10.3 "9.5 "10.0 -2.7 8.3 -4.1 11.8 11.2 13.5 -3.4 10.2 -0.3 8.5 -4.3 10.2 8.8 14.6 -5.3 8.6 -0.4 8.4 -4.5 9.3 8.9 10.6 -10.4 7.3 -0.1 11.0 -5.1 12.2 11.1 15.4 -10.9 9.9 ' —1.9 11.1 -2.3 '17.6 '13.2 '31.1 ' -34.7 '12.1 (’ ) (’ ) (’ ) V) (’ ) V) V) V) -.6 8.7 -1.8 8.6 9.4 6.2 0 7.7 -1.1 8.9 -2.6 9.9 10.1 9.4 -3.9 8.4 -1.4 9.0 -3.3 10.8 10.6 11.3 -10.6 8.4 -0.9 9.0 -4.5 10.9 10.0 13.5 -7.6 9.0 ' —0.7 9.7 -4.1 12.1 '10.5 '17.7 ' —16.2 9.5 (’ ) ( 1) <’ ) ( ') (’ ) ( 1) ( 1) <’ ) '1.1 9.6 -2.8 '8.5 2.5 7.8 -4.9 5.2 ' -1.3 8.8 -4.2 r 10.2 ' -2.8 10.5 -5.5 r 13.7 '- 4 .7 15.2 '1.4 '20.9 " -2 .7 "12.0 "4.5 "15.1 '0.8 9.2 -1.3 '8.3 '0.1 9.1 -2.4 8.9 -0.3 9.1 -3.3 '9.3 '0.2 9.2 -4.4 '9.3 ' —1.6 10.5 -3.4 '12.4 " -2 .9 "11.6 "-1 .1 "14.9 r=revised. 113 LABOR-MANAGEMENT DATA M ajor collective bargaining data a r e co n tr a c ts on file a t th e B u reau of L abor o b t a in e d S ta t is t ic s , fr o m d ir e c t c o n t a c t w ith t h e p a r tie s , a n d fr o m s e c o n d a r y s o u r c e s . A d d i t io n a l d e ta il is p u b lis h e d in C u rren t W a g e D e v e lo p m e n ts , a m o n t h ly p e r io d ic a l o f th e B u r e a u . D a t a o n w o r k s t o p p a g e s a r e b a s e d o n c o n f id e n t ia l r e s p o n s e s t o q u e s t io n n a ir e s m a ile d the agreement. Changes over the life of the agreement refer to total agreed upon settlements (exclusive of potential cost-of-living escalator adjustments) expressed at an average annual rate. Wage-rate changes are expressed as a percent of straight-time hourly earnings, while wage and benefit changes are expressed as a percent of total compensation. Definitions Effective wage-rate adjustments going into effect in major bargaining units measure changes actually placed into effect during the reference period, whether the result of a newly negotiated increase, a deferred increase negotiated in an earlier year, or as a result of a costof-living escalator adjustment. Average adjustments are affected by workers receiving no adjustment, as well as by those receiving in creases or decreases. Data on wage changes apply to private nonfarm industry agree ments covering 1,000 workers or more. Data on wage and benefit changes combined apply only to those agreements covering 5,000 workers or more. First-year wage settlements refer to pay changes go ing into effect within the first 12 months after the effective date of Work stoppages include all known strikes or lockouts involving six workers or more and lasting a full shift or longer. Data cover all workers idle one shift or more in establishments directly involved in a stoppage. They do not measure the indirect or secondary effect on other establishments whose employees are idle owing to material or service shortages. b y t h e B u r e a u o f L a b o r S ta t is t ic s t o p a r tie s in v o lv e d in w o r k sto p p a g e s. S t o p p a g e s in it ia lly c o m e t o t h e a t t e n t io n o f th e B u r e a u fr o m r e p o r ts o f F e d e r a l a n d S ta t e m e d ia tio n a g e n c ie s , n e w s p a p e r s , a n d u n io n a n d in d u s t r y p u b lic a tio n s . 114 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis M ONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • 35. Current Labor Statistics: Productivity Wage and benefit settlements in major collective bargaining units, 1975 to date Quarterly average Annual average 1975 1976 1977 1980 p 1979 1978 Sector and measure 1979 1978 IV I II III IV I II III Wage and benefit settlements, all industries: First-year settlements .................................... Annual rate over life of contract...................... 11.4 8.1 8.5 6.6 9.6 6.2 8.3 6.3 9.0 6.6 6.1 5.2 2.8 5.3 10.5 7.8 9.0 6.1 8.5 6.0 8.6 6.4. 10.1 6.8 11.6 7.3 Wage rate settlements, all industries: First-year settlements .................................... Annual rate over life of contract...................... 10.2 7.8 8.4 6.4 7.8 5.8 7.6 6.4 7.4 6.0 7.4 5.9 5.7 6.6 8.9 7.2 6.8 5.1 6.3 5.3 7.8 6.3 8.7 6.8 10.7 7.4 Manufacturing: First-year settlements................................ Annual rate over life of contract ................ 9.8 8.0 8.9 6.0 8.4 5.5 8.3 6.6 6.9 5.4 9.5 7.4 8.7 7.7 9.7 8.1 6.3 4.7 5.6 4.2 7.0 5.6 6.6 4.9 8.7 5.5 Nonmanufacturing (excluding construction): First-year settlements................................ Annual rate over life of contract ................ 11.9 8.0 8.6 7.2 8.0 5.9 8.0 6.5 7.6 6.2 6.4 5.1 3.2 5.6 8.5 5.8 9.4 6.5 7.8 7.4 9.1 7.1 10.4 8.6 9.4 5.8 Construction: First-year settlements................................ Annual rate over life of contract ................ 8.0 7.5 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.3 6.5 6.2 8.8 8.3 8.4 7.1 9.7 8.2 8.7 8.3 9.7 8.5 7.5 7.6 9.6 9.3 12.7 10.3 15.7 13.3 36. Effective wage adjustments going into effect in major collective bargaining units, 1975 to date Average quarterly change* Average annual changes 1980 p 1979 1978 Sector and measure 1976 8.1 8.0 8.2 9.1 III IV I II III III IV I II 2.7 1.4 1.4 2.6 3.3 1.6 1.5 2.9 3.1 .5 .4 .7 .4 .5 .6 1.0 1.2 .6 1.5 1.1 .6 2.4 1.0 1.8 1.3 3.2 2.7 2.6 3.6 Total effective wage rate adjustment, all industries.............. Change resulting from — Current settlement .............................................. Prior settlement .................................................. Escalator provision .............................................. 8.7 2.8 3.7 2.2 3.2 3.2 1.6 3.0 3.2 1.7 2.0 3.7 2.4 3.0 3.0 3.1 .5 1.2 1.0 .4 .5 .5 .2 .6 .6 1.1 1.0 .5 1.0 1.0 1.2 Manufacturing............................................................ Nonmanufacturing...................................................... 8.5 8.9 8.5 7.7 8.4 7.6 8.6 7.9 9.6 8.8 2.9 2.5 1.9 1.1 1.5 1.4 2.3 2.8 3.2 3.4 NOTE: Because of rounding and compounding, the sums of individual items may not equal totals. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 115 37. W o rk s to p p a g e s , 1 94 7 to d a te Number of stoppages Month and year Workers involved In effect during month Beginning in month or year (thousands) In effect during month (thousands) Days idle Number (thousands) Percent of estimated working time 1947 1948 1949 1950 .................. ................ .................... ...................... 3.693 3,419 3,606 4,843 2,170 1,960 3,030 2,410 34,600 34,100 50,500 38,800 .30 .28 .44 .33 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 ................ ...................... ........................ ...................... .................... 4,737 5,117 5,091 3,468 4,320 2,220 3,540 2,400 1,530 2,650 22,900 59,100 28,300 22,600 28,200 .18 .48 .22 .18 .22 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 ...................... ...................... ........................ ...................... .................. 3,825 3,673 3.694 3,708 3,333 1,900 1,390 2,060 1,880 1,320 33,100 16,500 23,900 69,000 19,100 .24 .12 .18 .50 .14 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 ................ ...................... ................ ................ .................. 3,367 3,614 3,362 3,655 3,963 1,450 941 1,640 1,550 16,300 18,600 16,100 22,900 23,300 .11 .13 .11 .15 .15 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 .................... ...................... .................... ................ ........................ 4,405 4,595 5,045 5,700 5,716 1,960 2,870 2,649 2,481 3,305 25,400 42,100 49,018 42,869 66,414 .15 .25 .28 .24 .37 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 .................. ...................... ................ .................... ........................ 5,138 5,010 5,353 6,074 5,031 3,280 1,714 2,251 2,778 1,746 47,589 27,066 27,948 47,991 31,237 .26 .15 .14 .24 .16 5,648 5,506 4,230 2,420 2,040 1,623 37,859 35,822 36,922 .19 .17 .17 474 152 2,804 .16 439 272 149 208 91 45 3,372 3,201 2,424 .17 .17 .13 3,142 3,025 2,705 2,786 2,464 2,553 4,030 3,363 3,169 .16 .17 .14 .14 .13 .13 .21 .17 .16 1976 .................... 1977 .......................... 1978 .................. 1979': September.................... October.................. November .................. December .............. 1980°: January.................... February .............. March ................ April................ M ay............................ June ...................... J u ly ................................ August.................... September.................. ' = revised. 116 Beginning in month or year https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 352 354 396 425 505 435 491 409 438 441 590 631 663 752 714 768 768 711 207 114 123 116 139 164 270 64 163 p = preliminary. 292 332 310 231 214 201 394 238 269 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW Index of Volume 103 January 1980 through December 1980 117 l INDEX OF VOLUME 103 JANUARY 1980 THROUGH DECEMBER 1980 ACCIDENTS (See Work injuries and illnesses.) AFL-CIO Meany farewell, bid to Auto Workers, Teamsters mark AFL-CIO convention. 1980 Feb. 58-62. AGE DISCRIMINATION IN EMPLOYMENT ACT OF 1967 (ADEA) Age Discrimination in Employment Act: a review of recent changes. 1980 Mar. 32-36. The retirement decision: a question of opportunity? 1980 Nov. 14-17. AID TO FAMILIES WITH DEPENDENT CHILDREN (AFDC) New directions for income transfer programs. 1980 Feb. 41-45. ALCOHOLISM The extent of alcoholism among Air Force employees. 1980 May 4 6 49. APPRENTICESHIP (See Education and training.) ARBITRATION Arbitration and the rights of mentally handicapped workers. 1980 Apr. 41-42. Customized ‘final-offer’: New Jersey’s arbitration law. 1980 Sept. 3033. Do uncertain cost/benefit estimates prolong public-sector disputes'? 1980 Sept. 26-29. Industrial relations research: an agenda for the 1980’s. 1980 Sept. 2025. AUTOMATION (See Technological change.) BARGAINING (See Collective bargaining.) BENEFITS (See Supplemental benefits.) BUDGETS CIVIL SERVANTS (See Public employees.) COLLECTIVE BARGAINING Arbitration and the rights of mentally handicapped workers. 1980 Apr. 41-47. Collective bargaining in the health care industry. 1980 Feb. 49-53. Contracts in six key industries scheduled to expire in 1981. 1980 Dec. 22-31. Do uncertain cost/benefit estimates prolong public-sector disputes'? 1980 Sept. 26-29. Hospital managers’ perception of the impact of unionization. 1980 June 36-38. Industrial relations in 1979: inflation still holds spotlight. 1980 Feb 11-18. Industrial relations research: an agenda for the 1980’s. 1980 Sept. 2025. Labor and the Supreme Court: significant decisions of 1978-79. 1980 Jan. 14-21. Labor-management panels: three case studies. 1980 June 41-44. Scheduled wage increases and escalator provisions in 1980. 1980 Jan 9-13. Two approaches to the mediator’s role. 1980 June 39-40. Unionism’s effect on faculty pay: handicapping the available data. 1980 June 34-36. Wage gains in 1979 offset by inflation. 1980 July 48-51. COMPREHENSIVE EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING ACT (CETA) Geographic wage indexing for CETA and Medicare. 1980 Sept. 1519. CONFERENCES AND CONVENTIONS Short-time compensation systems in California and Europe. 1980 July 13-22. AFL-CIO. 13th biennial convention, November 1979. 1980 Feb 5862. Industrial Relations Research Association. 32d annual meeting, De cember 1979. Papers from. 1980 June 32-40; July 37-39, 41-43; Aug. 22-28. International Labor Organization, 66th session, June 1980. 1980 Nov 39-43. United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America. 26th constitutional convention, June 1980. 1980 Sept 41-43. United Mine Workers of America. Triennial convention, December 1979. 1980 Mar. 48-50. Work in America Institute and the International Institute of Labor Studies Conference, December 1979. Paper from. 1980 July 39-41. CANADA CONSTRUCTION Educational leave in Canada: a look at individual programs. 1980 Aug. 41-43. Does the CPI exaggerate or understate inflation? 1980 May 31-33. Does the CPI exaggerate or understate inflation? Some observations 1980 May 33-35. Double-digit inflation today and in 1973-74: a comparison. 1980 May 3-20. Estimating the user cost of owner-occupied housing. 1980 Feb 3135. Measuring the social costs of instability in construction. 1980 Feb 5357. Family budget increases in 1978 were the largest in 4 years. 1980 Jan 44-47. Special panel suggests changes in BLS family budget program. 1980 Dec. 3-10. Rise in autumn 1979 family budgets marked by transportation and taxes. 1980 Aug. 29-30. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS Frances Perkins, Isador Lubin, and the Bureau of Labor Statistics. 1980 Apr. 22-30. CALIFORNIA CHILD CARE Child care and family benefits: policies of six industrialized countries. 1980 Nov. 23-28. CHILD LABOR Exploitation of children widespread, ILO reports. 1980 Nov. 43-45. 118 Federal Employers’ Liability Act CONSUMER PRICE INDEX (See also Prices.) CPI controversy. 1980 Feb. 2. Does the CPI exaggerate or understate inflation? 1980 May 31-33. Does the CPI exaggerate or understate inflation? Some observations. 1980 May 33-35. Estimating the user cost of owner-occupied housing. 1980 Feb. 31 — 35. Inflation slows in third quarter, although food prices soar. 1980 Dec. 45-51. The Consumer Price Index and indexation. 1980 June 2. Norfolk and Western Railway Co. v. Liepelt. 1980 June 52. Federal Mine Safety and Health Act Amendments of 1977 Whirlpool Corp. v. Marshall. 1980 Apr. 57. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure General Telephone Co. v. EEOC. 1980 Aug. 45-46. Labor-Management Relations Act Carbon Fuel Co. v. United Mine Workers of America. 1980 Mar. 51. Whirlpool Corp. v. Marshall. 1980 Apr. 57. COST OF LIVING Cost-of-Living indexes for Americans living abroad. 1980 Jan. 53-54; June 50; Sept. 40. Family budget increases in 1978 were the largest in 4 years. 1980 Jan. 44-47. Special panel suggests changes in BLS family budget program. 1980 Dec. 3-10. Rise in autumn 1979 family budgets marked by transportation and taxes. 1980 Aug. 29-30. The Consumer Price Index and indexation. 1980 June 2. DECISIONS, COURT (See also Labor and the Supreme Court: sig nificant decisions of 1978-79.) 1980 Jan. 14-21. Administrative Procedures Act Marshall v. Jerrico, Inc. 1980 June 52. Civil Service Retirement Act U.S. v. Clark. 1980 June 53. Civil Rights Act of 1964 Alexander v. Gardner-Denver Co. 1980 Dec. 63. Board of Education, City of New York v. Harris. 1980 Mar. 52. California Brewers Assn. v. Bryant. 1980 June 51. Dist. Atty. Sacramento City v. Sacramento City. Civil Service Com mission. 1980 Dec. 63-64. General Telephone Co. v. EEOC. 1980 Aug. 45-46. Steelworkers v. Weber. 1980 June 51 and Dec. 63-64. Teamsters v. U.S. 1980 June 51. Univ. of Calif. Regents v. Bakke. 1980 Sept. 54-56. Constitutional issues Branti v. Finkel. 1980 Aug. 44-45. Califano v. Goldfarb. 1980 Aug. 45. Detroit Police Officers’ Assn. v. Young. 1980 Dec. 63-64. Elrod v. Burns. 1980 Aug. 44-45. Fullilove v. Klutznick. 1980 Sept. 54-56 and Dec. 63-64. Los Angeles City v. Marshall. 1980 Dec. 64. Maehren v. City of Seattle. 1980 Dec. 64. Marshall v. Jerrico, Inc. 1980 June 52. Nachman Corp. v. Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. 1980 Sept. 56. NLRB v. Retail Store Employees Union. 1980 Nov. 47. National League of Cities v. Usery. 1980 Dec. 64. New Hampshire Dept, of Employment Security v. Marshall. 1980 Dec. 64. Steelworkers v. Weber. 1980 Dec. 63-64. Turney v. Ohio. 1980 June 52. U.S. v. Clark. 1980 June 53. Univ. of Calif. Regents v. Bakke. 1980 Sept. 55. Ward v. Village of Monroeville. 1980 June 52. Weinberger v. Wisenfield. 1980 Aug. 45. Wengler v. Druggists Mutual Ins. Co. 1980 Aug. 45. Emergency School Aid Act Board of Education, City of New York v. Harris. 1980 Mar. 52. Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 Nachman Corp. v. Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. 1980 Sept. 56. Fair Labor Standards Act Barren tine v. Arkansas-Best Freight System, Inc. 1980 Dec. 63. Marshall v. Jerrico, Inc. 1980 June 52. Longshoremen’s and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act Nacirema Operating Co. v. Johnson. 1980 Mar. 51. Northeast Marine Terminal Co. v. Caputo. 1980 Mar. 51. P. C. Pfeiffer Co., Inc. v. Ford. 1980 Mar. 52. National Labor Relations Act Carbon Fuel Co. v. United Mine Workers of America. 1980 Mar. 51. NLRB v. Enterprise Assn, of Pipefitters. 1980 Nov. 46. NLRB v. Fruit Packers (Tree Fruits). 1980 Nov. 47. NLRB v. International Longshoremen’s Association. 1980 Nov. 46. NLRB v. Yeshiva University. 1980 Apr. 57. NLRB v. Retail Store Employees Union. 1980 Nov. 47. Steelworkers Trilogy. 1980 Mar. 51. Whirlpool Corp. v. Marshall. 1980 Apr. 57. Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 American Iron and Steel Institute v. OSH A. 1980 Dec. 63. American Textile Mfg. Assn., Inc. v. Marshall. 1980 Dec. 63. Industrial Union Dept., AFL-CIO v. American Petroleum Institute. 1980 Sept. 53-54 and Dec. 63. Marshall v. Certified Welding Co. 1980 Apr. 57. Marshall v. Daniel Construction Co. 1980 Apr. 57. Whirlpool Corp. v. Marshall. 1980 Apr. 57. Public Works Employment Act of 1977 Fullilove v. Klutznick. 1980 Sept. 54-56. Social Security Act Califano v. Goldfarb. 1980 Aug. 45. Weinberger v. Wisenfield. 1980 Aug. 45. Wengler v. Druggists Mutual Ins. Co. 1980 Aug. 45. State laws Dist. Atty. Sacramento City v. Sacramento City. Civil Service Com mission. 1980 Dec. 63. National League of Cities v. Usery. 1980 Dec. 64. New Hampshire Dept, of Employment Security v. Marshall. 1980 Dec. 64. Los Angeles City. v. Marshall. 1980 Dec. 64. Wengler v. Druggists Mutual Ins. Co. 1980 Aug. 45. Vietnam Era Veterans’ Readjustment Assistance Act of 1974 Alabama Power Co. v. Davis. 1980 Nov. 48. Coffey v. Republic Steel Corp. 1980 Nov. 48. DISABILITY How the disabled fare in the labor market. 1980 Sept. 48-52. DISCOURAGED WORKERS National Commission recommends changes in labor force statistics. 1980 Apr. 11-21. DISCRIMINATION (See Equal Employment Opportunity.) DISPLACED WORKERS Auto Workers seek Government aid for laid-off workers, ailing indus try. 1980 Sept. 41-43. DOMESTIC WORKERS Women in domestic work: yesterday and today. 1980 Aug. 17-21. 119 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • Index of Volume 103 EARNINGS AND WAGES General Employment and pay trends in the retail trade industry. 1980 Mar. 4 0 43. Geographic wage indexing for CETA and Medicare. 1980 Sept. 1519. Hours and earnings of production or nonsupervisory workers, 196878. 1980 Apr. 54-56. How the disabled fare in the labor market. 1980 Sept. 48-52. Immigrant earnings patterns by sex, race, and ethnic groupings. 1980 Oct. 22-25. Industrial relations in 1979: inflation still holds spotlight. 1980 Feb 11-18. Industrial relations research: an agenda for the 1980’s. 1980 Sept 2025. Measuring wage relationships among selected occupations. 1980 May 21-25. Percent working long hours shows first post-recession decline. 1980 May 39-42. Scheduled wage increases and escalator provisions in 1980. 1980 Jan. 9-13. Self-employed Americans: their number has increased. 1980 Nov. 3 8. State labor legislation enacted in 1979. 1980 Jan. 22-39. The Consumer Price Index and indexation. 1980 June 2. The distribution of earned income among men and women, 1958-77 1980 Apr. 3-10. Tracking individual earnings mobility with the Current Population Survey. 1980 May 43-46. Unionism’s effect on faculty pay: handicapping the available data. 1980 June 34-36. Wage and benefits of State and local government employees. 1980 Sept. 2. Wage gains in 1979 offset by inflation. 1980 July 48-51. Working wives reduce inequality in distribution of family earnings. 1980 July 51-53. Specified industries and occupations Auto dealer repair shops, June 1978. 1980 Apr. 56. Building trades, July 1978-79. 1980 Dec. 61. Communications, 1978. 1980 Nov. 37-38. Electric and gas utilities, February 1978. 1980 Dec. 59-60. Hotels and motels, May 1978. 1980 Dec. 60-61. Men’s apparel, May 1978. 1980 Jan. 52-53. Printing industry, September 1978. 1980 Nov. 36-37. Printing trades, July 1976-77. 1980 Jan. 54. Steel mills, February 1978-May 1980. 1980 Dec. 62. White-collar workers, March 1980. 1980 Nov. 33-34. ECONOMIC POLICIES AND PROGRAMS Beyond Keynes: European unions formulate new economic programs. 1980 Feb. 36-40. Moving to the sun: regional job growth, 1968 to 1978. 1980 Mar. 1219. EDUCATION AND TRAINING Educational leave in Canada: a look at individual programs. 1980 Aug. 41-43. Employment training in France: firm and worker experience. 1980 June 45-50. School and work among youth during the 1970’s. 1980 Sept. 44-47. State labor legislation enacted in 1979. 1980 Jan. 22-39. Trends in educational attainment among workers in the 1980’s. 1980 July 44 -47. Employment and unemployment in the first half of 1980. 1980 Aug 3 9. Employment gains of women by industry, 1968-78. 1980 June 3-9. Employment patterns of Southeast Asian refugees. 1980 Oct. 31-38. Employment training in France: firm and worker experience. 1980 June 45 - 50. Evaluating the 1975 projections of occupational employment. 1980 June 10-21. Folding paperboard box industry shows slow rise in productivity. 1980 Mar. 25-28. Identifying States and areas prone to high and low unemployment. 1980 Mar. 20-24. Immigration and employment: a need for policy coordination. 1980 Oct. 47-50. Labor force activity of married women as a response to changing job less rates. 1980 June 32-33. Measuring the social costs of instability in construction. 1980 Feb 5357. Minorities report. 1980 Mar. 2. Moving to the sun: regional job growth, 1968 to 1978. 1980 Mar. 1219. National Commission recommends changes in labor force statistics. 1980 Apr. 11-21. Productivity growth below average in fabricated structural metals. 1980 June 27-31. Recent trends in worktime: hours edge downward. 1980 Mar. 3-11. School and work among youth during the 1970’s. 1980 Sept. 44-47. Seasonal variations in employment and unemployment during 1951 — 75. 1980 Jan. 48-52. Self-employed Americans: their number has increased. 1980 Nov. 3 8. The labor force experience of black youth: a review. 1980 Aug 1016. The workweek in 1979: fewer but longer workdays. 1980 Aug. 31-33. Tracking individual earnings mobility with the Current Population Survey. 1980 May 43-46. Trends in educational attainment among workers in the 1980’s. 1980 July 44 - 47. U.S. labor turnover: analysis of a new measure. 1980 Nov. 9-13. Women in domestic work: yesterday and today. 1980 Aug. 17-21. Women’s use of time converging with men’s. 1980 Dec. 57-59. Work experience of the population in 1978. 1980 Mar. 43-47. Worksharing in the U.S.: its prevalence and duration. 1980 July 3 12. ENERGY Double-digit inflation today and in 1973-74: a comparison. 1980 May 3-20. Slowdown in energy prices eases second-quarter inflation. 1980 Sept. 34-40. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY Employment gains of women by industry, 1968-78. 1980 June 3-9. Industrial relations in 1979: inflation still holds spotlight. 1980 Feb 11-18. Labor and the Supreme Court: significant decisions of 1978-79. 1980 Jan. 14-21. State labor legislation enacted in 1979. 1980 Jan. 22-39. The distribution of earned income among men and women, 1958-77 1980 Apr. 3-10. ESCALATOR CLAUSES Scheduled wage increases and escalator provisions in 1980. 1980 Jan 9-13. EUROPE EMPLOYMENT Are women safer workers? a new look at the data. 1980 Sept. 3-10. Employment and pay trends in the retail trade industry. 1980 Mar. 4 0 43. Employment and unemployment during 1979: an analysis. 1980 Feb. 3-10. 120 American wood products workers study European job safety systems 1980 Aug. 40-41. Beyond Keynes: European unions formulate new economic program 1980 Feb. 36-40. Short-time compensation systems in California and Europe. 1980 July 13-22. FEDERAL EMPLOYEES (See Public employees.) FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY Child care and family benefits: policies of six industrialized countries. 1980 Nov. 23-28. FLEXITIME Results of experimental study on flexitime and family life. 1980 Nov. 29-32. FRANCE Child care and family benefits: policies of six industrialized countries. 1980 Nov. 23-28. Employment training in France: firm and worker experience. 1980 June 45-50. IMMIGRATION Immigration and the labor force— A special issue. 1980 Oct. 4-50. International migration of labor: boon or bane? The changing composition of Europe’s guestworker population. Documenting the undocumented: data, like aliens, are elusive. Immigrant earnings patterns by sex, race, and ethnic groupings. Nonimmigrant workers: visiting labor force participants. Employment patterns of Southeast Asian refugees. The new Cuban immigrants: their background and prospects. Immigration and employment: a need for policy coordination. INCOME (See Earnings and wages.) INDEXES Child care and family benefits: policies of six industrialized countries. 1980 Nov. 23-28. Cost-of-living indexes for Americans living abroad. 1980 Jan. 53-54 June 50; Sept. 40. CPI controversy. 1980 Feb. 2. Estimating the user cost of owner-occupied housing. 1980 Feb. 3135. Geographic wage indexing for CETA and Medicare. 1980 Sept. 1519. The Consumer Price Index and indexation. 1980 June 2. GOVERNMENT WORKERS (See Public employees.) HEALTH AND SAFETY INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS (See Labor-management relations.) INFLATION American wood products workers study European job safety systems. 1980 Aug. 40-41. Arbitration and the rights of mentally handicapped workers. 1980 Apr. 41-47. Are women safer workers? a new look at the data. 1980 Sept. 3-10. A view of the costs and benefits of the job safety and health law. 1980 Aug. 24-26. Collective bargaining in the health care industry. 1980 Feb. 49-52. Dental and vision care benefits in health insurance plans. 1980 June 22-26. Exploitation of children widespread, ILO reports. 1980 Nov. 43-45. Industrial relations in 1979: inflation still holds spotlight. 1980 Feb. 11-18. Occupational diseases. 1980 Aug. 2. Occupational safety and health: a report on worker perceptions. 1980 Sept. 11-14. State labor legislation enacted in 1979. 1980 Jan. 22-39. Targeting worker safety programs: weighing incidence against ex pense. 1980 Jan. 3-8. The extent of alcoholism among Air Force employees. 1980 May 4 6 49. The sounds of silence: little aid awarded for job-related hearing loss. 1980 Nov. 35-36. Vinyl chloride protection: less costly than predicted. 1980 Aug. 2224. Does the CPI exaggerate or understate inflation? 1980 May 31-33. Does the CPI exaggerate or understate inflation? Some observations. 1980 May 33-35. Double-digit inflation today and in 1973-74: a comparison. 1980 May 3-20. Industrial relations in 1979: inflation still holds spotlight. 1980 Feb. 11-18. Inflation slows in third quarter, although food prices soar. 1980 Dec. 45-51. Slowdown in energy prices eases second-quarter inflation. 1980 Sept. 34-40. Wage gains in 1979 offset by inflation. 1980 July 48-51. FRINGE BENEFITS (See Supplemental benefits.) GERMAN DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC HOURS OF WORK Conflicts among work, leisure, and family roles. 1980 Aug. 35-39. Conflicts between work and family life. 1980 Mar. 29-31. Hours and earnings of production or nonsupervisory workers, 1968— 78. 1980 Apr. 54-56. Percent working long hours shows first post-recession decline. 1980 May 39-42. Recent trends in worktime: hours edge downward. 1980 Mar. 3-11. Results of experimental study on flexitime and family life. 1980 Nov. 29-32. Self-employed Americans: their number has increased. 1980 Nov. 3 8. State labor legislation enacted in 1979: 1980 Jan. 22-39. The workweek in 1979: fewer but longer workdays. 1980 Aug. 31-33. Women’s use of time converging with men’s. 1980 Dec. 57-59. Worksharing in the U.S.: its prevalence and duration. 1980 July 3 12. HOUSING (See Construction.) HUNGARY Child care and family benefits: policies of six industrialized countries. 1980 Nov. 23-28. INTERNATIONAL LABOR ORGANIZATION Exploitation of children widespread, ILO reports. 1980 Nov. 43-45. Highlights of the 1980 ILO conference. 1980 Nov. 39-43. U.S. rejoins ILO: the agenda for 1980’s stresses human rights. 1980 May 50-51. JOB SATISFACTION Conflicts among work, leisure, and family roles. 1980 Aug. 35-39. How quality-of-worklife projects work for General Motors. 1980 July 37-39. How quality-of-worklife projects work for the United Auto Workers. 1980 July 39-40. The quality-of-worklife project at Bolivar: an assessment. 1980 July 41-43. JOBSEEKING METHODS Most workers find jobs through word of mouth. 1980 Aug. 33-35. JOB SECURITY Workers’ expectations about losing and replacing their jobs. 1980 Apr. 53-54. JO B TENURE Employment and pay trends in the retail trade industry. 1980 Mar. 4043. Workers’ expectations about losing and replacing their jobs. 1980 Apr. 53-54. LABOR AND ECONOMIC HISTORY Frances Perkins. 1980 Apr. 2. Frances Perkins’ interest in a new deal for blacks. 1980 Apr. 31-35. Frances Perkins, Isador Lubin, and the Bureau of Labor Statistics. 1980 Apr. 22-30. LABOR COSTS (See Unit labor cost.) 121 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • Index of Volume 103 LABOR FORCE Employment and unemployment during 1979: an analysis. 1980 Feb 3-10. Employment and unemployment in the first half of 1980. 1980 Aug. 3 9. Employment gains of women by industry, 1968-78. 1980 June 3-9. Evaluating the 1975 projections of occupational employment. 1980 June 10-21. How the disabled fare in the labor market. 1980 Sept. 48-52. Identifying States and areas prone to high and low unemployment. 1980 Mar. 20-24. Immigration and the labor force— A special issue. 1980 Oct. 4-50. International migration of labor: boon or bane? The changing composition of Europe’s guestworker population. Documenting the undocumented: data, like aliens, are elusive. Immigrant earnings patterns by sex, race, and ethnic groupings. Nonimmigrant workers: visiting labor force participants. Employment patterns of Southeast Asian refugees. The new Cuban immigrants: their background and prospects. Immigration and employment: a need for policy coordination. Labor force activity of married women as a response to changing job less rates. 1980 June 32-33. Marital and family characteristics of the labor force, March 1979. 1980 Apr. 48-52. Moving to the sun: regional job growth, 1965 to 1978. 1980 Mar. 1219. National Commission recommends changes in labor force statistics. 1980 Apr. 11-21. New occupational rates of labor force separation. 1980 Mar. 36-40. Percent working long hours shows first post-recession decline. 1980 May 39-42. Probing the issues of unemployment duration. 1980 July 23-32. School and work among youth during the 1970’s. 1980 Sept. 44-47. Seasonal variations in employment and unemployment during 1951 — 75. 1980 Jan. 48-52. The distribution of earned income among men and women, 1958-77. 1980 Apr. 3-10. The labor force experience of black youth: a review. 1980 Aug. 1016. The 1995 labor force: a first look. 1980 Dec. 11-21. Tracking individual earnings mobility with the Current Population Survey. 1980 May 43-46. Trends in educational attainment among workers in the 1980’s. 1980 July 44-47. U.S. labor turnover: analysis of a new measure. 1980 Nov. 9-13. Women’s share of moonlighting nearly doubles during 1969-79. 1980 May 36-39. Workers’ expectations about losing and replacing their jobs. 1980 Apr. 53-54. Work experience of the population in 1978. 1980 Mar. 43-47. How quality-of-worklife projects work for General Motors. 1980 July 37-39. How quality-of-worklife projects work for the United Auto Workers. 1980 July 39-41. Industrial relations research: an agenda for the 1980’s. 1980 Sept. 2025. Labor and the Supreme Court: significant decisions of 1978-79. 1980 Jan. 14-21. Labor-management panels: three case studies. 1980 June 41-44. New Spanish legislation marks turning point in labor relations. 1980 Aug. 27-28. Occupational safety and health: a report on worker perceptions. 1980 Sept. 11-14. The quality-of-worklife project at Bolivar: an assessment. 1980 July 41-43. Two approaches to the mediator’s role. 1980 June 39-40. LABOR MARKET How the disabled fare in the labor market. 1980 Sept. 48-52. Labor force activity of married women as a response to changing job less rates. 1980 June 32-33. National Commission recommends changes in labor force statistics. r 1980 Apr. 11-21. New occupational rates of labor force separation. 1980 Mar. 36-40. Probing the issues of unemployment duration. 1980 July 23-32. Self-employed Americans: their number has increased. 1980 Nov. 3 8. The distribution of earned income among men and women, 1958-77. 1980 Apr. 3-10. The labor force experience of black youth: a review. 1980 Aug. 1016. LABOR ORGANIZATIONS Beyond Keynes: European unions formulate new economic program. 1980 Feb. 36-40. Employment training in France: firm and worker experience. 1980 June 45-50. Hospital managers’ perception of the impact of unionization. 1980 June 36-38. Labor-management panels: three case studies. 1980 June 41-44. Meany farewell, bid to Auto Workers, Teamsters mark AFL-CIO convention. 1980 Feb. 58-62. Mine Workers’ new president wins dues increase, right to name VP. 1980 Mar. 48-50. State of the unions. 1980 Jan. 2. State labor legislation enacted in 1979. 1980 Jan. 22-39. Two approaches to the mediator’s role. 1980 June 39-40. Unionism’s effect on faculty pay: handicapping the available data. 1980 June 34-36. LABOR LAW LABOR REQUIREMENTS Changes in unemployment insurance legislation during 1979. 1980 Apr. 36-40. Labor and the Supreme Court: significant decisions of 1978-79. 1980 Jan. 14-21. State labor legislation enacted in 1979. 1980 Jan. 22-39. Workers’ compensation laws— key amendments of 1979. 1980 Feb. 19-25. Labor requirements decline for public housing construction. 1980 Dec. 40-44. LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS Arbitration and the rights of mentally handicapped workers. 1980 Apr. 41-47. Collective bargaining in the health care industry. 1980 Feb. 49-53. Contracts in six key industries scheduled to expire in 1980. 1980 Dec. 22-31. Customized ‘final-offer’: New Jersey’s arbitration law. 1980 Sept. 3033. Do uncertain cost/benefit estimates prolong public-sector disputes? 1980 Sept. 26-29. Hospital managers’ perception of the impact of unionization. 1980 June 36-38. 122 LABOR TURNOVER U.S. labor turnover: analysis of a new measure. 1980 Nov. 9-13. MEDICARE Geographic wage indexing for CETA and Medicare. 1980 Sept. 1519. MIGRATION Moving to the sun: regional job growth, 1968 to 1978. 1980 Mar. 1219. MINORITY WORKERS (See also Equal Employment Opportunity.) Frances Perkins’ interest in a new deal for blacks. 1980 Apr. 31-35. Minorities report. 1980 Mar. 2. The labor force experience of black youth: a review. 1980 Aug. 10-16. The 1995 labor force: a first look. 1980 Dec. 11-21. MULTIPLE JOBHOLDERS PROJECTIONS Women’s share of moonlighting nearly doubles during 1969-79. 1980 May 36-39. Evaluating the 1975 projections of occupational employment. 1980 June 10-21. New occupational rates of labor force separation. 1980 Mar. 36-40. The 1995 labor force: a first look. 1980 Dec. 11-21. OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH ACT A view of the costs and benefits of the job safety and health law. 1980 Aug. 24-26. Vinyl chloride protection: less costly than predicted. 1980 Aug. 2224. OCCUPATIONS Measuring wage relationships among selected occupations. 1980 May 21-25. OLDER WORKERS Age Discrimination in Employment Act: a review of recent changes. 1980 Mar. 32-35. ILO meeting supported older workers, improved standards supervi sion. 1980 Nov. 39-43. The 1995 labor force: a first look. 1980 Dec. 11-21. The retirement decision: a question of opportunity? 1980 Nov. 14-17. PENSIONS (See also Retirement; Supplemental benefits.) Age Discrimination in Employment Act: a review of recent changes. 1980 Mar. 32-35. Industrial relations in 1979: inflation still holds spotlight. 1980 Feb. 11-18. Labor and the Supreme Court: significant decisions of 1978-79. 1980 Jan. 14-21. Rise of pensions and social security created alternating goals for unions. 1980 Aug. 26-27. POPULATION Evaluating the 1975 projections of occupational employment. 1980 June 10-21. National Commission recommends changes in labor force statistics. 1980 Apr. 11-27. Work experience of the population in 1978. 1980 Mar. 43-47. PRICES CPI controversy. 1980 Feb. 2. Does the CPI exaggerate or understate inflation? 1980 May 31-33. Does the CPI exaggerate or understate inflation? Some observations. 1980 May 33-35. Double-digit inflation today and in 1973-74: a comparison. 1980 May 3-20. Inflation slows in third quarter, although food prices soar. 1980 Dec. 45-57. Slowdown in energy prices eases second-quarter inflation. 1980 Sept. 34-40. The Consumer Price Index and indexation. 1980 June 2. PRODUCTIVITY Construction machinery industry posts slow rise in productivity. 1980 July 33-36. Folding paperboard box industry shows slow rise in productivity. 1980 Mar. 25-28. International comparisons of productivity and labor costs. 1980 Dec. 32-39. Productivity declines continue into third quarter 1979. 1980 Feb. 4 6 48. Productivity gains in the drugstore industry, 1958-79. 1980 Nov. 1822 . Productivity growth below average in fabricated structural metals. 1980 June 27-31. Productivity increased in 1978 in most industries measured. 1980 Jan. 40-43. Sixth consecutive productivity recorded for the second quarter. 1980 Dec. 52-54. The paper and plastic bag industry: two distinct productivity phases. 1980 May 26-30. The productivity trend in the soaps and detergents industry. 1980 Feb. 26-30. PUBLIC EMPLOYEES Customized ‘final-offer’: New Jersey’s arbitration law. 1980 Sept. 3033. Do uncertain cost/benefit estimates prolong public-sector disputes? 1980 Sept. 26-29. Industrial relations in 1979: inflation still holds spotlight. 1980 Feb. 11-18. Labor and the Supreme Court: significant decisions of 1978-79. 1980 Jan. 14-21. QUALITY OF WORKLIFE Conflicts among work, leisure, and family roles. 1980 Aug. 35-39. How quality-of-worklife projects work for General Motors. 1980 July 37-39. How quality-of-worklife projects work for the United Auto Workers. 1980 July 39-41. Labor-management panels: three case studies. 1980 June 41-44. Results of experimental study on flexitime and family life. 1980 Nov. 29-32. The quality-of-worklife projects at Bolivar: an assessment. 1980 July 41-43. RETIREMENT (See also Pensions.) Age Discrimination in Employment Act: a review of recent changes. 1980 Mar. 32-35. Rise of pensions and social security created alternating goals for unions. 1980 Aug. 26-27. The retirement decision: a question of opportunity? 1980 Nov. 14-17. SAFETY (See Health and safety.) SALARIES (See Earnings and wages.) SOCIAL SECURITY Age Discrimination in Employment Act: a review of recent changes. 1980 Mar. 32-35. New directions for income transfer programs. 1980 Feb. 41-45. Occupational diseases. 1980 Aug. 2. Rise of pensions and social security created alternating goals for unions. 1980 Aug. 26-27. SPAIN New Spanish legislation marks turning point in labor relations. 1980 Aug. 27-28. SPECIAL LABOR FORCE REPORTS Employment and unemployment during 1979: an analysis. 1980 Feb. 3-10. Employment and unemployment in the first half of 1980. 1980 Aug. 3 9. Marital and family characteristics of the labor force, March 1979. 1980 Apr. 48-52. Percent working long hours shows first post-recession decline. 1980 May 29-42. School and work among youth during the 1970’s. 1980 Sept. 44-47. Trends in educational attainment among workers in the 1980’s. 1980 July 44-47. Women’s share of moonlighting nearly doubles during 1969-79. 1980 May 36-39. Work experience of the population in 1978. 1980 Mar. 43-47. STATE GOVERNMENT Changes in unemployment insurance legislation during 1979. 1980 Apr. 36-40. State labor legislation enacted in 1979. 1980 Jan. 22-39. Wage and benefits of State and local government employees. 1980 Sept. 2. 123 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • Index of Volume 103 STATISTICAL PROGRAMS AND METHODS National Commission recommends changes in labor force statistics. 1980 Apr. 11-21. Statistics in bureaucracies. 1980 Nov. 2. National Commission recommends changes in labor force statistics. 1980 Apr. 11-21. Probing the issues of unemployment duration. 1980 July 23-32. Seasonal variations in employment and unemployment during 195175. 1980 Jan. 48-52. Short-time compensation systems in California and Europe. 1980 July 13-22. The labor force experience of black youth: a review. 1980 Aug. 1016. Tracking individual earnings mobility with the Current Population Survey. 1980 May 43-46. Trends in educational attainment among workers in the 1980’s. 1980 July 44-47. Workers’ expectations about losing and replacing their jobs. 1980 Apr. 53-54. SUPPLEMENTAL BENEFITS UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE Changes in unemployment insurance legislation during 1979. 1980 Apr. 36-40. Child care and family benefits: policies of six industrialized countries. 1980 Nov. 23-28. Dental and vision care benefits in health insurance plans. 1980 June 22-26. Employee benefits. 1980 July 2. Wage and benefits of State and local government employees. 1980 Sept. 2. Wage gains in 1979 offset by inflation. 1980 July 48-51. Workers’ compensation laws— key amendments of 1979. 1980 Feb. 19-25. Auto Workers seek Government aid for laid-off workers, ailing indus try. 1980 Sept. 41-43. Changes in unemployment insurance legislation during 1979. 1980 Apr. 36-40. Improving jobless pay. 1980 Oct. 2. Short-time compensation systems in California and Europe. 1980 July 13-22. SWEDEN UNIONS (See Labor organizations.) UNIT LABOR COST International comparisons of productivity and labor costs. 1980 Dec. 32-39. Productivity declines continue into third quarter 1979. 1980 Feb. 4648. Productivity increased in 1978 in most industries measured. 1980 Jan. 40-43. Sixth consecutive productivity recorded for the second quarter. 1980 Dec. 52-54. Evaluating the 1975 projections of occupational employment. 1980 June 10-21. National Commission recommends changes in labor force statistics. 1980 Apr. 11-21. New occupational rates of labor force separation. 1980 Mar. 36-40. Probing the issues of unemployment duration. 1980 July 23-32. Tracking individual earnings mobility with the Current Population Survey. 1980 May 43-46. U.S. labor turnover: analysis of a new measure. 1980 Nov. 9-13. STATISTICS Child care and family benefits: policies of six industrialized countries. 1980 Nov. 23-28. TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE Construction machinery industry posts slow rise in productivity. 1980 July 33-36. Employment training in France: firm and worker experience. 1980 June 45-50. Folding paperboard box industry shows slow rise in productivity. 1980 Mar. 25-28. Productivity gains in the drugstore industry, 1958-79. 1980 Nov. 1822. Productivity growth below average in fabricated structural metals. 1980 June 27-31. The paper and plastic bag industry: two distinct productivity phases. 1980 May 26-30. The productivity trend in the soaps and detergents industry. 1980 Feb. 26-30. TRADE READJUSTMENT ASSISTANCE Auto Workers seek Government aid for laid-off workers, ailing indus try. 1980 Sept. 41-43. TRADE UNIONS (See Labor organizations.) TRAINING (See Education and training.) UNEMPLOYMENT (See also Employment; Labor force.) Changes in unemployment insurance legislation during 1979. 1980 Apr. 36-40. Employment and unemployment during 1979: an analysis. 1980 Feb. 3-10. Employment and unemployment in the first half of 1980. 1980 Aug. 3 9. Employment gains of women by industry, 1968-78. 1980 June 3-9. Identifying States and areas prone to high and low unemployment. 1980 Mar. 20-24. Labor force activity of married women as a response to changing job less rates. 1980 June 32-33. Measuring the social costs of instability in construction. 1980 Feb. 5357. Minorities report. 1980 Mar. 2. Most workers find jobs through word of mouth. 1980 Aug. 33-35. 124 UNION MEMBERSHIP AND ELECTIONS Mine Workers’ new president wins dues increase, right to name VP. 1980 Mar. 48-50. WAGES (See Earnings and wages.) WELFARE Geographic wage indexing for CETA and Medicare. 1980 Sept. 1519. New directions for income transfer programs. 1980 Feb. 41-45. WOMEN Are women safer workers? a new look at the data. 1980 Sept. 3-10. Child care and family benefits: policies of six industrialized countries. 1980 Nov. 23-28. Employment gains of women by industry, 1968-78. 1980 June 3-9. Frances Perkins. 1980 Apr. 2. Frances Perkins’ interest in a new deal for blacks. 1980 Apr. 31-35. Frances Perkins, Isador Lubin, and the Bureau of Labor Statistics. 1980 Apr. 22-30. Labor force activity of married women as a response to changing job less rates. 1980 June 32-33. Marital and family characteristics of the labor force, March 1979. 1980 Apr. 48-52. Self-employed Americans: their number has increased. 1980 Nov. 3 8. The distribution of earned income among men and women, 1958-77. 1980 Apr. 3-10. The 1995 labor force: a first look. 1980 Dec. 11-21. Women in domestic work: yesterday and today. 1980 Aug. 17-21. Women’s share of moonlighting nearly doubles during 1969-79. 1980 May 36-39. Women’s use of time converging with men’s. 1980 Dec. 57-59. Work experience of the population in 1978. 1980 Mar. 43-47. Working wives reduce inequality in distribution of family earnings. 1980 July 51-53. WORKERS’ COMPENSATION Occupational diseases. 1980 Aug. 2. The sounds of silence: little aid awarded for job-related hearing loss. 1980 Nov. 35-36. Workers’ compensation laws— key amendments of 1979. 1980 Feb. 19-25. WORK INJURIES AND ILLNESSES American wood products workers study European job safety systems. 1980 Aug. 40-41. Are women safer workers? a new look at the data. 1980 Sept. 3-10. Occupational safety and health: a report on worker perceptions. 1980 Sept. 11-14. Targeting worker safety programs: weighing incidence against ex pense. 1980 Jan. 3-8. The extent of alcoholism among Air Force employees. 1980 May 4 6 49. WORK LIFE Conflicts between work and family life. 1980 Mar. 29-36. WORKSHARING Worksharing in the U.S.: its prevalence and duration. 1980 July 3 12. WORKSHARING UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE Short-time compensation systems in California and Europe. 1980 July 13-22. YOUTH (See also Labor force; Unemployment.) School and work among youth during the 1970’s. 1980 Sept. 44-47. The labor force experience of black youth: a review. 1980 Aug. 1016. The 1995 labor force: a first look. 1980 Dec. 11-21. Worksharing in the U.S.: its prevalence and duration. 1980 July 3 12. DEPARTMENTS Anatomy of Price Change. September and December issues. Book Reviews. Each issue. (See Book Reviews by author of book.) Communications. February, April, May, June, September issues. Conference Papers. June, July, August, November issues. Conventions. February, March, September issues. Current Labor Statistics. Each issue. Developments in Industrial Relations. Each issue except February. Foreign Labor Developments. May, June, August, November issues. Labor Month in Review. Each issue. Major Agreements Expiring. Each issue. Productivity Reports. January, February, December issues. Research Summaries. Each issue except June and October. Significant Decisions in Labor Cases. March, April, June, August, September, November issues. Special Labor Force Reports— Summaries. February, March, April, May, July, August, December issues. BOOK REVIEWS (listed by author of book) Amacher, Ryan C., Gottfried Harberler, Thomas D. Willett, eds. Challenge to a Liberal International Economic Order, 1980 Mar. 5961. Ashworth, Kenneth H., foreword by Logan Wilson. American Higher Education in Decline. 1980 Oct. 56-57. Ayres, Robert U. Uncertain Futures: Challenges for Decision-Makers. 1980 Dec. 72-73. Baumer, Donald, Carl Van Horn, Randall B. Ripley. Areawide Plan ning in CETA. 1980 Nov. 53-55. Cantarow, Ellen, Susan Gushee O’Malley, Sharon Hartman Strom. Moving the Mountain: Women Working for Social Change. 1980 Oct. 60. Diaz-Alejandro, Carlos F„ Richard R. Fagen, Roger D. Hansen, Al bert Fishlow. Rich and Poor Nations in the World Economy. 1980 Mar. 59-61. Fairley, Lincoln. Facing Mechanization: The West Coast Longshore Plan. 1980 July 61-62. Fishlow, Albert, Carlos F. Diaz-Alejandro, Richard R. Fagen, Roger D. Hansen. Rich and Poor Nations in the World Economy. 1980 Mar. 59-61. Flaherty, John E. Managing Change: Today's Challenge to Manage ment. 1980 Aug. 55-56. Franklin, Vincent P. The Education of Black Philadelphia: The Social and Educational History o f a Minority Community, 1900-1950. 1980 Oct. 59. Ghozeil, Susan and Lawrence R. Klein. A Popularized Version of 21 Doctoral Dissertations, 1980 Apr. 64-65. Ginzberg, Eli. Good Jobs, Bad Jobs, No Jobs. 1980 June 60. Greenberg, Michael R., Donald A. Kruekeberg, Connie O. Michaelson. Local Population and Employment Projection Tech niques. 1980 Jan. 59. Greenspan, Harry, Scott Seablom, William Mirengoff, Lester Rindler. CETA: Assessment of Public Service Employment Programs. 1980 Nov. 53-55. Haendel, Dan. Foreign Investment and the Management o f Political Risk 1980 Aug. 54. Hansen, Roger D., Albert Fishlow, Carlos F. Diaz-Alejandro, Rich ard R. Fagen. Rich and Poor Nations in the World Economy. 1980 Mar. 59-61. Harberler, Gottfried, Thomas D. Willett, Ryan C. Amacher, eds. Chal lenges to a Liberal International Economic Order. 1980 Mar. 5961. Hiestand, Dale L. and Dean W. Morse. Comparative Metropolitan Employment Complexes — New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Houston, Atlanta. 1980 Feb. 67-68. Havelick, Franklin J., ed. Collective Bargaining: New Dimensions in Labor Relations. 1980 Aug. 53-54. Holley, William H., Jr. and Kenneth M. Jennings. The Labor Rela tions Process. 1980 Dec. 70-71. Howe, Christopher, China's Economy: A Basic Guide. 1980 July 6364. Jascourt, Hugh D„ ed. Government Labor Relations: Trends and Infor mation for the Future, Vol. I, 1975-1978. 1980 Aug. 54-55. Jennings, Kenneth M. and William H. Holley, Jr. The Labor Relations Process. 1980 Dec. 70-71. Kahn, Herman. World Economic Development: 1979 and Beyond. 1980 Nov. 55. Kanter, Rosabeth Moss and Barry A. Stein. Life in Organizations: Work-Places as People Experience Them. 1980 Jan. 61-62. Klein, Lawrence R. and Susan Ghozeil. A Popularized Version o f 21 Doctoral Dissertations. 1980 Apr. 64-65. Kruekeberg, Donald A., Connie O. Michaelson, Michael Greenberg. Local Population and Employment Projection Techniques. 1980 Jan. 59. Lecht, Leonard A. and Marc A. Matland. Involving Private Employers in CETA Programs. 1980 Nov. 53-55. Lederer, Muriel. Blue-Collar Jobs for Women. 1980 Jan. 60-61. Lloyd, Cynthia B. and Beth T. Niemi. The Economics o f Sex Dif ferentials. 1980 Sept. 64-65. McLane, Helen J. Selecting, Developing, and Retaining Women Execu tives: A Corporate Strategy for the Eighties. 1980 Dec. 71-72. McLaurin, Melton Alonza. The Knights of Labor in the South. 1980 Mar. 61. MacLaury, Judson, ed. Protecting People at Work: A Reader in Occu pational Safety and Health. 1980 Aug. 56-57. Matland, Marc. A. and Leonard A. Lecht. Involving Private Employ ers in CETA Programs. 1980 Nov. 53-55. Mauer, Harry. Not Working: An Oral History o f the Unemployed. 1980 May 58-59. Meier, Gretl S. Job Sharing: A New Pattern for Quality o f Work and Life. 1980 May 59-60. Michaelson, Connie O., Michael Greenberg, Donald Kruekeberg. Lo cal Population and Employment Projection Techniques. 1980 Jan. 59. Mirengoff, William, Lester Rindler, Harry Greenspan, Scott Seablom. CETA: Assessment o f Public Service Employment Programs. 1980 Nov. 53-55. 125 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • Index of Volume 103 Mohr, Lillian Holmen. Frances Perkins: “That Woman in FDR’s Cabi net. ” 1980 Apr. 64. Montero, Darrel. Vietnamese Americans: Patterns of Resettlement and Socioeconomic Adaptation in the U.S. 1980 May 60-61. Montgomery, David. Workers’ Control in America: Studies in the His tory o f Work, Technology, and Labor Struggles. 1980 June 60-61. Morse, Dean W. and Dale L. Hiestand. Comparative Metropolitan Employment Complexes— New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Houston, Atlanta. 1980 Feb. 67-68. Niemi, Beth T. and Cynthia B. Lloyd. The Economics o f Sex Dif ferentials. 1980 Sept. 64-65. O’Malley, Susan Gushee, Sharon Hartman Strom, Ellen Cantarow. Moving the Mountain: Women Working for Social Change. 1980 Oct. 60 Reiser, Stanley Joel. Medicine and the Reign of Technology. 1980 Sept. 62-64. Ripley, Randall B., Donald Baumer, Carl Van Horn. Areawide Plan ning in CETA. 1980 Nov. 53-55. Rindler, Lester, Harry Greenspan, Scott Seablom, William Mirengoff, CETA: Assessment o f Public Service Employment Programs. 1980 Nov. 53-55. Rodgers, Daniel T. The Work Ethic in Industrial America, 1850-1920. 1980 Oct. 57-58. Rostow, W. W. Getting From Here to There: America’s Future in the World Economy. 1980 Feb. 65-67. —— The World Economy: History and Prospect. 1980 Feb. 65-67. Seablom, Scott, William Mirengoff, Lester Rindler, Harry Greenspan. CETA: Assessment of Public Service Employment Programs. 1980 Nov. 53-55. Shaevitz, Marjorie Hansen and Morton H. Shaevitz. Making it To gether as a Two-Career Couple. 1980 Dec. 73. Smith, Ralph E., ed. The Subtle Revolution: Women at Work. 1980 July 62-63. Somers, Gerald G., Collective Bargaining: Contemporary American Ex perience. 1980 June 59-60. Standback, Thomas M., Jr. Understanding the Service Economy: Em ployment, Productivity, Location. 1980 Nov. 56. Stein, Barry A. and Rosabeth Moss Kanter. Life in Organizations: Work Places as People Experience Them. 1980 Jan. 61-62. Strom, Sharon Hartman, Ellen Cantarow, Susan Gushee O’Malley. Moving the Mountain: Women Working for Social Change. Oct. 60. Van Horn, Carl, Randall B. Ripley, Donald Baumer. Areawide Plan ning in CETA. 1980 Nov. 53-55. Wilson, Logan. American Academics: Then and Now. 1980 Oct. 5657. AUTHORS Accolla, Peter. ILO meeting supported older workers, improved stan dards supervision. 1980 Nov. 39-43. Adams, Larry T. Auto Workers seek Government aid for laidoff workers, ailing industry. 1980 Sept. 41-43. Ahmuty, Alice L., Lucretia Dewey Tanner, Harriet Goldberg Weinstein. Collective bargaining in the health care industry. 1980 Feb. 49-53. Ashford, Nicholas A., Richard L. Frenkel, W. Curtiss Priest. Occupa tional safety and health: a report on worker perceptions. 1980 Sept. 11-14. Ayres, Mary Ellen. Book review. 1980 July 63-64. Bach, Jennifer B. and Robert L. Bach. Employment patterns of Southeast Asian refugees. 1980 Oct. 31-38. Bach, Robert L. The new Cuban Immigrants: their background and prospects. 1980 Oct. 39-46. ----- and Jennifer B. Bach. Employment patterns of Southeast Asian refugees. 1980 Oct. 31-38. Barton, David and Benjamin W. Wolkinson. Arbitration and the rights of mentally handicapped workers. 1980 Apr. 41-47. Baston, Judy. Book review. 1980 July 62-63. Becker, Eugene H. Meany farewall, bid to Auto Workers, Teamsters mark AFL-CIO convention. 1980 Feb. 58-62. Bednarzik, Robert W. Book review. 1980 Oct. 57-58. 126 ----- Worksharing in the U.S.: its prevalence and duration. 1980 July 3-12. Bell, Donald R. Dental and vision care benefits in health insurance plans. 1980 June 22-26. Bernick, Michael S. Book Review. 1980 Nov. 53-55. Best, Fred and James Mattesich. Short-time compensation systems in California and Europe. 1980 July 13-22. Bloom, David E. Customized ‘final-offer’: New Jersey’s arbitration law. 1980 Sept. 30-33. Bluestone, Irving. How quality-of-worklife projects work for the Unit ed Auto Workers. 1980 July 39-41. Borum, Joan D. Wage gains in 1979 offset by inflation. 1980 July 4851. Bowers, Norman. Probing the issues of unemployment duration. 1980 July 23-32. Bowlby, Roger L., Sidney L. Carroll, Richard Evans. Measuring the social costs of instability in construction. 1980 Feb. 53-57. Boynton, Robert E. Book review. 1980 June 60-61. Brand, Horst. Book review. 1980 Sept. 62-64. ----- and Clyde Huffstutler. The paper and plastic bag industry: two distinct productivity phases. 1980 May 26-30. Burdetsky, Ben. Book review. 1980 Aug. 54-55. Capdeviclle, Patricia A. and Arthur F. Neef. International compari sons of productivity and labor costs abroad. 1980 Dec. 32-39. Carey, Max L. Evaluating the 1975 projections of occupational em ployment. 1980 June 10-26. Carroll, Sidney L., Richard Evans, Roger L. Bowlby. Measuring the social costs of instability in construction. 1980 Feb. 53-57. Cavanagh, Gerald. Book review. 1980 Aug. 55-56. Chiswick, Barry R. Immigrant earnings patterns by sex, race, and ethnic groupings. 1980 Oct. 22-25. Chupp, Virginia A. Changes in unemployment insurance legislation during 1979. 1980 Apr. 36-40. Clague, Ewan. Book review. 1980 Feb. 65-67. Clem, Andrew, Eddie Lamb, William Thomas. Slowdown in energy prices eases second quarter inflation. 1980 Sept. 34-40. ----- John F. Early, Craig Howell. Double-digit inflation today and in 1973-74: a comparison. 1980 May 3-20. Cohen, Carin and Dixie Sommers. New Occupational rates of labor force separation. 1980 Mar. 36-40. Cohen, Malcolm S. and Arthur R. Schwartz. U.S. labor turnover: analysis of a new measure. 1980 Nov. 9-13. Corcoran, Mary, Linda Datcher, Greg J. Duncan. Most workers find jobs through word of mouth. 1980 Aug. 33-35. Daley, Judy R. and Norman Root. Are women safer workers? a new look at the data. 1980 Sept. 3-10. Datcher, Linda, Greg J. Duncan, Mary Corcoran. Most workers find jobs through word of mouth. 1980 Aug. 33-35. Davis, Howard. Employment gains of women by industry, 1968-78. 1980 June 3-9. ----- Hours and earnings of production or nonsupervisory workers, 1968-78. 1980 Apr. 54-56. DeFreitas, Gregory. Book review. 1980 May 60-61. Derber, Milton. Book review, 1980 June 59-60. Devens, Richard M., Jr. Book reviews. 1980 Mar. 59-61; Aug. 54; Nov. 55. ----- Employment and unemployment in the first half of 1980. 1980 Aug. 3-9. Douglass, Gordon K. Book review. 1980 Oct. 56-57. Douty, H. M. Book review. 1980 Dec. 70-71. Dreijmanis, John. Book review. 1980 June 60. Driscoll, James W. Labor-management panels: three case studies. 1980 June 41-44. Drotning, John F. and Paul F. Gerhart. Do uncertain cost/benefit es timates prolong public-sector disputes? 1980 Sept. 26-30. Duke, John. Construction machinery industry posts slow rise in pro ductivity. 1980 July 33-36. Duncan, Greg J., Mary Corcoran, Linda Datcher. Most workers find jobs through word of mouth. 1980 Aug. 33-35. Early, John F., Craig Howell, Andrew Clem. Double-digit inflation today and in 1973-74: a comparison. 1980 May 3-20. Evans, Richard, Roger L. Bowlby, Sidney L. Carroll. Measuring the social costs of instability in construction. 1980 Feb. 53-57- Fain, T. Scott. Self-employed Americans: their number has increased. 1980 Nov. 3-8. Farrell, Kate. Book review. 1980 Oct. 60. Frankel, Richard L., W. Curtiss Priest, Nicholas A. Ashford. Occupa tional safety and health: a report on worker perceptions. 1980 Sept. 11-14. Friedman, Brian L. Productivity gains in the drugstore industry, 1958— 79. 1980 Nov. 18-22. Fulco, Lawrence J. Productivity declines continue into third quarter 1979. 1980 Feb. 46-48. ----- Sixth consecutive productivity recorded for the second quarter. 1980 Dec. 52-54. Fuller, Stephen H. How quality-of-worklife projects work for General Motors. 1980 July 37-39. Fullerton, Howard N. The 1995 labor force: a first look. 1980 Dec. 1121. Garfinkel, Irwin and Timothy M. Smeeding. New directions for in come transfer programs. 1980 Feb. 41-45. Gerhart, Paul F. and John E. Drotning. Do uncertain cost/benefit es timates prolong public-sector disputes? 1980 Sept. 26-30. Gillingham, Robert. Estimating the user cost of owner-occupied hous ing. 1980 Feb. 31-35. Ginnold, Richard E. A view of the costs and benefits of the safety and health law. 1980 Aug. 24-26. Ginsburg, Helen. Book review. 1980 May 58-59. Goldberg, Joseph P. Book review. 1980 July 61-62. ----- Frances Perkins, Isador Lubin, and the Bureau of Labor Statis tics. 1980 Apr. 22-30. Greene, Richard. Geographic wage indexing for CETA and Medicare. 1980 Sept. 15-19. Grossman, AJlyson Sherman. Women in domestic work: yesterday and today. 1980 Aug. 17-21. Grossman, Jonathan. Book review. 1980 Apr. 64. Guzda, Henry P. Frances Perkins’ interest in a new deal for blacks. 1980 Apr. 31-35. Hedges, Janice Neipert. Book review. 1980 May 59-60. ------ The workweek in 1979: fewer but longer workdays. 1980 Aug. 31-33. ------ and Daniel E. Taylor. Recent trends in worktime: hours edge downward. 1980 Mar. 3-11. Henle, Peter and Paul Ryscavage. The distribution of earned income among men and women, 1958-77. 1980 Apr. 3-10. Herman, Arthur S. Productivity increased in 1978 in most measured industries. 1980 Jan. 40-43. Horvath, Francis W. Tracking individual earnings mobility with the Current Population Survey. 1980 May 43-46. ----- Working wives reduce inequality in distribution of family earn ings. 1980 July 51-53. Howell, Craig, John R. Early, Andrew Clem. Double-digit inflation today and in 1973-74: a comparison. 1980 May 3-20. ------ William Thomas, Eddie Lamb. Inflation slows in third quarter, although food prices soar. 1980 Dec. 45-51. Huffstutler, Clyde and Horst Brand. The paper and plastic bag indus try: two distinct productivity phases. 1980 May 26-30. Iden, George. The labor force experience of black youth: a review. 1980 Aug. 10-16. Job, Barbara Cottman. Employment and pay trends in the retail trade industry. 1980 Mar. 40-43. Johnson, Beverly L. Marital and family characteristics of the labor force, March 1979. 1980 Apr. 48-52. Kamerman, Sheila B. Child care and family benefits: policies of six in dustrialized countries. 1980 Nov. 23-28. Kassalow, Everett M. Beyond Keynes: European unions formulate new economic program. 1980 Feb. 36-40. Klein, Deborah Pisetzner. Book review. 1980 Sept. 64-65. Kochan, Thomas A. Industrial relations research: an agenda for the 1980’s. 1980 Sept. 20-25. Kolb, Deborah M. Two approaches to the mediator’s role. 1980 June 38-39. Kucherov, Tanya. Exploitation of children widespread, ILO reports. 1980 Nov. 43-45. Kudat, Ayse and Mine Sabuncuoglu. The changing composition of Europe’s guestworker population. 1980 Oct. 10-17. Lamb, Eddie, Craig Howell, William Thomas. Inflation slows in third quarter, although food prices soar. 1980 Dec. 45-51. ----- William Thomas, Andrew Clem. Slowdown in energy prices eases second-quarter inflation. 1980 Sept. 34-40. Lang, Linda, Graham L. Staines, Joseph L. Pleck. Conflicts between work and family life. 1980 Mar. 29-32. Leon, Carol Boyd and Philip L. Rones. Employment and unemploy ment during 1979: an analysis. 1980 Feb. 3-10. Linsenmayer, Tadd. U.S. rejoins ILO: the agenda for the 1980’s stresses human rights. 1980 May 50-51. Litvak, Isaiah A. and Christopher J. Maule. Educational leave in Canada: a look at individual programs. 1980 Aug. 41-43. Lockhart, Madelyn N. Book review. 1980 Jan. 59. Lowenstem, Henry. Book review. 1980 Apr. 64-65. McCaffrey, David. Targeting worker safety programs: incidence v. ex pense. 1980 Jan. 3-8. McNichols, Charles W„ T. Roger Manley, Michael J. Stahl. The ex tent of alcoholism among Air Force employees. 1980 May 46-49. McPherson, Donald S. and Martin J. Morand. Unionism’s effect on faculty pay: handicapping the available data. 1980 June 34-36. Macy, Barry A. The quality-of-worklike project at Bolivar: an assess ment. 1980 July 41-43. Manley, T. Roger, Charles W. McNichols, Michael J. Stahl. The ex tent of alcoholism among Air Force employees. 1980 May 46-49. Martin, Benjamin. New Spanish legislation marks turning point in la bor relations. 1980 Aug. 27-28. Martin, Gail. Book review. 1980 Jan. 60-61. Martin, Philip L. and Alan Richards. International migration of la bor: boon or bane? 1980 Oct. 4 -9. ----- and David S. North. Immigration and employment: a need for policy coordination. 1980 Oct. 47-50. Mattesich, James and Fred Best. Short-time compensation systems in California and Europe. 1980 July 13-22. Maule, Christopher J. and Isaiah A. Litvak. Educational leave in Canada: a look at individual programs. 1980 Aug. 41-43. Maxey, Charles. Hospital managers’ perception of the impact of unionization. 1980 June 36-38. Mitchell, Daniel J. B. Does the CPI exaggerate or understate infla tion? 1980 May 31-33. Mitchell, Olivia S. Labor force activity of married women as a re sponse to changing jobless rates. 1980 June 32-33. Morand, Martin J. and Donald S. McPherson. Unionism’s effect on faculty pay: handicapping the available data. 1980 June 34-36. Mounts, Gregory J. Labor and the Supreme Court: significant deci sions of 1978-79. 1980 Jan. 14-21. Neale, Michael S. and Richard A. Winett. Results of experimental study on flexitime and family life. 1980 Nov. 29-32. Neef, Arthur F. and Patricia A. Capdevielle. International compari sons of productivity and labor costs abroad. 1980 Dec. 32-39. Nelson, Richard. State Labor legislation enacted in 1979. 1980 Jan. 23-39. Newman, Morris J. Seasonal variations in employment and unem ployment during 1951-75. 1980 Jan. 48-52. North, David S. Nonimmigrant workers: visiting labor force partici pants. 1980 Oct. 26-30. ----- and Philip L. Martin. Immigration and employment: a need for policy coordination. 1980 Oct. 47-50. O’Connor, Pamela and Graham L. Staines. Conflicts among work, lei sure, and family roles. 1980 Aug. 35-39. Otto, Phyllis Flohr. Productivity growth below average in fabricated structural metals. 1980 June 27-31. Paster, Irving. Book review. 1980 Aug. 53-54. Perry, Charles R. Vinyl chloride protection: less costly than predicted. 1980 Aug. 22-24. Pleck, Joseph A., Graham L. Staines, Linda Lang. Conflicts between work and family life. 1980 Mar. 29-32. Porter, Felice. Record white-collar pay increase closes decade but trails inflation. 1980 Nov. 33-35. Pospolita, George R. Book Review. 1980 Dec. 73. Prier, Robert J. Labor requirements decline for public housing con struction. 1980 Dec. 40-44. 127 MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW December 1980 • Index of Volume 103 Priest, W. Curtiss, Nicholas A. Ashford, Richard L. Frenkel. Occupa tional safety and health: a report on worker perceptions. 1980 Sept. 11-14. Richards, Alan and Philip L. Martin. International migration of la bor: boon or bane? 1980 Oct. 4 -9 . Rones, Philip L. Moving to the sun: regional job growth, 1968 to 1978. 1980 Mar. 12-19. ----- The retirement decision: a question of opportunity? 1980 Nov. 14-17. ----- and Carol Boyd Leon. Employment and unemployment during 1979: an analysis. 1980 Feb. 3-10. Root, Norman and David McCaffrey. Targeting worker safety pro grams: weighing incidence against expense. ----- and Judy R. Daley. Are women safer workers? a new look at the data. 1980 Sept. 3-10. Rosen, Richard. Indentifying States and areas prone to high and low employment. 1980 Mar. 20-24. Ruben, George. Industrial relations in 1979: inflation still holds spot light. 1980 Feb. 11-18. Ryscavage, Paul and Peter Henle. The distribution of earned income among men and women, 1958-77. 1980 Apr. 3-10. Sabuncuoglu, Mine and Ayse Kudat. The changing composition of Europe’s guestworker population. 1980 Oct. 10-17. Schlein, David. Contracts in six key industries scheduled to expire in 1981. 1980 Dec. 22-31. Schwartz, Arthur R. and Malcolm S. Cohen. U.S. labor turnover: analysis of a new measure. 1980 Nov. 9-13. Sehgal, Ellen and Joyce Vialet. Documenting the undocumented: data, like aliens, are elusive. 1980 Oct. 18-21. Sekscenski, Edward S. Women’s share of moonlighting nearly doubles during 1969-79. 1980 May 36-39. Smeeding, Timothy M. and Irwin Garfinkel. New directions for in come transfer programs. 1980 Feb. 41-45. Sommers, Dixie and Carin Cohen. New occupational rates of labor force separation. 1980 Mar. 36-40. Sparrow, Dorothy G. Employment training in France: firm and work er experience. 1980 June 45-50. Stafford, Frank P. Women’s use of time converging with men’s. 1980 Dec. 57-59. Stahl, Michael J., T. Roger Manley, Charles W. McNichols. The ex tent of alcoholism among Air Force employes. 1980 May 46-49. Staines, Graham L. and Pamela O’Connor. Conflicts among work, lei sure, and family roles. 1980 Aug. 35-39. ----- Joseph Pleck, Linda Lang. Conflicts between work and family life. 1980 Mar. 29-32. Stamas, George D. Percent working long hours shows first post-reces sion decline. 1980 May 39-42. Stein, Bruno. Rise of pensions and social security created alternating goals for unions. 1980 Aug. 26-27. Stein, Robert L. National Commission recommends changes in labor force statistics. 1980 Apr. 11-21. Steinberg, Edward. Book reviews. 1980 Feb. 67-68; Nov. 56. Stone, Julia E. Age Discrimination in Employment Act: a review of recent changes. 1980 Mar. 32-36. Tanner, Lucretia Dewey, Harriet Goldberg Weinstein, Alice L. Ahmuty. Collective bargaining in the health care industry. 1980 Feb. 49-53. Taylor, Daniel E. and Janice Neipert Hedges. Recent trends in worktime: hours edge downward. 1980 Mar. 3-11. Thomas, William, Andrew Clem, Eddie Lamb. Slowdown in energy prices eases second-quarter inflation. 1980 Sept. 34-40. ----- Eddie Lamb, Craig Howell. Inflation slows in third quarter, al though food prices soar. 1980 Dec. 45-51. Tinsley, LaVeme C. Workers’ compensation laws— key amendments of 1979. 1980 Feb. 19-25. Triplett, Jack E. Does the CPI exaggerate or understate inflation? Some observations. 1980 May 33-35. Ury, Claude. Book review. 1980 Oct. 59. Van Auken, Jr., Kenneth G. Book review. 1980 Jan. 61-62. Van Staaveren, Elizabeth K. Book review. 1980 Mar. 61. Vialet, Joyce and Ellen Sehgal. Documenting the undocumented: data, like aliens, are elusive. 1980 Oct. 18-21. Ward, Virginia L. Measuring wage relationships among selected occu pations. 1980 May 21-25. Wasilewski, Edward. Scheduled wage increases and escalator provi sions in 1980. 1980 Jan. 3-8. Watts, Harold W. Special panel suggests changes in BLS family bud get program. 1980 Dec. 3-10. Weaver, Charles N. Workers expectations about losing and replacing their jobs. 1980 Apr. 53-54. Weiermair, Klaus. Book review. 1980 Dec. 72-73. Weinstein, Harriet Goldberg, Alice L. Ahmuty, Lucretia Dewey Tan ner. Collective bargaining in the health care industry. 1980 Feb. 4953. Westcott, Diane N. Book review. 1980 Dec. 71-72. Wilder, Patricia S. The productivity trend in the soaps and detergents industry. 1980 Feb. 26-30. Winett, Richard A. and Michael S. Neale. Results of experimental study on flexitime and family life. 1980 Nov. 29-32. Witt, Matt. American wood products workers study European job safety systems. 1980 Aug. 40-41. Wolfe, Barbara L. How the disabled fare in the labor market. 1980 Sept. 48-52. Wolkinson, Benjamin W. and David Barton. Arbitration and the rights of mentally handicapped workers. 1980 Apr. 41-47. York, James L. Folding paperboard box industry shows slow rise in productivity. 1980 Mar. 25-32. Young, Anne McDougall. School and work among youth during the 1970’s. 1980 Sept. 44-47. ----- Trends in educational attainment among workers in the 1970’s. 1980 July 44-47. ----- Work experience of the population in 1978. 1980 Mar. 43-47. 128 ☆ U .S . G O VERNM ENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1980 O — 341-258/49 Earnings . . . .one of six periodicals published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, gives monthly figures on those two topics for the Nation as a whole, for in dividual States, and for more than 200 areas. Included are household and establishment data, seasonally and not seasonally adjusted. The data are collected by the Bureau of the Census (Department of Com merce), State Employ ment Security Agencies, and State Departments of Labor in cooperation with BLS. A supplement is in cluded in the subscription price. Subscription Order Form: Enter my Subscription to: Employment and Earnings $22; ($5.50 additional for foreign mailing). □ Remittance is enclosed. CD Charge to GPO deposit account no.OCDDDCDCDCD-Q Order No. Credit Card Orders Only-Master Charge and Visa. Total charges $------------------------------------------Credit Card Expiration Date Month/Year □ □ □ □ Mail Order Form to: Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402 Make checks payable to Superintendent of Documents. Name_______________ Address_____________ City, State, and Zip Code U.S. Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics Washington D.C. 20212 Official Business Penalty for private use, $300 RETURN POSTAGE GUARANTEED Postage and Fees Paid U.S. Department of Labor Lab-441 SECOND CLASS MAIL U.S.MAIL
@FedFRASER